Sorry, but I still think that checking what a very old person is drinking is stupid, no matter how much notation you add to it.
Yes, that's the point. The bouncer doesn't need to check the old man, and the card player doesn't need to check the third card.
This is obvious when given the bar context, but less obvious when the same set of rules is taken out of any human context.
If we refer to either "a card has a vowel" or "a person is drinking alcohol" as P and either "a card has an even number" or "a person is over eighteen" as Q, we can describe the four cards/people in both situations as:
1. P 2. ¬P 3. Q 4. ¬Q
The rule can be described as P implies Q. P implies Q is equivalent to "Q or ¬P". Therefore, in cases 2 and 3, P implies Q is known to be true without needing to know the value of the other proposition. In the remaining cases, you don't have enough information to know whether P implies Q. In case 1, P implies Q if and only if the value of Q is true when one checks it. In case 4, P implies Q is true if and only if the value of P is false when one checks it.