Card exposed when dealing - 1st burn right ? Answer - not al

[maverick]

Last night one of my cards was seen by 1 person as it went through the air when dealt. I looked down @ AKs

I asked them, "did u see that card" ? They said, yes it was a picture.

I relucantly turned over my king, showed everyone and then mucked it, thinking that I would get the burn card as a replacement.

In between the dealing, checking with the other player, and then finally turning my card over, the UTG had called.

The TD was called over. He ruled since UTG had called before the card was exposed to everyone else, then I couldn't get a replacement. And since the king was now in the muck, i also had to muck my ace. The ruling was that a call, and then me showing everyone was considered substantial action.

My feeling is that the card was exposed to 1 player during the dealing, prior to any action. It shouldn't matter, if exposed to 1 person or all. Exposed is exposed and I should have been given a replacement.

Maverick

[Luke05(Jamo)]

if the td is rulling that. u should still have u king but it should be exposed, and u still should be able to be in the hand.

[bennymacca]

my feeling is that substantial action had not taken place - this requires 2 people to act on their hands, so if only UTG has acted, then u are entitled to a new card

this is just a stab in the dark though, i might be completely wrong

[Shannon]

i'm with benny the cunt on this one

[maverick]

if the td is rulling that. u should still have u king but it should be exposed, and u still should be able to be in the hand.

I would have thought that too, and actually was reaching in to grab it back. Since it was now in the muck, the 2nd ruling was it was mucked.

[AceLosesKing]

UTG is an idiot. Play should've stopped at the table right then and there, until the situation was worked out.

I don't think you actually had to turn your card over - probably the right thing to do, but just because they said "its a picture" I don't think that's actually a ruling of "turn your card over." But I could be wrong.

Kinda sucky that you were thrown from the hand - but the TD would know the rules better than any of us. Pretty crappy loophole, though.

[BigPete33]

pretty sure only 1 person acting isn't substantial action... but I could be wrong.

[maverick]

It was ruled me turning over the king was the 2nd action.

[xtal]

UTG is an idiot. Play should've stopped at the table right then and there, until the situation was worked out.

I don't think you actually had to turn your card over - probably the right thing to do, but just because they said "its a picture" I don't think that's actually a ruling of "turn your card over." But I could be wrong.

Kinda sucky that you were thrown from the hand - but the TD would know the rules better than any of us. Pretty crappy loophole, though.

yep i agree with this

[Luke05(Jamo)]

I think I know is, that we are all poker nerds