Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Going by ept ruling

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

    Going by ept ruling

    Just playing in the emop main this weekend when this hand came up. Guy loose most of his stack in a flip and shoves the next hand for 1600 the blinds are 500-1k, chap next to him raises to 2,500.

    What is the correct ruling on this? Is he allowed raise to 2,500 after a 1,600 all in before him?

    My argument was no, soley because even tho raises preflop only have to be double the previous raise not the bet, if the raise here is only 900 which is less than the current big blind, should the min bet of 1k cause blinds are 500-1k stand and therefore his 900 raise should not be allowed?

    Hope that is clear enough guys . Twice I was told that what I thought was wrong by a dealer and then one of the floor staff, floor staff said his raise could be as low as 2,200 which is a raise of 600... Surely not with the min bet rule?

    Be great to get clarification on this. Cheers
    Last edited by blaaaaaaah; 30-07-11, 11:42.
    Huh, Math my dear boy is nothing more than the lesbian sister of biology.

    My Poker Blog http://jason-tompkins.blogspot.com
    My twitter http://twitter.com/#!/blaaaaaah666

    #2
    This rule kind of came in to play at my table in this tourney also, where a guy tried to click it back too small after I opened and we were told the rule for emop was not that it had to be double the previous raise but double the previous bet as you stated.

    So, in your spot, I imagine the guy can make it 2,600 and obv his making it 2,500 will stand as a raise, he just needs to throw in an extra 100 chip, since there is clear intent to raise etc.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Alfie View Post
      This rule kind of came in to play at my table in this tourney also, where a guy tried to click it back too small after I opened and we were told the rule for emop was not that it had to be double the previous raise but double the previous bet as you stated.

      So, in your spot, I imagine the guy can make it 2,600 and obv his making it 2,500 will stand as a raise, he just needs to throw in an extra 100 chip, since there is clear intent to raise etc.
      No I said it is double the previous raise not the bet ie. Raise to 2,200 next raise is 3,400 not 4,400.

      I get your point ye but if tats d case if guy raises to 2,200 n u make it 2,900 tat stil stands as a raise? Because it's more than half of the required 1,200. I think then u wil be told u have to call. That's why this ruling is getting to me how can any raise be less than that of the current big blind.
      Huh, Math my dear boy is nothing more than the lesbian sister of biology.

      My Poker Blog http://jason-tompkins.blogspot.com
      My twitter http://twitter.com/#!/blaaaaaah666

      Comment


        #4
        Hi Jason,

        Funny that this situation happened this weekend as I was only discussing it a few weeks ago in France in a meeting on the WSOPE rules. The min raise in France is double the last bet. In France if the above example happened the min raise would be to 3200, which makes sense if you apply the double the last bet rule. That said I disagreed with them at the time.
        They have a rule if the all-in bet was for less then 50% of a correct raise the next min bet would be just the normal min raise that the all-in player could have made if they had more chips, but if it was for more than 50% the next min raise is double.

        E.g. Blinds 500-1000…
        1: UTG goes all in for 1475 next player wants to min raise it must be 2000.
        2: UTG goes all in for 1525 next player want to min raise it must be 3050.

        I told them at the time that I think they are mixing up the half bet rule from limit games. In this rule if a player goes all in for less than a full bet but it is over 50% it counts as a full bet.

        E.g. Blinds 500-1000, Limits 1000-2000
        UTG goes all in for 1475, next player can call or make the 1st full bet to 2000
        UTG goes all in for 1525 (this becomes the 1st full bet) if the next player wishes to raise it must be to 2525.

        I have to say I thought it was a little bit strange but they said that it was French law and that was just the way it was going to be.

        I did speak to a few TD’s about this situation after as I have never seen it in any rule book and I got a mixed reaction. I’ve also never seen it happen, I guess most players wanting to raise in this situation make an isolation play.

        For me the next min raise using normal min raise rules would be that the next player must bring it up to the full bet amount. Toby Stone thinks this is also correct.

        E.g Blinds 500-1000
        UTG goes all in for 1475, next player wants to min raise it must be 2000
        UTG goes all in for any amount up 1975, next player wants to min raise it must be 2000.

        I have sent an email to one of my friends who Td’s at the WSOP and see what he thinks.
        €10,000 GTD New Monthly Tournament
        Village Green Card Club, Last Thursday of the Month, €270 Freezeout
        €1,000,000 GTD - Irish Open
        CityWest Hotel, 6th-13th April

        Comment


          #5
          I think the min-raise should be 2600 based on blaaaaaah's reasoning. Assuming it is double the raise (if it's double the bet, the min raise has to 3200) then the raise is 600, so double would equal to 2200, but since an additional 600 isn't the min bet of 1k, then it has to be an additional 1k, which equals 2600.

          Since 1600 technically doesn't count as a legal raise, does that mean someone can make it 2k? I can see the reasoning behind this alright.

          The min raise should either be 2000 or 2600 (assuming it's double the bet) depending on whether you count the 1600 raise as a legitimate raise. Can't see how it can be justified being anything between 2000 and 2600.

          Comment


            #6
            It's never 2000, that ridic.
            1600 counts as a raise, it just doesn't re-open betting. Other rules regarding betting still stand.

            Also, people keep saying "double the raise", this is incorrect its "equal the raise", ie the min raise must match the last bet, or "double the bet" where the total is doubled.

            IMO I think equal the bet is the best rule. Which in this case gives 2200 - but seeing at this is below the min bet of 1 BB, it can't stand. The min raise should be 1000 giving a total of 2600
            Becasue the guy bet 2500, it stands but he must put 100 on top.


            Originally posted by JP
            UTG goes all in for 1475, next player wants to min raise it must be 2000
            UTG goes all in for any amount up 1975, next player wants to min raise it must be 2000.
            Wouldn't be mad on that rule JP. One potential problem I can see. If using the equal last bet rule, when it was raised from 1975 to 2000, the next raise can be 2025, a bit silly.

            I think the only time a bet smaller than the BB can be made is were you are all-in for less than that.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Mellor View Post
              It's never 2000, that ridic.
              1600 counts as a raise, it just doesn't re-open betting. Other rules regarding betting still stand.

              Also, people keep saying "double the raise", this is incorrect its "equal the raise", ie the min raise must match the last bet, or "double the bet" where the total is doubled.

              IMO I think equal the bet is the best rule. Which in this case gives 2200 - but seeing at this is below the min bet of 1 BB, it can't stand. The min raise should be 1000 giving a total of 2600
              Becasue the guy bet 2500, it stands but he must put 100 on top.



              Wouldn't be mad on that rule JP. One potential problem I can see. If using the equal last bet rule, when it was raised from 1975 to 2000, the next raise can be 2025, a bit silly.

              I think the only time a bet smaller than the BB can be made is were you are all-in for less than that.

              I think that's the argument though. Does a less than standard raise count or not? I think JP is saying that it should either count or it shouldn't (ie it shouldn't matter if 50% of a legal raise so long as it's less than a legal raise). So therefore if someone pushes for 1100 or 1900, the rule should be the same regardless. The debate imo should be whether the respective min raises should now be 2200 and 3800, 2100 and 2900, or 2000 and 2000. The ruling in France where this 50% nonsense comes into play and where a difference in 50 chips can mean a difference in the min raise being 1000+ is ludicrous.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Mellor View Post
                It's never 2000, that ridic.
                1600 counts as a raise, it just doesn't re-open betting. Other rules regarding betting still stand.

                Also, people keep saying "double the raise", this is incorrect its "equal the raise", ie the min raise must match the last bet, or "double the bet" where the total is doubled.

                IMO I think equal the bet is the best rule. Which in this case gives 2200 - but seeing at this is below the min bet of 1 BB, it can't stand. The min raise should be 1000 giving a total of 2600
                Becasue the guy bet 2500, it stands but he must put 100 on top.



                Wouldn't be mad on that rule JP. One potential problem I can see. If using the equal last bet rule, when it was raised from 1975 to 2000, the next raise can be 2025, a bit silly.

                I think the only time a bet smaller than the BB can be made is were you are all-in for less than that.
                I think you've picked this up wrong.
                If UTG was to go all in for 1975, the next player completed a full min raise to 2000 (can't really seeing this happen to be honest), the next min raise would have to be 3000 not 2025.

                I have to say I can see the logic behind making the next raise 2,600 (In Jason's example).
                €10,000 GTD New Monthly Tournament
                Village Green Card Club, Last Thursday of the Month, €270 Freezeout
                €1,000,000 GTD - Irish Open
                CityWest Hotel, 6th-13th April

                Comment


                  #9
                  Spoke to one of guys who TD's at the WSOP and he said it the same principle as the half bet rule in limit games.

                  In Jason's example the min raise should have to been to 2600

                  If the all-in under raise bet for less than 50% the next player if they wish to min raise it will be to the amount which the all-in player could have min raised to if they had more chips.

                  If however the all-in under raise is for more than 50%, the next player wish to min raise must add what the min bet would have been on to the all-in players bet.

                  E.g. Blinds 500-1000
                  UTG All-in for 1200, the next player can min raise to 2000
                  UTG All-in for 1750, the next player can min raise to 2750

                  Hope this clears things up. Sometimes situations come up that we as TD's have not see before and apply the rules and logic that we know.
                  €10,000 GTD New Monthly Tournament
                  Village Green Card Club, Last Thursday of the Month, €270 Freezeout
                  €1,000,000 GTD - Irish Open
                  CityWest Hotel, 6th-13th April

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by JP Poker View Post
                    I think you've picked this up wrong.
                    If UTG was to go all in for 1975, the next player completed a full min raise to 2000 (can't really seeing this happen to be honest), the next min raise would have to be 3000 not 2025.

                    I have to say I can see the logic behind making the next raise 2,600 (In Jason's example).
                    Ah right, I agree completely so JP

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X