Fitz EOM Ruling.....

[Dice75]

Just curious as to what the correct ruling is in this situation......


Not sure of exact numbers so a quick summary....


HJ opens & i 3 bet in CO (all standard so far), both playing about 20% over average stack.

HJ then 4 bets but with an increment raise rather than double my bet. I respond with an incremental 5 bet.

Now on reflection i do know that the Fitz plays the "double the last bet" rule but in the heat of the hand & coming off 2 weeks in Citywest this was overlooked by both of us (other player very competent).

My intention with the 5 bet was to fold to a shove. Another player then alerts the dealer to my incremental bet which in turn leads to questions about the HJs previous incremental bet.

Floor is called and its ruled that his 4 bet must be double my bet & my 5 bet must be double his new amount.

Now this puts me in trouble with my intended course of action as my new forced bet is now a substantially higher proportion of my stack leaving me with no fold option to a shove imo.

Baring in mind my opponent hasn't acted yet to this new bet that is incoming I am trying to ascertain do I have all my options from the floorstaff member without giving away my hand strength/intention to my opponent but floor is only interested in making me put out the new amount.



Anyway tl/dr - due to the action being pulled back and a new higher bet amount coming into play on his 4 bet, should this give me all my options back? ( i don't know if it matters but i never spoke, i.e said "raise" etc)


PS - any chance of the Fitz arriving into this century regarding incremental raises?

[Irisheman]

Interesting spot. Well yeah I totally agree the rule is silly and needs to be updated. I feel the only fair way based on how this hand plays out is to have all your options after his incremental 4b when this gets adjusted to double your 3b.

Doubt TD appreciates this though and your 5b has to then stand once adjusted to double the 4b. But this changes everything and imo it all should be brought back to the first 'mistake'

[Ollie]

Can they take the action back to the 4bet? I don't think that's an option as more action as happen since the 4bet, so I'm guessing that bet now stands and you now have to raise double his bet.

If they do take the action all the way back to the 4bet, then you should have all your options again as the action as change I.e. Bet size.

[PokerPiper]

Dealer should have been in control. The 4-bet was undersized and dealer didn't 'notice'. This is where it all started.

Not sure about getting your options back once HJ put out the correct raise amount. Given his holding he probably wasn't too concerned

Personally felt that given that substantial action had taken place it should have been allowed to play out as was and the floor then clarifying the rule for future reference.

[newbie2]

Originally Posted by Ollie

Can they take the action back to the 4bet? I don't think that's an option as more action as happen since the 4bet, so I'm guessing that bet now stands and you now have to raise double his bet.

If they do take the action all the way back to the 4bet, then you should have all your options again as the action as change I.e. Bet size.

This.

Although significant action has occured - can't take it back to the 4b IMO.

[Strewelpeter]

Originally Posted by PokerPiper

Dealer should have been in control. The 4-bet was undersized and dealer didn't 'notice'. This is where it all started.

Not sure about getting your options back once HJ put out the correct raise amount. Given his holding he probably wasn't too concerned

Personally felt that given that substantial action had taken place it should have been allowed to play out as was and the floor then clarifying the rule for future reference.

This.
Its ridiculous for floor to try and rewind to the first mistake as the subsequent actions taken are affected by that mistake and cannot be undone.

Dealer error that should have been allowed stand for the rest of this hand.

[Downtown]

5b bluffing FTW!

[RossiesAbu]

Forgive my ignorance but whats an 'incremental raise'? Double the last raise as opposed to double the bet?

[PokerPiper]

Originally Posted by RossiesAbu

Forgive my ignorance but whats an 'incremental raise'? Double the last raise as opposed to double the bet?

Yes. The rule in The Fitz is Double the last bet rather than double the raise.

[Atlantispoker]

What a mess , Two things I think
1. you acted on the information given to you by the Dealer accepting villans bet so maybe you should have all options open !!!!
2 when his 4 bet was re-sized was your 5 bet more than 50% greater that his new amount or not given you did not speak therefore limited to a call and action closed .:-)

[Dice75]

Originally Posted by Downtown

5b bluffing FTW!

Yeah, may as well go the whole hog & do it against the bloke who just shipped the IO. While he is holding AA

[Jam-Fly]

Originally Posted by PokerPiper

Dealer should have been in control. The 4-bet was undersized and dealer didn't 'notice'. This is where it all started.

Not sure about getting your options back once HJ put out the correct raise amount. Given his holding he probably wasn't too concerned

Personally felt that given that substantial action had taken place it should have been allowed to play out as was and the floor then clarifying the rule for future reference.

Yeah I think this would've been the best ruling. Too difficult to change things mid hand in this case.

[Irisheman]

Originally Posted by Dice75

Yeah, may as well go the whole hog & do it against the bloke who just shipped the IO. While he is holding AA

Exactly; why ever go half way! ;-P

I think the most sensible thing from the feedback is to let the action stand (incremental bets stand) as its so far developed. Dealer should have been on top of this, its a accumulation of errors and sometimes in these instances some sort of sensible judgement has to be made. The action is so far developed and too many inferences can be taken if its taken back to the 4b