Low value angle but still sketchy

Low value angle but still sketchy

$2/$5 table, button is in seat 8. Seat 9 is small blind, seat 1 big blind. Seat 2 straddles for $10. A bunch of limps mixed in with a few folds. Button folds. Small blind limps, big blind throws in an extra $5 to call. Straddle checks. 5 or 6 players to the flop. $50 or $60 in the pot.

I put out the flop.

I start to rearrange my rack (the previous dealer left it a mess), but I am carefully watching the player on seat 9 waiting for him to act first. To the best of my knowledge he hasn't moved. I continue with my rack, while watching him.

Then out of the corner of my eye, I see seat 4 check. I perk up, and say "Stop the action". I ask seat 9 if he has acted yet.? He does not answer me. He continues to look at everyone else to see what they are doing. Meanwhile, every other player in the hand checks (nobody stoppedthe action). Then the player in seat 9 speaks up and says that he hasn't acted yet and throws out $15. I pause for a second, and start to speak up and say that he didn't protect his action and it has checked around. I barely get the first syllable of the first word out of my mouth after the pause but it is already too late. Everyone else folds.

It is one of those hands that no one was really interested in. It was a small pot, obviously Everyone missed, they were just more interested in getting back to their phones or their conversations with the neighbors, that they just blondly acted after their neighbor acted. They wanted no part of the hand.

Since everyone else folded, I reluctantly pushed the pot to seat 9. I considered speaking up or calling the floor, but then I thought about it and decided that was not a rules hill I wanted to die on.

It is quite clear seat 9 was cheating. He was seeing if the action was going to blindly check around before betting. It was also obvious that everyone else at the table did not care. Most of the other players would have been more frustrated by the delay in the game by me calling the floor. So I didn't call the floor.

After I pushed the pot and was cleaning up the board, I said to seat 9 that he has to be careful. If enough people check behind him (even out of turn), he might lose his action and his bet wouldn't count. He doesn't say anything for a few seconds, then halfway through my pitch for the next hand he starts going off on me.

He asks me if I am accusing him of cheating? His voice goes higher and gets louder. I say that I am just telling him that he wasn't protecting his action by watching everyone else check. It was fine this time, but it could come back to bite him in the future in a bigger pot where others were interested. Of course everyone else at the table is trying to figure out what is going on and all conversation stops.

He then asks me again if I am accusing him of cheating? I said that I am not accusing him of anything. I was just letting him know that his actions could be ruled differently in the future.

The whole rest of the down he keeps thowing out the cheater accusation. I really wanted to say, "Yes, you cheated", but I didn't. I kept quiet. He talked about going to my manager. When I finally got tapped out, I went to the area supervisor and explained the hand (just as I have here). I said that the player threatened to go to the shift manager over it so I just wanted to explain before that happened.

I don't think I handled it poorly, in fact I think I handled correctly.

I would like to hear others thoughts on this though.

21 June 2024 at 08:21 AM
Reply...

59 Replies

5
w


by JimL k

I was fixing my rack and watching seat 9 with me peripheral vision. I saw seat r act out of turn. Since seat 1 and 2 never spoke up, I think it isnsafe tonassume they acted as well.

by JimL k

Ok, so then to be fair...

It should also be noted that even while cleaning up the rack, I was watching the player who the action was on and also caught the out of turn action.

This isn't accurate then, is it? Did you really catch the out of turn action if you didn't do so until it was too late? Once three people have checked behind seat 9, that's significant action and they've lost their right to act. It's not farfetched to say that this whole issue could have been avoided if you had been paying more attention to the game.

Considering they bet anyway and everybody mucked without protest, I'm probably just pushing the pot, moving on and not dying on this hill. Afterwards, I don't mind trying to give them a polite heads up as to why they need to protect their action however, and you can't take this however you want, based on some of the posts I've seen from you in this sub-forum, (specifically the Breakroom thread) I would not be shocked if your delivery was subpar and that's what sent s9 off.


I don't understand the (new?) confusion by OP. You either knew that Seats 1 and 2 were acting out of turn and failed to stop the action until you "perked up" at Seat 4, or you didn't know that Seats 1 and 2 were acting out of turn and therefore can't be sure about what Seat 9 was "clearly watching". Assumptions built on and backfilled from assumptions — that is what is unfair.


by JimL k

Respectfully (and I really do mean this respectfully), this is wrong. No experienced dealer would agree with you. Not a single one.

Furthermore, it should be noted that I didn't make any mistake whike counting the rack. I still caught the out of turn action.

You did not successfully stop the subsequent OOT checks. You saw that seat OOT but even you admitted you can’t say that 1&2 acted. You did not stop the action even though it was slow enough you could watch s9 almost nodding as the checks went on. So it wasn’t those bang bang everyone check in an instance situations. Thus imo and ime you could have stopped some of the OOT checks.

Was this a major mess up. Not at all. It is one that prolly most dealers have happen. But it still an error. I doubt you have ever dealt to me. But based on your postings I suspect you are better than a decent dealer. No dealer is 100% error free.

You were not specific on where we disagree but I can say I showed my post to one of the best dealers I know. She is a machine, runs a table great and seldom makes an error. But she also has just enough banter to keep the table fun when doing so is appropriate.

She agreed 100% with what I said. Note in this room the rack is supposed to be counted at the start of every down. She ALWAYS does so before dealing hand one. Most of the time she knows if the count is likely right or not because she has counted it while waiting after the tap. If the rack is a real mess she has mentally mapped out the fastest way to clean it up.


I agree with not being bothered if I hadda wait 20 seconds before the new dealer started the hand. I prefer quality over quantity.

by JimL k

Seat 2 straddles for $10. A bunch of limps mixed in with a few folds. Button folds. Small blind limps, big blind throws in an extra $5 to call. Straddle checks. 5 or 6 players to the flop. $50 or $60 in the pot.

I was jw were you also counting up your rack when all the limping, folding and raising was going on too? Maybe we found a leak in your game. A good dealer will let every player know when the action's on him, where the action is and announce every action although some like to sit back, look at the well, be nonchalant and let the players run the game (I'm not saying you're one of these dealers) but maybe I'm being alil too picky having played for so long and expect everyone to be 100%, but that's just me.


by Playbig2000 k

A good dealer will let every player know when the action's on him, where the action is and announce every action

Good god, no.


by Didace k

Good god, no.

When you're playing with ppl who are staring into their phones all day and not paying attention, yes. I shouldn't have to be the one to tell them "it's on you, buddy".


Uh there is a happy medium between announcing every single action and not saying anything when someone isn’t acting.


by JimL k

Respectfully (and I really do mean this respectfully), this is wrong. No experienced dealer would agree with you. Not a single one.

Furthermore, it should be noted that I didn't make any mistake whike counting the rack. I still caught the out of turn action.

I'm not a dealer, but as a very experienced player, I would also prefer the dealer clean up the rack before he starts dealing hands.

And you can't tell someone that his opinion is wrong.


by Jeffage k

You allowed the hand to proceed and this person to bet despite people checking behind him after weighing a variety of factors. So why say something afterward when you didn’t think the possible infraction warranted stopping the hand? It is kind of passive aggressive and my guess is your tone was more annoying/accusatory/passive aggressive than you think. Just my opinion. Either stop the action or let the hand proceed. No need for a comment after the fact when you decided to let it go and mov

How did I "allow" action to proceed?

I called for the action to stop as soon as I saw the out of turn action, but then it continued and then seat 9 bet and everyone insta folded on all of about a 30 second span.

What was I supposed to? Should I have gotten up and tackled someone? Used a taser? Maybe punched them in the face?

A dealer can call out warnings, but they cannot control players who refuse to pay attention.

How was I supposed to "stop" the actions of players who are not paying attention because they do not care about the hand?


by Rawlz517 k

This isn't accurate then, is it? Did you really catch the out of turn action if you didn't do so until it was too late? Once three people have checked behind seat 9, that's significant action and they've lost their right to act. It's not farfetched to say that this whole issue could have been avoided if you had been paying more attention to the game.

Considering they bet anyway and everybody mucked without protest, I'm probably just pushing the pot, moving on and not dying on this hill. Afterwar

WTF?!?!?

No. It was 100% accurate.

I called the out of turn action the moment I saw it, no one else did. In fact, it isn't unreasonable to say that me rearranging the rack helped me catch the out of turn action quicker because I was looking down so the other side of thr table was more in my peripheral vision. If I was 100% focused on seat 9, I probably would have missed seat 4's check out of turn.

You really need to read the OP closer. How exactly did my divided attention ruin the hand? How would have paying closer attention been any different?

As for your comment about my delivery. I pretty much quoted what I said verbatim.


I had a very similar situation happen today at the poker table. The dealer didn't stop several players from acting out of turn because he was focused on the slow player.

Is this what they teach dealers to do? I think it would be much better to have them keeping an eye on the whole table, not to be hyper focused on one player.


by Fore k

You did not successfully stop the subsequent OOT checks. You saw that seat OOT but even you admitted you can’t say that 1&2 acted. You did not stop the action even though it was slow enough you could watch s9 almost nodding as the checks went on. So it wasn’t those bang bang everyone check in an instance situations. Thus imo and ime you could have stopped some of the OOT checks.

I find it weird that this is the point of contention, but I will explain it more clearly because maybe I am wrong.

Flop comes out, my attention is divided between my rack and seat 9 who is first to act. It literally involves me looking at my rack while focusing on him with my peripheral vision while alternatly looking at him directly to make sure he knows it is his action and is paying attention. In these instances, dealers are mostly looking for movement by the hands. Either a check or bet.

His hands never move to make a bet or check.

His head is looking over towards the center of the table/ the other side of the table (he is in seat 9 so they are the same). He is slightly nodding/turning his head, but players do stuff like this all of the time while thinking. It is the literal definition of physical tells. Players make movements with eyes/head while thinking.

He nods/turns his head twice. Again. Not notable in real time, but significant after the fact.

I see seat 4 check out of turn in conjunction with seat 9's head nodding/turning. I then call out to hold the action. The rest of the players (seat 6 and 7 or 8???, don't remember exactly) ignore me and proceed to quickly check right after seat 4. Boom, boom, boom. Seat 9's head nodding/turning and watching each of seat 4, 6 and 7's checks in turn.

Do you see the pattern?

I didn't see seat 1 and 2 check. Sorry. I am human with eyes facing forward and not a fly with eyes on the side of my head so I cannot see 300 degrees. When the action is on seat 9, every dealer is going to miss whatever seat 1 and 2 do. It is outside of human vision. Unless there is an audible tell, we will not know.

However it was very clear after the fact of watching seat 9 react to seat 4 and then 6 and 7 that he was following the action and that was what his head movements were correlated to earlier. He was watching seat 1 and 2 checknout of turn.

How could I have stopped the action any sooner? After the hand, was I wrong on letting seat 9 know that it is his responsibility to stop out of turn action if he sees it when it is his turn (even though it didn't matter this hand, I might in the future)?


by Fore k

She agreed 100% with what I said. Note in this room the rack is supposed to be counted at the start of every down. She ALWAYS does so before dealing hand one. Most of the time she knows if the count is likely right or not because she has counted it while waiting after the tap. If the rack is a real mess she has mentally mapped out the fastest way to clean it up.

In my experience there are two types of rooms. The first expect an incoming dealer to count the rack before ever dealing a hand. Generally they are super strict about the rack, even to the point where in the old days they would expect dealers to make up differences if the rack was off on tables they just left (though this no longer really happens because it is probably illegal).

The second type expect a dealer to immediately start dealing hands and count the rack as they are dealing. They are generally more lax about the rack. They don't care if it is a few dollars off. If it is off by a $100 they would care, but not $5. To management, getting out the hands in more important than a couple of dollars.

I have worked in casinos that had both type of attitudes. Generally, I find that the second type (count as you go) is better. It generally results in a hand or two extra per down. Better for the house, better for the dealers (and extra tip or two), and better for the players (and extra hand per down).

That said, if I was running a room, my attitude would depend upon the skill level of the dealers. If I was leading a room that ended up having lots of experienced cash game dealers, the count as you go is far superior. More hands and the mistakes are minimal due to experienced dealers. If my room generally had a bunch of new dealers (for whatever reason), then I might have them count first. The risk of rack error is too great and they are probably not experienced enough to count a rack and deal at the same time.

That said, it really is better to have a dealer count while dealing. That extra hand or two per down add up.

There is absolutely no doubt that having a dealer count a rack while dealing is distracting. Even the absolute best will make more mistakes while doing two things at once. That is simple human nature.

It is the procedures of the room though. Not the dealer.


by checkraisdraw k

Uh there is a happy medium between announcing every single action and not saying anything when someone isn’t acting.

This. More this.

A good dealer knows how to read the table. There are tables where you know you have to wake up every player because they are distracted by their phones. Other tables operate just fine with minimal dealer interaction. They know what is going on. Just shut up and move the cards and chips. Some times it is a mix. There are players you have to announce everything for and others you do not.


by chillrob k

I'm not a dealer, but as a very experienced player, I would also prefer the dealer clean up the rack before he starts dealing hands.

And you can't tell someone that his opinion is wrong.

That generally means less hands per down. Maybe that is fine with you, but just a fact.

Also, opinions can be wrong. Of someone says that in their opinion the sun rises in the west and sets in the east. It doesn't matter if it is an opinion. It is still wrong.


by chillrob k

I had a very similar situation happen today at the poker table. The dealer didn't stop several players from acting out of turn because he was focused on the slow player.

Is this what they teach dealers to do? I think it would be much better to have them keeping an eye on the whole table, not to be hyper focused on one player.

It is a give or take situation. It depends.

It is human nature that a person can only focus on so much. If a dealer is hyper focused on the action, they will often miss out of turn action (or any craziness that happens away from the action). No doubt. But it also works in reverse. If dealer who is trying to focus on the whole table will also miss subtle actions by specific players. Players who check by wiggling their pinky finger subtly.

I generally try and switch back and forth, depending upon circumstances. If the players are loose and lax, I will try and pay attention to the whole table. These tables are the type where out of action stuff happens. If players are serious and paying attention, I am more focused on the player the action is on. Those are the type of games where the action movements will be more subtle.

Also, the type of game matters. Tournaments are generally more serious. The action (checks) are more subtle. Also, out of turn action happens far less often (and is less tolerated), so it is better to focus on the action rather than the whole table.

Also, the game state matters. If the action is on a short stacked player. I will probably pay more attention to him because he may subtly indicate "all in" and I do not want to miss it because all ins are important from a game perspective.

Finally, it also depends upon the player. When the action is on a player who either acts is subtle ways (i.e. folds by pushing the cards two millimeters forward), or checks by subtly nodding, then of course you are going to pay closer attention to them than the rest of the table. Also, if there is a known angleshooter or just generally troublesome player, of course 100% of your attention will be on them because there is a chance you will have to react to their vague actions.

That is why when people ask me what they can do as a player to be better, I always say to play cleanly and clearly. Not only does it make it easier for every other player at the table to play with you, but it is easier for the dealer. Furthermore, it is easier for the dealer to look good. If I know a player plays clean and clear, I can focus on the rest of the table and maybe catch somethingthat no other dealer would catch, as well as the the rest of the stuff like the tournament clock.

75% of the time when a dealer misses something away from the action, it is because of the player who the action is on because of reasons. The dealer HAS to focus on them. Same in reverse. I might miss your subtle pinky check because I am mostly focusing on the player at the other end of the table on the player who has folded out if turn 50% of the time.

It is a trade off and more often than not it involves a dealer making an educated guess on where to devote their attention knowing that they will be wrong some percentage of the time.

It should also be noted that paying attention to the action as well as the rest of the table is just part of a dealers job. A dealers job also consists of a bunch of non-table activities. Maybe calling over a floor for a non-emergency situation (the rack is off, the rotation is wrong, whatever). My attention might be half focused on looking for a floor. Maybe a big tipping player is looking for a cocktail waitress and tells me to keep an eye open for one. Maybe I am looking at the rotation because it changed and I need to figure out where I am going next. Maybe the next tournament table that breaks means I get to go home so I am looking at the clock and looking at the remaining players to do the math. Whatever.

Maybe some of those are good reasons, maybe they are not, point is often times a dealer has to also do stuff that is different than the table action.

That is not to make excuses. A good dealer does all of that and still keeps the action moving. Absolutely no doubt. Furthermore I would go far enough to say a good dealer makes sure keeping the action going is priority one. I am just pointing out that occasionally there are other stuff going on.


by JimL k

That generally means less hands per down. Maybe that is fine with you, but just a fact.

Also, opinions can be wrong. Of someone says that in their opinion the sun rises in the west and sets in the east. It doesn't matter if it is an opinion. It is still wrong.

That is not a real opinion, that is something that has a right answer. Saying you prefer A to B is an opinion, which you said was wrong but cannot be. He didn't say anything about which way gives more hands per down. I play poker to pay my bills so more hands would make me more money but I would still prefer to have it done first.

Your more recent point about about it being based on room policy makes sense, and maybe in those places the dealer does not have the choice, but earlier you made it sound like you could have done it either way.

Really I think it seemed better to have dealers carry around their own racks, but I guess nowhere does it that way anymore


by chillrob k

That is not a real opinion, that is something that has a right answer. Saying you prefer A to B is an opinion, which you said was wrong but cannot be. He didn't say anything about which way gives more hands per down. I play poker to pay my bills so more hands would make me more money but I would still prefer to have it done first.

Your more recent point about about it being based on room policy makes sense, and maybe in those places the dealer does not have the choice, but earlier you made it

Wow!!!! That brings back memories. I am old enough to have played in rooms where the dealers brought their own rack to the table. No offense but you are old if you remember that. Good times. I love it.

That said, the whole deal right away versus count the rack is more of a theoretical argument than a real argument when done right. It really doesn't make a difference.

At most it only makes a hand or two difference per down, also, a moderately decent dealer can count the rack while also keeping the action going. If done right with good dealers, most players should never notice the difference I just happened to be following a dealer who kept a really bad rack and I hit upon a unique situation with action on seat 9 and out of turn action behind me in seat 1 and 2. A super vast majority of the time, it shouldn't be noticed.

Most of the dealers I follow keep a good rack so I can count it very quickly without the players noticing. Just one of those times.

Poker.


It should also be noted that if a rack is well kept that it should be able to be counted before the dealer ever sits down. I have counted racks before sitting down, but it is rare. I generally don't even try now because most racks require slight adjustments.

I will also admit that I am 100% anal about racks being set right. There is a procedure set by the room on how racks should be. I gollow it to my detriment.
Unfortunately it is rarely enforced enough to make a difference. Most are close enough, but not perfect.

That said. My analness at getting the rack right is also what makes me a good dealer. I care enough to get it right so I will also try to get the action right. I think a sloppy rack is generally done by a dealer who just doesn't care or is so overwhelmed that they don't have the time to care. Good dealers getting the basics right is a good indicator of them getting other things right.

Obviously I am highly biased though.


by JimL k

How did I "allow" action to proceed?

I called for the action to stop as soon as I saw the out of turn action, but then it continued and then seat 9 bet and everyone insta folded on all of about a 30 second span.

What was I supposed to? Should I have gotten up and tackled someone? Used a taser? Maybe punched them in the face?

A dealer can call out warnings, but they cannot control players who refuse to pay attention.

How was I supposed to "stop" the actions of players who are not paying attention bec

Ok well you pushed the pot to the person you said did something you described I believe as cheating or unethical. You could have called the floor over to warn him or rule whether he could even bet before proceeding (not sure if any of the mucked hands were recoverable I’m sure some of them were if it happened in an instant). You didn’t do any of those things which I am not even arguing you should have done necessarily. So why say something after and act like the police of all things poker? You pushed the pot, I would just move on and not try to teach the player a lesson because again in the moment you didn’t do anything. I am sure what you said had a bite or shitty tone to it because obviously his actions agitated you but it can be hard to be introspective on stuff like that when you are saying it sometimes. Just my two cents, I enjoy your posts and I’m sure you are a good dealer and player, but since you posted something you are asking for opinions on it and I and others provided one.


by JimL k

WTF?!?!?

No. It was 100% accurate.

I called the out of turn action the moment I saw it, no one else did. In fact, it isn't unreasonable to say that me rearranging the rack helped me catch the out of turn action quicker because I was looking down so the other side of thr table was more in my peripheral vision.

Well that wasn't really what you said in the OP

by JimL k


I start to rearrange my rack (the previous dealer left it a mess), but I am carefully watching the player on seat 9 waiting for him to act first. To the best of my knowledge he hasn't moved.

As a player (and this isn't directed at you) I would hope my dealers are focused 100% on the game, not just watching it from their peripheral vision. You shoulda been able to say "seat 9 hasn't acted yet, it's still on him" instead of "to the best of my knowledge he hasn't moved". I mean, why even bring up the fact that you were fixing your rack when all this was going on if it had no bearing on what happened?


by JimL k

I find it weird that this is the point of contention, but I will explain it more clearly because maybe I am wrong.

Flop comes out, my attention is divided between my rack and seat 9 who is first to act. It literally involves me looking at my rack while focusing on him with my peripheral vision while alternatly looking at him directly to make sure he knows it is his action and is paying attention. In these instances, dealers are mostly looking for movement by the hands. Either a check or bet.

His h

If you can’t watch s9 afire action while also monitoring s1 and s2, you realize you just literally said you can’t do your job. You can’t claim ‘I caught the OOT action by s4; see how good I did.’ You are expected to catch and attempt to stop OOT action by s1. I see dealers do this all the time

I also don’t know how you can claim being distracted by counting did not impact catching the OOT actions. You literally imply s9 is watching these. OOT actions but at the same time claiming it was impossible for you to see them. What advantage does s9 have over you.

Also 30 secs is an eternity in such spots. If you can’t attempt to stop OOT action until 3 have occurred while s9 is able too watch everything with nods, etc. I believe table mgmt practice is likely a skill for improvement. Again this isn’t a case where 7 people checked OOT in 5 seconds.

You wish to penalize s9 for not stopping the oot action, yet you the person charged with controlling the action say you could not possibly be expected to do so. You honestly don’t see the inconsistencies of your positions? And you won’t allow that if you were not distracted counting, maybe you could have successfully done the task your position had responsibility for. You can’t even concede after multiple people pointed this out, that maybe your way is not equally good as doing it “the correct way”. Just like pitching cards, faster is not better if it leads to more errors. You also might want to look into some of the studies on how our brains manage multitasking and splitting our attention.


by JimL k

In my experience there are two types of rooms. The first expect an incoming dealer to count the rack before ever dealing a hand. Generally they are super strict about the rack, even to the point where in the old days they would expect dealers to make up differences if the rack was off on tables they just left (though this no longer really happens because it is probably illegal).

The second type expect a dealer to immediately start dealing hands and count the rack as they are dealing. They are ge

So how many hands are lost when you need to make a floor call for not timely catching OOT action?

First if you are any good it will cost maybe a qtr of a hand per down to count the rack. Literally takes more time to pitch the cards to a full table than how long the count should take. And you won’t have to split your attention away from your primary responsibility.

Sure if the room rules are to check the rack while dealing, you should follow your rooms procedures. But the claim you are now making that it is the best way on top of claiming being distracted doesn’t impact performance are both poppy cock.


by JimL k

It should also be noted that if a rack is well kept that it should be able to be counted before the dealer ever sits down. I have counted racks before sitting down, but it is rare. I generally don't even try now because most racks require slight adjustments.

I will also admit that I am 100% anal about racks being set right. There is a procedure set by the room on how racks should be. I gollow it to my detriment.
Unfortunately it is rarely enforced enough to make a difference. Most are close enough

Today, many rooms will keep a fair amount of money in cash in the rack. This can’t be counted when not taking the cash out of the rack. But at Wynn, they often don’t stop and count when a new dealer arrives. In fact, you often don’t even notice that a new dealer has sat down. One regular player told me that they “don’t sweat the small stuff.” And my guess is that they get to deal 3 more hands an hour, and at a $5 rake, that should more than make up any rack shortages.

Mason


by Jeffage k

I am sure what you said had a bite or shitty tone to it because obviously his actions agitated you but it can be hard to be introspective on stuff like that when you are saying it sometimes. Just my two cents, I enjoy your posts and I’m sure you are a good dealer and player, but since you posted something you are asking for opinions on it and I and others provided one.

Why are you sure what I said had bite or a shirty tone?

I am fairly sure it didn't. I literally just warned him that if it was a big pot against players who cared, he could have been ruled against. I was helping him.

My guess is that he knew exactly what he was doing and then when I pointed out the obvious, he decided to get aggressive.

Reply...