Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is that a raise? CG&T

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Is that a raise? CG&T

    Situation on 1/2 cash game...Player A small blind Player B big blind player C calls BB, player A takes his small blind with one hand and with the other hand he puts €15 over the line (one motion movement)....Is that a raise?
    Or...he takes his small blind and thinks about it and then with the other hand he places the raise without announcing anything... Is that a raise?
    The decision that was taken last night because he did it in one motion taking his small blind with one hand and putting the raise with the other hand was that his raise stood.
    If he was taking his small blind and thinking about it and after a while placing his raise without announcing it his bet would have been considered a call...
    Is that right or wrong decision? Does anybody know the right ruling on this one? Does the same rule apply in tournaments?
    Thank you

    #2
    Taking the sb with one hand and putting in chips with the other is defo a legit raise and doesnt have to be announced. Fairly common to see it being done in live cash games and ive never seen it penalised and the raise has always stood. Presume the same is true for tournaments but not 100% sure

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by FitzpatrickscasCardClub View Post
      player A takes his small blind with one hand and with the other hand he puts €15 over the line (one motion movement)....Is that a raise?
      Looks like more than a call anyway.

      Comment


        #4
        That's exactly how I raise.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by FitzpatrickscasCardClub View Post
          Situation on 1/2 cash game...Player A small blind Player B big blind player C calls BB, player A takes his small blind with one hand and with the other hand he puts €15 over the line (one motion movement)....Is that a raise?
          Or...he takes his small blind and thinks about it and then with the other hand he places the raise without announcing anything... Is that a raise?
          The decision that was taken last night because he did it in one motion taking his small blind with one hand and putting the raise with the other hand was that his raise stood.
          If he was taking his small blind and thinking about it and after a while placing his raise without announcing it his bet would have been considered a call...
          Is that right or wrong decision? Does anybody know the right ruling on this one? Does the same rule apply in tournaments?
          Thank you
          Both scenarios you outlined above are obvious raises imo, and I'm pretty sure anywhere I've ever played that has been the case.
          Iirc it's known as the single chip rule, if he had put out a single €20 chip without declaring a raise then it's considered a call, but in your example he raised to €15 which can not be done with less than 2 chips so it's always considered a raise unless otherwise stated.

          Comment


            #6
            Unless your club has $15 chips both actions are raises regardless of what he does with his SB. It's completely obvious what his intentions are. A single $5 chip is a call, but 3 x $5 chips can only mean a raise.

            Think about it sensibly. If you rule this is only a call if he takes his SB back. Whats to stop players in future angleshooting by taking back their SB, and silently shoving in their entire stack or some other ridiculous amount, knowing it will be ruled a call.

            Originally posted by Morihei View Post
            Looks like more than a call anyway.
            Not if he went out of his way to put in 3 chips.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Mellor View Post
              Originally posted by Morihei View Post
              Looks like more than a call anyway.
              Not if he went out of his way to put in 3 chips.

              Comment


                #8
                Edit: never mind. I'm an idiot
                Last edited by Mellor; 16-07-12, 09:34.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Mellor re-read Morhei's post again. Think you're misunderstanding it.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Yeah you're right Cardshark.
                    I somehow read it as "more like a call".
                    Apologies Morhei. Not sure how I managed that. I blame monday

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Mellor View Post
                      Yeah you're right Cardshark.
                      I somehow read it as "more like a call".
                      Apologies Morhei. Not sure how I managed that. I blame monday
                      FWIW I also read it as 'looks more like a call' twice. Took me a third read to see it properly.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Mellor View Post
                        Yeah you're right Cardshark.
                        I somehow read it as "more like a call".
                        Apologies Morhei. Not sure how I managed that. I blame monday
                        Ah no need I thought you must've read it like that.

                        OP, I don't see how this can be construed as anything other than a raise.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          fwiw, I think the whole rule should be abolished. In most places, a player taking chips from the pot (eg his SB) does not affect the action. So for example, player in the SB takes back €1, and then puts out €15, that should be a legal raise. Having the rule as it is just creates extra headaches for dealers and management.

                          The problem with the rule as it is, is it creates too many ambiguous situations e.g.
                          If you cut out €15 from your stack, put it in the pot first, and then take back out your €1, it is a raise. If you do it simultaneously, is it a raise? If you have €15 in your left hand, and the €1 in your right, and do it all in one continuous instantaneous motion, is it a raise or only a call?

                          In my opinion, the best decision is get rid of the rule. Standard string raising rules still apply obviously, but the 'taking back the original bet means its only a call' should be abolished.

                          Jamie
                          Poker Podcast Playlist

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Jam-Fly View Post
                            fwiw, I think the whole rule should be abolished. In most places, a player taking chips from the pot (eg his SB) does not affect the action. So for example, player in the SB takes back €1, and then puts out €15, that should be a legal raise. Having the rule as it is just creates extra headaches for dealers and management.

                            The problem with the rule as it is, is it creates too many ambiguous situations e.g.
                            If you cut out €15 from your stack, put it in the pot first, and then take back out your €1, it is a raise. If you do it simultaneously, is it a raise? If you have €15 in your left hand, and the €1 in your right, and do it all in one continuous instantaneous motion, is it a raise or only a call?

                            In my opinion, the best decision is get rid of the rule. Standard string raising rules still apply obviously, but the 'taking back the original bet means its only a call' should be abolished.

                            Jamie
                            All of those situations mean its a raise. To either $15 or $16 depending on the SB being left in or not.

                            'taking back the original bet means its only a call' - that's no rule i've ever heard of??????

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Mellor View Post
                              All of those situations mean its a raise. To either $15 or $16 depending on the SB being left in or not.

                              'taking back the original bet means its only a call' - that's no rule i've ever heard of??????
                              it's a house rule in the club in question
                              Poker Podcast Playlist

                              Comment


                                #16
                                I have only seen this rule enforced in one casino. I also asked T.D J.P Mc Cann for a ruling on this matter one night out of interest in a tournament and he said it was a very straight forward raise. It was also a rule that generally was caught by players, in my instance one player specifically and almost never the dealers. I think if this "rule" is being implemented it should be abolished as it is easily taken advantage of by players and is plainly not a rule as far as most other casinos/ card clubs are concerned.

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by Jam-Fly View Post
                                  it's a house rule in the club in question
                                  To be fair, that TD/Card room manager of the club in question was the one who started the thread question if the decision was right or wrong, and what the rule actually was. So its hardly a an useful reference given they aren't sure themselves. It's very straight forward raise under the more than one chip condition.

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by Mellor View Post
                                    To be fair, that TD/Card room manager of the club in question was the one who started the thread question if the decision was right or wrong, and what the rule actually was. So its hardly a an useful reference given they aren't sure themselves. It's very straight forward raise under the more than one chip condition.
                                    I don't really understand what point you're trying to make?

                                    There is a non-common house rule in the club which makes the OPs question alot more open to interpretation than it is under usual rules. So my suggestion is to get rid of this specific house rule altogether.
                                    Poker Podcast Playlist

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by FitzpatrickscasCardClub View Post
                                      Situation on 1/2 cash game...Player A small blind Player B big blind player C calls BB, player A takes his small blind with one hand and with the other hand he puts €15 over the line (one motion movement)....Is that a raise?
                                      Or...he takes his small blind and thinks about it and then with the other hand he places the raise without announcing anything... Is that a raise?
                                      The decision that was taken last night because he did it in one motion taking his small blind with one hand and putting the raise with the other hand was that his raise stood.
                                      If he was taking his small blind and thinking about it and after a while placing his raise without announcing it his bet would have been considered a call...
                                      Is that right or wrong decision? Does anybody know the right ruling on this one? Does the same rule apply in tournaments?
                                      Thank you



                                      You weren't by any chance overseeing the cash games in Vegas a few weeks ago

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by Jam-Fly View Post
                                        I don't really understand what point you're trying to make?

                                        There is a non-common house rule in the club which makes the OPs question alot more open to interpretation than it is under usual rules. So my suggestion is to get rid of this specific house rule altogether.
                                        I'm not disagreeing with you. It shouldn't be a rule in place.

                                        My point was its not a rule, even though the club in question use it, because they obviously aren't sure of the rules - by virtue of asking the questions in the OP.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X