Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
String Bet Ruling EPT London
Collapse
X
-
Saw that alright.
Before the ruling was made I was saying to myself that the ruling that was made would be the one unless anyone actually objected.
The intent was 100% to push the 3 stacks but he only managed to get 2 across at the same time with all the shaking!!!
If I'm out of the hand I just stay quiet, none of my business.
If I am in the hand then I probably argue the string bet but obviously accept the ruling and move on...
The intent was clear so I just move on with the ruling.
Comment
-
Originally posted by tylerdurden94 View PostWhy don't you like it?
1. There was little of now chance he was going to get 3 stacks over the line with 1 hand considering how shaky it was.
2. He obviously could have declared raise before he start moving the chips.
3. If it was to be deemed a raise, a minraise would have been a better ruling than incuded a stack than barely moved and remained firmly behind the line.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Flushdraw View PostThere's been hundreds of occasions where 'intent' has been ignored and the either the actions or the verbal declaration is used.
1. There was little of now chance he was going to get 3 stacks over the line with 1 hand considering how shaky it was.
2. He obviously could have declared raise before he start moving the chips.
3. If it was to be deemed a raise, a minraise would have been a better ruling than incuded a stack than barely moved and remained firmly behind the line.
Think a few people here also missing the line Neil Johnson brought up that it the full raise which he intended wouldn't of been allowed he still would've been forced to min raise as he put in more than 50% with the stacks he brought forward."you raise, i kill you" El Tren :{)
Comment
-
It's a difficult one in this hand because Luca, the floor man hasn't seen it happen himself and is ruling based on what he's been told. If he'd seen it himself I'm not sure he'd have ruled the same but it's close. String bets are so rarely called at Ept's but it's defiantly 2 separate movements, that said the lines not an official betting line either.
On a separate note, I think people need to be more liberal toward string betting , particularly in Ireland where I find it called up on most often. I'm not sure iv ever seen a string bet used as an angle and all it seems to achieve is make newcomers more uncomfortable in an already unfamiliar environment. A simple explanation from the dealer after the hand is a much better approach.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheImprover View PostWatched it myself and before the ruling was made it was 100% intent to push in the 3 stacks so cant see why it wouldn't stand.Originally posted by Michael View PostWhether the intent there is irrelevant. The rules are not open to interpretation. A floor person can't know what a player intends to do, maybe he went to push the three stacks like that but only pushed two as an angle shot. So it should be ruled a call.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheImprover View PostWatched it myself and before the ruling was made it was 100% intent to push in the 3 stacks so cant see why it wouldn't stand.
Having chips in your hand intending to raise but drop one across the line = call
Throw a chip onto your big blind intending to raise = call
Don't see a raise before you, and throw in 'raising' chips without saying anything = call
It would be nice to have clarification of the rules because 'intent' doesn't seem to have a bearing on the rules lately.
Originally posted by LTL View PostOn a separate note, I think people need to be more liberal toward string betting , particularly in Ireland where I find it called up on most often. I'm not sure iv ever seen a string bet used as an angle and all it seems to achieve is make newcomers more uncomfortable in an already unfamiliar environment. A simple explanation from the dealer after the hand is a much better approach.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LTL View PostOn a separate note, I think people need to be more liberal toward string betting , particularly in Ireland where I find it called up on most often. I'm not sure iv ever seen a string bet used as an angle and all it seems to achieve is make newcomers more uncomfortable in an already unfamiliar environment. A simple explanation from the dealer after the hand is a much better approach.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Michael View PostWhether the intent there is irrelevant. The rules are not open to interpretation. A floor person can't know what a player intends to do, maybe he went to push the three stacks like that but only pushed two as an angle shot. So it should be ruled a call.
The very first TDA rule:
1: Floor Decisions
Floorpeople must consider the best interest of the game and fairness as top priorities in the decision-making process. Unusual circumstances can on occasion dictate that decisions in the interest of fairness take priority over the technical rules. The floorperson’s decision is final.
Comment
-
I think it's a fine and practical ruling.
I've noticed with Luca and Stars staff in general, the common sense option is often exercised. Yes, it's open to angle shooting sometimes, but I think on balance they make the right decisions. Give the guy a warning and advise him to be clear in future, and if anything similar occurs again, penalties etc can be used.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LTL View PostIt's a difficult one in this hand because Luca, the floor man hasn't seen it happen himself and is ruling based on what he's been told. If he'd seen it himself I'm not sure he'd have ruled the same but it's close. String bets are so rarely called at Ept's but it's defiantly 2 separate movements, that said the lines not an official betting line either.
On a separate note, I think people need to be more liberal toward string betting , particularly in Ireland where I find it called up on most often. I'm not sure iv ever seen a string bet used as an angle and all it seems to achieve is make newcomers more uncomfortable in an already unfamiliar environment. A simple explanation from the dealer after the hand is a much better approach.
Originally posted by Flushdraw View PostThrowing one oversized chip into a pot intending to raise = call
Having chips in your hand intending to raise but drop one across the line = call
Throw a chip onto your big blind intending to raise = call
Don't see a raise before you, and throw in 'raising' chips without saying anything = call
It would be nice to have clarification of the rules because 'intent' doesn't seem to have a bearing on the rules lately.
I 100% agree. I don't like the ruling above, not because i think it's necessarily wrong but because it's not in line with what i've seen and had ruled against me for a long time now. I'd like to raise by cutting chips across the line, or if there's some ambiguity just to have a dealer check with you. I just thought it was interesting that on the biggest stage of all, it was ruled a raise but it would be deemed a call in the majority of games i've playing over the last 10 years or so.
While out playing in the SE on Sunday a number of times I witnessed players going to bet/raise with a stack and one single chip as dropped out and it's then deemed just a call and I do think that's harsh and something that I think LTL is mentioning, also getting to your point about rulings you've had against you for instances the SE has changed a number of it's rule for the bad with the big one being the 50% rule which they no longer enforce, EPT has some great rules.
Originally posted by dobman88 View PostNothing about the actual ruling but why did the floor man standing there watching exactly what happened not give the ruling? Do they have to confer on big decisions? Very hard to give a ruling without seeing what happened. Shaky hands, the way he went for the three stacks etc."you raise, i kill you" El Tren :{)
Comment
-
Originally posted by dobman88 View PostNothing about the actual ruling but why did the floor man standing there watching exactly what happened not give the ruling? Do they have to confer on big decisions? Very hard to give a ruling without seeing what happened. Shaky hands, the way he went for the three stacks etc.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LTL View PostThe original guy who saw it happen isn't a floor man but rather a more senior dealer who's card calling for the live stream. In such a big situation like this it's better for him to get some assistance or advice.
Comment
Comment