Irish Poker Boards
Register Arcade FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices

Go Back   Irish Poker Boards > Poker > Poker Theory, Strategy and Rulings > Rules and Rulings
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-04-16, 11:34   #1
Dice75
Bringing the Mac
 
Dice75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ranking People
Posts: 10,734
Fitz EOM Ruling.....

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?
__________________
.

2017 LIVE IRISH POKER RANKINGS

.
Dice75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-16, 12:02   #2
Irisheman
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 790
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'

Last edited by Irisheman; 01-04-16 at 12:05.
Irisheman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-16, 12:12   #3
Ollie
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 199
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.
Ollie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-16, 13:50   #4
PokerPiper
Member
 
PokerPiper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 578
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.
PokerPiper is offline   Reply With Quote
2 Thanks From:
Old 01-04-16, 14:16   #5
newbie2
Member
 
newbie2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ollie View Post
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.
__________________
newbie2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-16, 14:29   #6
Strewelpeter
Member
 
Strewelpeter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: I Won
Posts: 19,763
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerPiper View Post
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.
__________________
Turning millions into thousands
Strewelpeter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-16, 15:17   #7
Downtown
Member
 
Downtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Mexico
Posts: 1,955
5b bluffing FTW!
Downtown is offline   Reply With Quote
3 Thanks From:
Old 01-04-16, 15:41   #8
RossiesAbu
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 83
Forgive my ignorance but whats an 'incremental raise'? Double the last raise as opposed to double the bet?
RossiesAbu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-16, 16:27   #9
PokerPiper
Member
 
PokerPiper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by RossiesAbu View Post
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.
PokerPiper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-16, 20:55   #10
Atlantispoker
Member
 
Atlantispoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 985
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 .:-)
__________________
3,500 GTD. in The Monte Monthly Sunday 26th Nov. The Trip to Tip Sunday 3rd Dec. @ 5pm Hayes Hotel Thurles 3,500 GTD.THE CHRISTMAS CRACKER Friday 29th DEC @ 5pm 5000 Gtd. The Dolmen Hotel
Atlantispoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanks From:
Old 01-04-16, 21:23   #11
Dice75
Bringing the Mac
 
Dice75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ranking People
Posts: 10,734
Quote:
Originally Posted by Downtown View Post
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
__________________
.

2017 LIVE IRISH POKER RANKINGS

.
Dice75 is offline   Reply With Quote
3 Thanks From:
Old 01-04-16, 22:06   #12
Jam-Fly
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerPiper View Post
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.
Jam-Fly is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanks From:
Old 02-04-16, 10:26   #13
Irisheman
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice75 View Post
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

Last edited by Irisheman; 02-04-16 at 10:33.
Irisheman is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanks From:
Reply

  Irish Poker Boards > Poker > Poker Theory, Strategy and Rulings > Rules and Rulings

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 00:06.