Ruling help needed

I was at a home game last night, and the following situation occured:

3 players in the hand.

First to act makes a big raise.
Second to act makes a big re-raise that will set the first player all-in.
First to act says "I call".
Third to act says "Whoa, I haven't acted yet", and folds.
First to act folds.

I thought that the first player should have been made to follow through with his call, but some others at the table wanted to let him fold, so the hand was indeed folded.  Should it have been?

Note that there was no discussion about whether or not verbal actions are binding in the game before the hand.  So, I'm wondering what the 'assumed' rule would be.

Comments

  • I think unless otherwise stated before the game, that call is binding and he must call. Acting out of turn like this could have very well changed how player 3 was going to play the hand. Player 1's chips go in.
  • all_aces wrote:
    Note that there was no discussion about whether or not verbal actions are binding in the game before the hand.  So, I'm wondering what the 'assumed' rule would be.
    My assumption would be that verbal actions are binding, even if out of turn.  However, if the rules were not discussed (and no precedent from previous home games at same place), that makes it harder. I'd discuss it for a bit, but if reasonable discussion doesn't work, I usually just suck it up, smile and say "you're the host :)" (and then decide whether to pack up my chips and go home...)
  • Robert's Rules of Poker says:

    "Deliberately acting out of turn will not be tolerated. A player who checks out of turn may not bet or raise on the next turn to act. An action or verbal declaration out of turn may be ruled binding if there is no bet, call, or raise by an intervening player acting after the infraction has been committed. A player who has called out of turn may not change his wager to a raise under any circumstances."

    ScottyZ
  • Funny I was about to post a simliar (but slightly different question), so I'll just hi jack this thread instead. :)

    For the above senario this is what Robert's Rules of Poker says...

    _________________________________________________
    Betting and Rasing

    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.

    10. Deliberately acting out of turn will not be tolerated. A player who checks out of turn may not bet or raise on the next turn to act. An action or verbal declaration out of turn may be ruled binding if there is no bet, call, or raise by an intervening player acting after the infraction has been committed.
    _________________________________________________

    So, #8 doesn't apply here, because he called the all-in out of turn. #10, though, clearly defines what happens here. Since there was no bet, call or raise from "Third" (he folded), "First"'s verbal declaration should be binding. Having said that, the tricky part is the wording..

    "..may be ruled binding if.."

    So. In reality, it's up to the house, but I think, personally, binding the player to his action is the best thing to do.
  • Having said that, the tricky part is the wording..

    "..may be ruled binding if.."

    Although the use of the word 'may' in the rule is, shall we say, non-binding, when looking for a standard rule when no pre-existing house rule exists (as in the OP), we should convert 'may' to 'will'.

    ScottyZ
  • all_aces wrote:

    First to act makes a big raise.
    Second to act makes a big re-raise that will set the first player all-in.
    First to act says "I call".
    Third to act says "Whoa, I haven't acted yet", and folds.
    First to act folds.

    This doesn't make sense. Why would he say "call" out of turn and then fold when there was no extra action in front of him.

    His verbal should be binding.



    Another rule for me put in writing for my home game..
Sign In or Register to comment.