Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can he raise??

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

    Can he raise??

    Playing in a pub game last night and there was a lot of confusion whether a player could re raise or not.

    Blinds are 500-1000

    UTG limps for 1000 playing about 14500

    Button moves all in for 8500

    Small blind announces call playing about 13000

    Question is can UTG now move all in or not?

    Also one more from last night but I think I know the answer to this.

    Four players limp into a pot.

    Its on the small blind to act, but before he does anything the big blind anoounces a bet of 3000.

    As far as I know this bet must stay out and it is still on the small blind to make a decision to check or bet.

    Am I correct in this?
    Last edited by derek2222_ie; 18-10-12, 08:45. Reason: Adding another situation

    #2
    of course he can, there is no valid reason why he can't.

    Comment


      #3
      UTG can move all in it's certainly not an under raise or anything to that effect.
      "you raise, i kill you" El Tren :{)

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by ghostface View Post
        of course he can, there is no valid reason why he can't.
        Thats what I thought but the player that moved all in was trying to say that because UTG did not have double his bet that it was an under raise and he therefore could not move all in.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by derek2222_ie View Post
          Playing in a pub game last night and there was a lot of confusion whether a player could re raise or not.

          Blinds are 500-1000

          UTG limps for 1000 playing about 14500

          Button moves all in for 8500

          Small blind announces call playing about 13000

          Question is can UTG now move all in or not?

          Also one more from last night but I think I know the answer to this.

          Four players limp into a pot.

          Its on the small blind to act, but before he does anything the big blind anoounces a bet of 3000.

          As far as I know this bet must stay out and it is still on the small blind to make a decision to check or bet.

          Am I correct in this?
          Situation 1: He can do whatever he likes
          Situation 2: You have all your actions open to you. If you call/fold he has to put out the 3000. If you raise he has all his options again i.e he can change his mind and take in the 3000, raise your bet or call
          Redbet at the Dublin Poker Invasion FTW

          Comment


            #6
            Hi

            yes he can, he could not if BTN had a stack of 1200 (all in)..and BB calls 1200
            in that case was under raise..

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by derek2222_ie View Post
              Thats what I thought but the player that moved all in was trying to say that because UTG did not have double his bet that it was an under raise and he therefore could not move all in.
              That is one of the best made up excuses for this kind of thing I've heard

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by derek2222_ie View Post
                Thats what I thought but the player that moved all in was trying to say that because UTG did not have double his bet that it was an under raise and he therefore could not move all in.
                As for the 2nd part you added in before if the SB checks the BB action stands but if the SB bets the BB gets to take back his bet.

                Onto to the main point, there is certain instances where the under raise rule comes into play but not in this hand. You open the action get a clear raise into you more than double the bet the player to act calls this still leaves you with all your options.

                If you open (call or limp) for 1,000 and the player moves all in for 1,900 then its an under raise and you can only call the action.
                "you raise, i kill you" El Tren :{)

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by tylerdurden94 View Post
                  If you open (call or limp) for 1,000 and the player moves all in for 1,900 then its an under raise and you can only call the action.
                  I think pokerstars brought in a 'more than 50% = Full raise' rule a while ago.

                  Discuss.
                  ﴾͡๏̯͡๏﴿

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by tylerdurden94 View Post
                    As for the 2nd part you added in before if the SB checks the BB action stands but if the SB bets the BB gets to take back his bet.

                    Onto to the main point, there is certain instances where the under raise rule comes into play but not in this hand. You open the action get a clear raise into you more than double the bet the player to act calls this still leaves you with all your options.

                    If you open (call or limp) for 1,000 and the player moves all in for 1,900 then its an under raise and you can only call the action.
                    This I did not know beacause what did happen was the small blind moved all in and I ruled that the 3000 bet must stay out as he had bet out of turn.

                    Was this incorrect?

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by ghostface View Post
                      That is one of the best made up excuses for this kind of thing I've heard
                      Trying to explain it to him when he was on his 10th pint was fun aswell Ste

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by derek2222_ie View Post
                        This I did not know beacause what did happen was the small blind moved all in and I ruled that the 3000 bet must stay out as he had bet out of turn.

                        Was this incorrect?
                        He should get to take back his bet. Wasn't a bad decision you made. I would prefer that they leave it in the pot as some kind of punishment for playing out of turn but most places they get it back
                        Redbet at the Dublin Poker Invasion FTW

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by derek2222_ie View Post
                          This I did not know beacause what did happen was the small blind moved all in and I ruled that the 3000 bet must stay out as he had bet out of turn.

                          Was this incorrect?
                          Horses for courses.

                          Some card rooms will rule that way ^ for simplicity.

                          Just as some card rooms would enforce a 'double the last bet' instead of the more modern 'Double the last raise'.

                          Just be consistent in your future rulings, and let everyone be aware of the house rule, you won't go far wrong.
                          ﴾͡๏̯͡๏﴿

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by derek2222_ie View Post
                            This I did not know beacause what did happen was the small blind moved all in and I ruled that the 3000 bet must stay out as he had bet out of turn.

                            Was this incorrect?
                            Originally posted by The Aul Switcharoo View Post
                            He should get to take back his bet. Wasn't a bad decision you made. I would prefer that they leave it in the pot as some kind of punishment for playing out of turn but most places they get it back
                            Seems to be two schools of thought on this with all rulings I've seen in the past while going with Switch. Still think this ruling is open to angling a lot but prob the best it'll get.

                            Playing IPO Derek? May have to stick a few quid on you

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Micknail View Post
                              I think pokerstars brought in a 'more than 50% = Full raise' rule a while ago.

                              Discuss.
                              That's for another thread don't want to derail this lads thread.

                              Originally posted by derek2222_ie View Post
                              This I did not know beacause what did happen was the small blind moved all in and I ruled that the 3000 bet must stay out as he had bet out of turn.

                              Was this incorrect?
                              It changes the action so he should get to take his bet, kinda weird though.
                              "you raise, i kill you" El Tren :{)

                              Comment


                                #16
                                Originally posted by ghostface View Post
                                Seems to be two schools of thought on this with all rulings I've seen in the past while going with Switch. Still think this ruling is open to angling a lot but prob the best it'll get.

                                Playing IPO Derek? May have to stick a few quid on you
                                No I am still in retirement Ste. Dont think I will be coming out of it anytime soon

                                Good luck if you are playing it.

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by tylerdurden94 View Post
                                  That's for another thread don't want to derail this lads thread.
                                  .
                                  Yikes, it's fairly relevant to the discussion.
                                  ﴾͡๏̯͡๏﴿

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by derek2222_ie View Post
                                    This I did not know beacause what did happen was the small blind moved all in and I ruled that the 3000 bet must stay out as he had bet out of turn.

                                    Was this incorrect?
                                    I use the same rule as you did Derek and as a funny coincidence had to enforce it in a game I was doing last night, I am also aware that alot of others use the fact that the action has changed that the bet should be returned, but I think this is far too open to abuse and think the ruling you imposed is more logical.

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by derek2222_ie View Post
                                      Playing in a pub game last night

                                      Its on the small blind to act, but before he does anything the big blind anoounces a bet of 3000.

                                      As far as I know this bet must stay out and it is still on the small blind to make a decision to check or bet.

                                      Am I correct in this?
                                      AFAIK, the correct ruling is that a bet out of turn where the player puts chips in must stand, I.e. you cannot take chips back. Verbal declarations may be binding. If no one raises by the time the action gets to the out of turn player then his bet stands. If someone raises (or opens the betting post flop) then the out of turn player has all his options open (fold, call, raise) and his bet does not stand.

                                      However on pub/ self deal games people are not usually sticklers for these rules and may allow any out of turn bet/ raise to be taken back.

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by CelticPhantom View Post
                                        AFAIK, the correct ruling is that a bet out of turn where the player puts chips in must stand, I.e. you cannot take chips back. Verbal declarations may be binding. If no one raises by the time the action gets to the out of turn player then his bet stands. If someone raises (or opens the betting post flop) then the out of turn player has all his options open (fold, call, raise) and his bet does not stand.

                                        However on pub/ self deal games people are not usually sticklers for these rules and may allow any out of turn bet/ raise to be taken back.

                                        As mentioned above there is no ruling on this, it varies from game to game. In most tournaments if the action changes the out of turn bet may be taken back but it depends on the house rules.

                                        Comment


                                          #21
                                          Originally posted by CelticPhantom View Post
                                          AFAIK, the correct ruling is that a bet out of turn where the player puts chips in must stand, I.e. you cannot take chips back. Verbal declarations may be binding. If no one raises by the time the action gets to the out of turn player then his bet stands. If someone raises (or opens the betting post flop) then the out of turn player has all his options open (fold, call, raise) and his bet does not stand.

                                          However on pub/ self deal games people are not usually sticklers for these rules and may allow any out of turn bet/ raise to be taken back.
                                          As per the TDA rules that were drawn up a couple of years ago he should get all his actions available to him which means he takes back in his bet. Obviously when I'm working a tournament I will enforce it but I don't really agree with it. As I said in a previous post you should get some kind of punishment for betting out of turn lie having to leave the bet in if the action changes and you end up folding
                                          Redbet at the Dublin Poker Invasion FTW

                                          Comment


                                            #22
                                            I don't thin he should be able to take back his bet.

                                            What if I started doing this when it's folded round to the button etc, or any scenario?
                                            Either way I think he should be warned then punished.

                                            Comment

                                            Working...
                                            X