When is a misdeal called?

WSOP Rules...

#66. In stud-type games, if any of the players' two down cards are exposed due to a dealer error, it is a misdeal. In flop games, exposure of one of the first two cards dealt is a misdeal. Players may be dealt two consecutive cards on the button.

This is a little ambiguous to me, and I would appreciate your insight...

In a flop game, are the first two cards the ones that go to each of the blinds? If so, what happens if, for example, UTG's card is exposed??

A re-deal?

No, you keep dealing the cards but the last card is dealt to UTG. The exposed card is the burn card when you do the flop. That's the way it's done when I play live.

The dealer at my casino announces the exposed card when dealing, making sure everyone sees it as well. The only time I've seen them call a misdeal, is if the muck up the order of the deal, or if players accidentally grab the wrong cards.

So the first two cards referred to in the OP are the ones going to the Blinds?

I've seen it called if the cards are dealt to the wrong players and are looked at before the dealer can move them to the right players.

Also if 2 cards flip over when they are being dealt. If only one flips over, it becomes the burn card.

^^^ this is what usually happens, and it's what I do in any game I deal*.

I suspect in the rule above they literally do mean the first two cards off the deck, for the following reasons:

- If it's one of the first two cards off the deck (ie: the small and big blind's first down cards, respectively), no significant action has taken place and not much time has been lost. So taking the cards back and reshuffling shouldn't be such a big deal.

- After the first two cards have been dealt successfully, I assume they go with the "exposed card = burn card" rule.

- Omaha is also a flop game, so if the rule were referring to everyone's first two hole cards it'd leave a gaping hole: what if MP1's third hole card is exposed? I'd be surprised if they made a gaffe like that in the official rules.

Also, the rule about downcards is set out much more clearly in the stud example (which is that way, I guess, because stud relies on information from other upcards so much that one more exposed card could be a bigger problem than in hold 'em).

(* Implication that I'd ever make a misdeal is, of course, implied only. Because I'm awesome and perfect and all that - LOLZ)