Rulings, rulings, rulings...
There were a number of rulings questions last night, (one of which caused me great grief), so I'm going to mention them here and get feedback on any you disagree with.
Situation A: Blinds are 50/100. UTG makes it 400 to go, UTG+1 announces raise to 500, and puts 500 in the pot. The raise of 100 is illegal (minimum raise must be to 700. Since 100 is less than half that amount, should UTG+1 be ruled to call the blind, or to raise to 700?
Ruling: UTG+1 must bet 700. "RR: NL[FONT="] #10. If a player tries to bet or raise less than the legal minimum and has more chips, the wager must be increased to the proper size. (This does not apply to a player who has unintentionally put too much in to call.) The wager is brought up to the sufficient amount only, no greater size."
[/FONT]Situation B: Blinds are 150/300. UTG folds, UTG+1 says, "300, err 400, I mean, raise." What action should UTG+1 be forced to take.
Ruling: UTG+1 was forced to call 300. "RR: B+R[FONT="] #8. A verbal statement denotes your action and is binding. If in turn you verbally declare a fold, check, bet, call, or raise, you are forced to take that action."[/FONT]
Situation C: Blinds are 100/200, still in the re-buy period where you can rebuy 1,000 chips if you're at 1,000 or less. Blinds are posted, button starts shuffling and is about to deal when SB says, "can I rebuy right now since the deal hasn't start?" Including the amount he posted, the SB has a total of 900 chips. Can he rebuy or does he have to wait a hand?
Ruling: SB is allowed to take the rebuy. "RR: NL[FONT="] #33. If a player announces the intent to rebuy before cards are dealt, that player is playing behind and is obligated to make the rebuy." Aside question: What would the ruling be if he started the hand with 1,100 and posted 100 in the SB, then announced rebuy before the cards were dealt?
[/FONT]Situation
Blinds are 150/300 (50). UTG mucks, UTG+2 mucks, UTG+3 mucks, CO mucks, Button announces "looks like you're getting a walk" and mucks, SB mucks, BB mucks and starts raking the pot. UTG+1 then says, "Umm.. I still have a hand." Is the pot awarded to UTG+1 because everyone mucked or to BB because UTG+1 didn't speak up in time?
Ruling: BB is awarded the pot because UTG+1 reacted after three or more players acted behind him. A number of players mentioned this is in Robert's rules, but I haven't been able to find it today. I'm still not 100% sure on this one. If the ruling is correct, does that mean that if UTG+1 were the button that he'd be awarded the pot in the same situation?
As mentioned above, I'm not 100% on D, and my first thought was to award it to UTG+1 because everyone mucked. Thoughts/rulings?
Situation A: Blinds are 50/100. UTG makes it 400 to go, UTG+1 announces raise to 500, and puts 500 in the pot. The raise of 100 is illegal (minimum raise must be to 700. Since 100 is less than half that amount, should UTG+1 be ruled to call the blind, or to raise to 700?
Ruling: UTG+1 must bet 700. "RR: NL[FONT="] #10. If a player tries to bet or raise less than the legal minimum and has more chips, the wager must be increased to the proper size. (This does not apply to a player who has unintentionally put too much in to call.) The wager is brought up to the sufficient amount only, no greater size."
[/FONT]Situation B: Blinds are 150/300. UTG folds, UTG+1 says, "300, err 400, I mean, raise." What action should UTG+1 be forced to take.
Ruling: UTG+1 was forced to call 300. "RR: B+R[FONT="] #8. A verbal statement denotes your action and is binding. If in turn you verbally declare a fold, check, bet, call, or raise, you are forced to take that action."[/FONT]
Situation C: Blinds are 100/200, still in the re-buy period where you can rebuy 1,000 chips if you're at 1,000 or less. Blinds are posted, button starts shuffling and is about to deal when SB says, "can I rebuy right now since the deal hasn't start?" Including the amount he posted, the SB has a total of 900 chips. Can he rebuy or does he have to wait a hand?
Ruling: SB is allowed to take the rebuy. "RR: NL[FONT="] #33. If a player announces the intent to rebuy before cards are dealt, that player is playing behind and is obligated to make the rebuy." Aside question: What would the ruling be if he started the hand with 1,100 and posted 100 in the SB, then announced rebuy before the cards were dealt?
[/FONT]Situation
Blinds are 150/300 (50). UTG mucks, UTG+2 mucks, UTG+3 mucks, CO mucks, Button announces "looks like you're getting a walk" and mucks, SB mucks, BB mucks and starts raking the pot. UTG+1 then says, "Umm.. I still have a hand." Is the pot awarded to UTG+1 because everyone mucked or to BB because UTG+1 didn't speak up in time?Ruling: BB is awarded the pot because UTG+1 reacted after three or more players acted behind him. A number of players mentioned this is in Robert's rules, but I haven't been able to find it today. I'm still not 100% sure on this one. If the ruling is correct, does that mean that if UTG+1 were the button that he'd be awarded the pot in the same situation?
As mentioned above, I'm not 100% on D, and my first thought was to award it to UTG+1 because everyone mucked. Thoughts/rulings?
Comments
I disagree that just saying a number is a verbally binding action. "check, bet call or raise (or fold)". He could have been bragging about his weight or something unrelated to poker.
It's a question of timing? The cards aren't delt and he's at the 1,000 mark. He rebuys.
It's a question of the number of players AND the amount of time. If three players turbo fold like a lightning chain-reaction, you have to give the player reasonable time to realize play has moved past him..
I like the call of UTG+1's hand being dead. I mean, 5 players WITH conversation? Either pay attention or fold.
rrop chapter 3: general poker rules...
11. To retain the right to act, a player must stop the action by calling “time” (or an equivalent word). Failure to stop the action before three or more players have acted behind you may cause you to lose the right to act. You cannot forfeit your right to act if any player in front of you has not acted, only if you fail to act when it legally becomes your turn. Therefore, if you wait for someone whose turn comes before you, and three or more players act behind you, this still does not hinder your right to act.
seems like utg+1 let 3 other players act while it was his turn and he didn't do anything to stop it. it's dead hand
For this one I'd also let him/her put their 500 in and fold. (not that they would) but if he was unaware of the original raise.....he should have the option of folding without putting in the extra 200, only because he said "raise to 500". But I'd be dissapointed in anyone who took that option.
Great job last night. Keeping this many players in line takes patience. It's good that you're willing to take advice and don't make split decisions. I know I was involved in one of these situations....and you took a few opinions before making your ruling. Makes it easy to follow your decisions.
I don't think the rule you quote covers the situation better than the simple rule of "...verbal is binding."
Again, verbal is binding. Announcing the bet is equalivent to "call".
A new "deal" or hand commences with the first riffle of the deck. I would not have allowed the re-buy.
Seems okay. Different details will lead you to different rulings here. Did the dealer move the action or did the players do it themselves? Was UTG+1 "hiding" his cards?
I don't think he mucked, I think BB exposed his hand as 55, but he was still holding on to them.
This is correct, the rebuy should not have been allowed to take effect until following hand.
Some mean the first riffle, some say the first card hitting the felt...
Maybe...but the Tournament Director's Association has 40 rules:
#17 New Limits- When time has elapsed in a round and a new level is announced by a member of the tournament staff, the new level applies to the next hand. A hand begins with the first riffle.
#18 Re-buys- A player may not miss a hand. If a player announces the intent to re-buy before a new hand begins, that player is playing chips behind and is obligated to make the re-buy.
Based on how we play, the posting of the blinds should have indicated the start of a new hand and the rebuy should have taken place on the following hand.
I try to keep the game light and make choices that are fair, but you do need some ground rules to have a framework for those fair choices.
I'm also VERY grateful that I have players that aren't rules lawyers, don't give me flack for the ruling I make and try to keep the spirit of fun in any decisions that need to me made.