Dealers Not Taking Action and an Angry Me

[LimeHouse]

I won't mention the name of the particular dealer involved or the cardroom in this story so as not to step on anyone's toes, but I do want to get some clarification about a rule and to see what others would do in this situation.

I was playing in Blackhawk on Sunday night and I have pocket threes with about 5 people seeing the flop. The flop comes with a three, rainbow, no appearant straight draws. Your run of the mill Blackhawk maniac bets out, I call along with two other, one of whom is my friend sitting to my left. He bets the turn, and I raise. My friend calls the 10 dollars to my surprise. I make him for a flush draw and a pair, since now there are two diamonds on the board. The maniac calls. The river completes the flush draw, so now I'm worried.

The maniac checks, I check, and to my surprise, so does my friend. Now I know I have the best hand. I look over to the maniac to see what he has. He stares at me and says I need to show. Now, I haven't played in many cardrooms, but in the few I have and on the many sites online, if there was no betting on the river, then the first to act shows his hand first. I tell him just that, and he says I need to show since I made the last bet (the raise on the turn) As I'm about to ask the dealer what the rule is, he says "Someone show something." This REALLY pissed me off. Partly the tone he said it in, but mostly that he didn't take control of the situation. So, I decide it's not that big of a deal if I see what the maniac had (probably total crap) and throw down my 33. They both muck.

I ask the dealer if there is a rule for who needs to show first. He then totally ignors me. I ask again, I little louder, and he just shakes his head no without even looking at me. I didn't think it was possible for a dealer to piss me off that much. I asked him some other question, mostly in disbelief that there is no rule, and he continued to completely ignor me.

So, my question: Is there actually NO RULE in the card rooms in Blackhawk as to who shows first? This just seems ridiculous to me.

Second question: How would you handle this situation? I know my remedy will be to not tip this particular dealer (and give every tip he doesn't get to the other dealers who are very good and very friendly) especially if there is in fact a rule, and go about my game. Comments?

[Patrick]

You may have a point that the maniac maybe technically should've had to show first. However, I would say grow up to all of you and just show your damned cards. The idiots that think we're playing the final table of the WSOP and do this every hand are ridiculous. Table your cards and quit wasting everyone's time.

[knowledge17]

The rule depends on the poker room. Some say the last person who bet opens first, others go with earliest position to late position opens.

Patrick is right though. I've seen an increase in the postering of players moreso now than ever before, especially in lower limit games. But still, it is your poker right to see that guy's hand. Simply say to the dealer, before opening your hand that you would like to see his hand. Then, regardless who opens first, his hand will be exposed. Out of ettiquite though, try not doing that every hand. Slows up the game and quickly transforms a friendly game into a rather...unfriendly one.

[LimeHouse]

You can say that I'm a jerk for wanting to see how a guy plays his cards, and you can belittle that I want more information at a low limt table, but that doesn't really change anything does it? And no, I don't normally sweat who shows first, but the maniac had been goading me and everyone else at the table for a while now. I wanted him to show his crap. Now, if I had even asked the dealer for him to show his cards, I don't think he would have anyways. If the limits are so low that rules don't apply anymore, then why spread them?

Also, no one has really answered either question I asked.

[Oz]

This is a house rule, as I've seen both in effect in different rooms. The rule that has the first checker show first is the most common.

But you need some perspective also. Even though it may be your "right" to have the early position maniac show his hand first, what knowledge do you gain if he shows middle pair vs a gut shot? You already know he's a maniac, why do you need further confirmation? Take the pot quickly and hope he continues to chase in bad situations.

If you have any questions about house rules and the dealer is not forthcoming, quietly ask for the floor and pose the question to him. He will answer your question and educate the players and dealer (and maybe you :) ) simultaneously.

-Oz-

[LimeHouse]

Yeah, I thought about calling the floor, but I decided to just let it rest at that, as bringing the subject up over and over would just slow things down more, and make things even more tense...just figured I'd let everyone know I wasn't just being a jerk at every step along the way. :)

[pseudoswede]

Don't you also have the right to ask the dealer to turn over mucked cards if the player mucks after you show?

[Oz]

Don't you also have the right to ask the dealer to turn over mucked cards if the player mucks after you show?

{takes deep breaths. OK better now. :) }

Yes you have the "right" in most rooms. You are, however accusing said player of collusion. You may or may not want to do that, but in all cases you make the game a lot unfriendlier. See Accusations of Collusion thread under General Chat.

-Oz-

PS. Sorry, one of my "hot buttons" because very few people understand the history and ramifications of this rule.

[mikef]

I remember having a similar discussion in a different thread. Obviously, different houses have different rules. I am used to the rule where the last one to bet/raise is the first one to show if everyone checks the river. Also, if you think you have the best hand, show your cards, it speeds up the game.

You definitely don't want to piss of the maniac. He is there to give you his money. Let him! Also, no need to embarass him by making him show his rags for the same reason.

As for the dealer, I would just stop tipping him, he'll get the hint after a while.

Did you find out later what your friend called a double bet on the turn with?

[coloradotop2]

the rule at mt high is if there is no action on the river, the first position shows first. And you can only request to see a hand after the showdown only if you were involved up to that point. example......player 1 bets and you call the river, you show the winner and he mucks, you can see that hand but no one else at the table not involvrd at the showdown can request it. also if a player shows his hand to another player then mucks and as long as there is no hand in play you can see that hand, show one show all rule.

btw, you should complain about that dealer to the CSM on duty.

also, did you know that gaming has recently changed the rule of what to do when there is premature action on the table? before now, when the dealer would burn and turn before the action was completed, the turn card would come back, complete the action then burn and bring the river, shuffle the stub and the turn card and then NO BURN and bring out the card. Now I know some of you are reading this saying WHA???? but to those of you that know what im saying, they changed it to where you always burn when you bring a card weather naturally or for correction. I find this completly hoaky but thats colorado division of gaming for you lol

[Oz]

before now, when the dealer would burn and turn before the action was completed, the turn card would come back, complete the action then burn and bring the river, shuffle the stub and the turn card and then NO BURN and bring out the card. Now I know some of you are reading this saying WHA???? but to those of you that know what im saying, they changed it to where you always burn when you bring a card weather naturally or for correction. I find this completly hoaky but thats colorado division of gaming for you lol

While this is definitly not standard, I don't see what difference it makes. You still shuffle the flipped card back in and it still has a chance to come back out. Now the second random card after the cut becomes the river instead of the first random card.

Or am I missing something?

-Oz-

[LimeHouse]

Thanks for the clear up Top Two. For Mike, unfortunately, I'm pretty sure I tipped him on that pot, it's just a habbit I guess. I don't know what my friend had...I'll ask him tonight.

As for the new rule with the premature action, I got to see that in action as well. Same night, same table. 4 people see a slop of QQ6. As it turns out, three people have hands of 66, KQ and Q9. The KQ, who was the blind, check raised, but the dealer didn't notice, and brought the turn, a 5. Eventually, it was brought to his attention, so he shuffled the 5 back in and brought a J. And then another J. My friend had the 66, and wasn't too pleased about it, but is at least smart enough to know that the cards were still random and that it was just bad luck reguardless. He had a lot of bad luck...not me though, ha.

[msober]

My friend had the 66, and wasn't too pleased about it, but is at least smart enough to know that the cards were still random and that it was just bad luck reguardless. He had a lot of bad luck...not me though, ha.

good thing he does, or you would never hear the end of it.

[coloradotop2]

Eventually, it was brought to his attention, so he shuffled the 5 back in and brought a J. And then another J. My friend had the 66, and wasn't too pleased about it, but is at least smart enough to know that the cards were still random and that it was just bad luck reguardless. He had a lot of bad luck...not me though, ha.

well I hope that it is just the way you worded it, but it shouldve gone
flop QQ6 then the 5 is pulled back, then the dealer burns and brings the orig river card J then he takes the 5 and shuffles it in, burns and brings the final card. at least I hope that is the way it happened. If not that floor person dont know jack. lol wouldnt surprise me tho.

While this is definitly not standard, I don't see what difference it makes. You still shuffle the flipped card back in and it still has a chance to come back out. Now the second random card after the cut becomes the river instead of the first random card.

Or am I missing something?

-Oz-

well oz the problem is the whole purpose is to keep the natural flow of the cards for that hand. The dealer should only have 3 burn cards at the end of the hand (of course when the hand goes to completion) doing it this way the dealer could have up to 5 burn cards. example (and Ive seen this happen when I was a Floor) the dealer burns and brings the flop...OOPS....complete action, shuffle the flop back in and redo.....burn and turn OOPS.....complete action burn and brings river OOPS...... UGH!!!!!!! when they completely fung up the hand lmao and with this new way you get 5 burn cards..........ooooooo still makes my head hurt. also when you say "flipped" cards are you meaning exposed? because that is a totally different story :wink:

[LimeHouse]

Top Two, it happened like you said. The floor didn't even come over though. He just explained everything that he was going to do before he did it. Handled it well.

[coloradotop2]

WOW.....he didnt call the floor???? that is a big no no up the hill at any of the rooms for a situation like that. that is a very poor dealer.

[DenverPokerClub]

Don't you also have the right to ask the dealer to turn over mucked cards if the player mucks after you show?

{takes deep breaths. OK better now. :) }

Yes you have the "right" in most rooms. You are, however accusing said player of collusion. You may or may not want to do that, but in all cases you make the game a lot unfriendlier. See Accusations of Collusion thread under General Chat.

-Oz-

PS. Sorry, one of my "hot buttons" because very few people understand the history and ramifications of this rule.

I disagree - you are not necessarily accusing anyone of anything. You may want to know that he calls down with bottom pair each time and yes I know this is low limit but that kind of information can be useful. And since he doesn't want to show I would be more inclined to want to see it.

[Oz]

I disagree - you are not necessarily accusing anyone of anything. You may want to know that he calls down with bottom pair each time and yes I know this is low limit but that kind of information can be useful. And since he doesn't want to show I would be more inclined to want to see it.

The prosecution rests, your honor.

-Oz-

[Patrick]

I disagree - you are not necessarily accusing anyone of anything. You may want to know that he calls down with bottom pair each time and yes I know this is low limit but that kind of information can be useful. And since he doesn't want to show I would be more inclined to want to see it.

The prosecution rests, your honor.

-Oz-
There are very few people who understand the intent of the rule and it gets abused quite a bit.

[DenverPokerClub]

I am not going to argue with you so you can take it for what it's worth but "intent" can be interpreted the way you want it too :wink: