How would you handle this?

GQUEUEGQUEUE
in General Poker Chat
Friendly, low stakes (1/2) home game. At the end, no huge winners/losers but money has changed hands. As we clean up, we find that a card was left in the box so we were really playing with only 51 cards.

Thoughts?

Comments

  • JohnnieHJohnnieH
    Umm....count the cards next time?
  • HobbesHobbes
    JohnnieH wrote: »
    Umm....count the cards next time?

    yup. At least it wasnt the 10 (or something) that someone else posted about a while back.
  • Little KingLittle King
    Your fault, always re-count cards at least twice. Especially cash games. Shitty deal if it was a face card.
  • sevryn999sevryn999
    This can be an honest mistake or someone is using what's known as "location play" - knowledge of one single card that won't be appearing in play.

    icon-aces.png
  • KristyKristy
    kill everyone
  • BlondeFishBlondeFish
    A card game should never be started until the 52 cards have been sorted, spread and approved by at least one other person. In a self-dealt game, it is also a good idea to occasionally count the cards, e.g., after you deal the river and waiting for the players to act just like at the casino.
  • ReefAquariumReefAquarium
    BlondeFish wrote: »
    A card game should never be started until the 52 cards have been sorted, spread and approved by at least one other person. In a self-dealt game, it is also a good idea to occasionally count the cards, e.g., after you deal the river and waiting for the players to act just like at the casino.

    Yes, count the stub after you deal the river card every time it comes round to you ...
  • GQUEUEGQUEUE
    Thanks, understand everyone is commenting on how to prevent this in the future (and these are good suggestions), but what I was asking was, do you think losing players should be compensated from the winners to address the possibility that the 1 card affected the outcome?
  • HobbesHobbes
    No. All players were at the same disadvantage.

    And whose to say it only impacted the losers.

    Maybe if that card was in the deck
    the losers lose more?
    the distribution of winners changes?
  • ConfusedONEConfusedONE
    make sure it's 52 next time ;)
  • compueasecompuease Admin
    ConfusedONE wrote: »
    make sure it's 52 next time ;)

    There's supposed to be 52? ut oh...
  • KristyKristy
    Hobbes wrote: »
    No. All players were at the same disadvantage.

    And whose to say it only impacted the losers.

    Maybe if that card was in the deck
    the losers lose more?
    the distribution of winners changes?

    This.
Sign In or Register to comment.
HomeDiscussionsToggle Dark Mode