RULING....discuss please...
This was originally posted on Full Contact Poker's forum. I think it is interesting, not from the situation standpoint, but from the thread that developed from it. I would like to see our members' opinions .
Ok, this happened in July and i am now just getting to posting it. I ma not completely sure regarding the poker room rules on this subject. I have been in and out of poker rooms for 3 years now and feel I know most precedures quite well.
I was at Harrahs casino in Vegas. PLaying some 1/2 NL, full ring game. I had been there for about 45 min and up to 250 from 100 buy-in. in this hand SB has about 70 and MP has 32. I am in BB with :kh :9d . No raises and I check for the flop. Flop comes :ah :9h :jh , so I have bottom pair with nice draw. SB bets out 20, I call 20 and and MP goes all in for 12 more on top of 20. At that point the SB reraises all in as well for another 45 or so. I mention to the dealer I thought he could not raise again after the MP raised only 12 into his initial bet., and I certainly did not want to chase that for another 45 bucks.
I ask that the floorman come over to verify, she called him over and he said the bet stands, even though he had not yet put it into the middle (he only put the 12 in and also announced the raise). Anyways, the floorman let him put his remaining chips in and I folded, only to have a fourth heart come on the turn, lol.
Was I wrong in my call, or did Harrah's have it right?
Thanks
Let's hear your responses BEFORE you look at the other thread (it contains my response!).
Ok, this happened in July and i am now just getting to posting it. I ma not completely sure regarding the poker room rules on this subject. I have been in and out of poker rooms for 3 years now and feel I know most precedures quite well.
I was at Harrahs casino in Vegas. PLaying some 1/2 NL, full ring game. I had been there for about 45 min and up to 250 from 100 buy-in. in this hand SB has about 70 and MP has 32. I am in BB with :kh :9d . No raises and I check for the flop. Flop comes :ah :9h :jh , so I have bottom pair with nice draw. SB bets out 20, I call 20 and and MP goes all in for 12 more on top of 20. At that point the SB reraises all in as well for another 45 or so. I mention to the dealer I thought he could not raise again after the MP raised only 12 into his initial bet., and I certainly did not want to chase that for another 45 bucks.
I ask that the floorman come over to verify, she called him over and he said the bet stands, even though he had not yet put it into the middle (he only put the 12 in and also announced the raise). Anyways, the floorman let him put his remaining chips in and I folded, only to have a fourth heart come on the turn, lol.
Was I wrong in my call, or did Harrah's have it right?
Thanks
Let's hear your responses BEFORE you look at the other thread (it contains my response!).
Comments
I'd be calling for the floor director! I take it this a typo.
Right ruling....wrong reasoning.
There's nothing wrong with this ruling as long as it's consistant with their rules and uniformally enforced... my local casino also uses the "half-bet" rule to re-open the betting for no-limit.
Having read your argument at FCP... you make a good argument... but by extension your saying that given: A bets 20, B calls 20, C moves in for 52, A wouldn't be allowed to raise here... and no room will rule this way.
Which casino is that?
Actually, that scenario you present is completely different. C has clearly raised in your example. However, in the original scenario, MP has gone All In for $32 while the bet was $20...this is clearly not a raise. Why is it not a raise??? Because, if MP threw in $32 and did not declare/verbal anything, it would not be allowed as a raise (it would only be a call).
#2, the bet SHOULD NOT reopen the betting. It is not a legal raise amount, which is of course the difference between the bet and the raise. So preflop, if I raise to $10, the minimum to reopen is $18, because the difference between bet A (the $2 big blind) and bet B (my pf raise of $10) is $8. Note, not all casinos work like this. Some say the raise has to be DOUBLE the previous bet, which would make it $20.
#3, the standard is that the bet does not reopen the betting. Some floor people get mistaken and use the LIMIT rule of half bet to reopen, none the less, the correct ruling depends STRICTLY on the casinos rules. There is no uniform rule book. Whatever there rules are, is what it is.
Best of luck
Akwasasne Mohawk Casino in NY state (10 mins from Cornwall, Ont)
But you did not base your argument on whether or not C had really raised or not... you argument was A can't raise someone with no more money... and was trying to raise B who had only called his bet.
If a casino chooses to allow the half-bet rule for no-limit... there is nothing unfair or wrong about this.... the only time a problem arises is when not all the participants are aware of the rules (which happens way more than it should). If everyone knew that a half-bet can re-open betting... then B is an idiot for not taking into account that a player left to act behind him, who only has $32, may call and re-open the betting for A... it's not unfair... B should know this. The playing field is level...
The last time I got surprised by a rule was last year when I tried to straddle at Turning Stone.
I call Patric Parent!
Could I please have a Mod do an IP check on Pokermojo and Patric. I will bet they are one and the same. There can't possibly be 2 people that are such assholes could there?
I disagree, first of all there is no mention in the OP that the MP player going all-in did not clearly declare all-in, in fact it seems implied that he did declare all-in. Had he just thrown $32 in I'm sure the argument would then have been did the dealer consider that a call (as he should) or did he allow it as an all-in (and this is the only scenario where you are correct, if it is not verbally declared it must be considered a call). Your argument that you cannot raise someone who has no money left, although completely obvious, holds no water in this scenario. The one and only deciding factor is if the all-in raise was considered enough to re-open the betting again according to that particular casino's house rules. Regardless of what the MP player has left if his all-in re-opens betting the next player to act can indeed raise. If it does not he cannot...plain and simple. Obviously this ruling depends entirely on the house rules and nothing else. Hopefully the house is consistent. Without Harrah's rules in front of us who can say.
If this was my home game I would allow the re-raise as I would consider the all-in sufficient to re-open betting. I would use the 50% rule.
So, you would NOT allow the re-raise, the all in ($32) would be insufficient. You WOULD use the 50% rule. Hmmmmm?
So, with a bet of $20, an all in of $32 would NOT be sufficient to re-open the betting even though you ARE using the 50% rule and 50% of $20 would be $30 and $32 is OVER 50%???? I am confused here. Maybe this is why so many players/supervisors are confused by a 50% rule and apply it in the wrong situations.
It is entirely my belief that any casino/poker room/home game that is using a 50% rule that re-opens betting in a No Limit game either:
1. truly misunderstands the correct ruling and is consistently mis-applying it; or,
2. completely misunderstands the essence of the rule and how limit and no limit differ and choose to have on their books a rule which is simply wrong.
What I am disbuting is your take that one player is specifically raising another player, this makes no sense to me there are three people in the hand so it is a moot point that one is all-in. The bottom line is that regardless of who's all-in with more then 2 in the pot if the all-in is less then twice the bet then house rules apply when deciding if it opens the betting again not how much people have left.
Personally IMHO any raise over the current bet should re-open the betting in NL regardless of how much. Likewise any raise double the last raise should re-open the betting in limit, anything less then that should not.
uh... what? you're telling me if it's $20 to him and he throws in all of his chips which equals $32 it should be considered a call? Unless there is a chip with a $32 value it's an all-in raise, NOT one which should re-open the action, but still a raise. It's only considered a call if it is a single chip with a value higher than needed to call that is put in the pot
No way. Â Imagine players A, B and C in a pot. Â If A bets enough to leave C with $1 behind, how can B call knowing C can go allin for $1 more and reopen the betting allowing A to dump allin and force B out.
umm, it's just an opinion...and honestly I really don't see a problem in that scenario, it's NL just one more difficult decision you'll have to make? Besides I really don't think too many players are going to make moves like this when a small fraction of a bet is added to the pot? Seriously who's going to come over the top for another $1?
besides B won't call, if he's any good he'll raise!
Again, in most cases you may be correct, however it ALL DEPENDS ON THE HOUSE RULES which, not to be rude, but this is my fucking point! It doesn't matter what anyone thinbks they know, it doesn't matter what you do in you basement, IT ONLY MATTERS WHAT THE HOUSE RULE IS!
Playing in Vegas this past year the dealers made it very clear when they joined the table if you push ANY amount of chips over the line without declaring your intentions it will be considered a CALL!
This is one sample, one casino, one case, it may be different elsewhere.
I use this rule in my home games as well if you don't declare your intentions I don't care wtf you put in the pot, it's a call plain and simple!
Huh? If it is $20 for C to call and he has $21 back is going to do anything BUT go all in? What would he keep the $1 for?
that's retarded. There really needs to be STANDARDIZED official rules for this game, it's too big to have different rules in different casinos all over the place. I think it's too much to expect for people to ask about every possible situation before they sit down to play, there should be a standard.
Amen (apologies to all non-religious)