The worst floor decision of ALL TIME! Aladdin Poker Room

[TomCollins]

I got to Vegas Saturday, and decided to start at the $2/5 NL game at the Aladdin. My friend could play 1/2 and be happy.

First, a couple at the table is sharing chips whenever one wins a big pot. Now, they were the worst players at the table and were constantly reloading, but the dealer said nothing to stop this.

But that just was the first clue that no one had a clue.

Cutting to the story, I am dealt AA in middle position. UTG (regular player) makes it 15. Called by idiot girlfriend in the couple. I make it 40 to go, and the player next to me is all in for 43. The original two callers call, and I ask the dealer if I am allowed to raise. Now I know in any well run casino, I am NOT allowed to raise. But, every room is different. And if someone can use the rule on me, I am surely going to take advantage. The dealer states that in fact, I AM allowed to raise, since it was raised after me.

I make it $100 more to go, the first guy folds, and the girl starts thinking. Some players at the table wake up, and start telling the dealer that I am not allowed to raise. Dealer calls the floor, who also rules that I am not allowed to raise. I take my $100 back, and call the $3.

Here's where it gets interesting. The player who mucked to my $100 non-raise, now is furious. "I want my cards back or my money back!!!! You can't tell him he can raise and then tell him he can't after I folded!"

Ok, so Dealer makes a mistake, the house should perhaps compensate him in some way. His cards are in the muck, so theres no way those are coming back. Floorperson agrees that he should get his money back. So she takes the $40 he had in the pot AND GIVES IT BACK TO HIM!!!!

OUT OF MY POT!!! I make aces up, and would win a sizeable pot, but I am furious over this and berate the floorperson for "f'ing me when the dealer made a mistake and I did nothing wrong". Dealer begs for a tip saying I still won a big pot, and I cash out.

Play at the Mirage or the Bellagio, this was just rediculous.

[detroitplayer]

I can't believe she had the audacity to ask for a tip after an atrocity like that. Wow. That very well may be the worst floor decision I've heard of in awhile.

[Bulbarainey]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't believe she had the audacity to ask for a tip after an atrocity like that. Wow. That very well may be the worst floor decision I've heard of in awhile.

[/ QUOTE ]

what a bitch, she deserves nothing

[juanez]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, so Dealer makes a mistake, the house should perhaps compensate him in some way. His cards are in the muck, so theres no way those are coming back. Floorperson agrees that he should get his money back. So she takes the $40 he had in the pot AND GIVES IT BACK TO HIM!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

How else should the house "compensate" the player for the dealer error?

[ QUOTE ]
Dealer begs for a tip saying I still won a big pot

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never seen a dealer "beg" for a toke (tip) especially after a floor call for his/her own mistake, and I'm a dealer, but I guess it happens.

[lapoker17]

If you hadn't tried to angle and reraise when you knew it was against the rules, then none of this would've happened.

[peachy]

When did this dealer becomes a SHE?!?!?!?!?

[Shoe]

If you wouldn't have tried to angle-shoot, you would have that $40, possibly more.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
"I make it 40 to go, and the player next to me is all in for 43. The original two callers call, and I ask the dealer if I am allowed to raise. Now I know in any well run casino, I am NOT allowed to raise. But, every room is different. And if someone can use the rule on me, I am surely going to take advantage."

[/ QUOTE ]

You know you aren't allowed to raise, but you attempt to take a shot at getting some free "incorrect information" that can only work to your advantage from a weak dealer. I've never heard of a room or casino (well run or not) that would allow a raise by a player in your spot, whether it is limit or no limit. You have stated that you are aware of this. I agree with LAPoker in his post below - you took a shot.

Given the mess the floorman faced, the decision isn't be any means the worse I've seen. This is a case where the house should have kept the $40 in the pot, but compensated the player with something worth $40. You benefit by having dead money in the pot (since he surely would have called $3 more).

All that said, I'm amazed the number of dealers, floor, and even managers who don't understand the betting rules (regarding how much you can bet or raise) in both limit and no limit.

~ Rick

[Jonny1723]

Hello,

I'm new to Poker, and only play limit not NL.
So can I ask a dumb question please ?

Why can't you raise in this spot ?

I would think the same as the dealer, that because it was raised after you, you could in fact raise.

Obviously I'm incorrect, but I'd love to know the reason.

Thanks.

J.

[TheMetetron]

It needs to be at least a half-raise. Basically the other player would need to be all-in for $60 or more in this situation.

[Randy_Refeld]

[ QUOTE ]
It needs to be at least a half-raise. Basically the other player would need to be all-in for $60 or more in this situation

[/ QUOTE ]

In NL or PL it must be at least a full raise to reopen the action. The half bet is strictly a limit rule. example. player bets $50, next player calls $50 third goes all-in for $99, first players cannot raise becasue the all-in did not have a FULL raise. I am aware by law in AC they play NL by limit rules and there are some other places where they play NL by limit rules, but most of those other places it is a matter of management being unfamiliar with the rules and procedures for big bet poker.

Randy Refeld

[Jonny1723]

Thanks very much - that clears it up for me. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Rick:

I agree this was a shot and the decision seems reasonable to me.

Best wishes,
Mason

[SpaceAce]

This is funny: you were willing to let someone else get screwed by a dealer error but you are FURIOUS when you're the one on the losing end.

You shot an angle and got what you deserved. Too bad for you the angle was such that your shot ricocheted and hit you square in the forehead.

SpaceAce

[sthief09]

while this is a bit more excuseable as it occurred in a NYC poker club, I had a dealer tell me that in a 4/8 game, a restraddle was to $16 (first straddle to 8, second straddle to 16). it then took every manager in the place to convince him he was wrong and he said "everywhere else in the world it's twice the straddle). apparently he's not aware that there's a structure where the betting goes in increments. I found that blatant stupidity and lack of any common sense or knowledge of the game pretty disgusting

[Chipr777]

Your complaining about taking a shot. You know the rules of poker plain and simple. Way to go. You just came on a public forum and admited your a cheat, and then have the audacity to complain about it? In my experience there are no concrete floor decisions. They're all dictated by the circumstances surrounding the situation. The floor may have had a little more experience than you gave him credit for. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[steamboatin]

You don't have a restraddle very often in Southern Indiana, (at least I don't see it much) but so far in a 5-10 game the straddle has been ten and the restraddle has been twenty.

All this stuff is cardroom specific but there is no excuse for a dealer not to know how it works at the place he deals.

[sleepyjoeyt]

The only thing I'd agree with is that you sound like a douche bag (spelling?).

[Luv2DriveTT]

[ QUOTE ]
while this is a bit more excuseable as it occurred in a NYC poker club, I had a dealer tell me that in a 4/8 game, a restraddle was to $16 (first straddle to 8, second straddle to 16). it then took every manager in the place to convince him he was wrong and he said "everywhere else in the world it's twice the straddle). apparently he's not aware that there's a structure where the betting goes in increments. I found that blatant stupidity and lack of any common sense or knowledge of the game pretty disgusting

[/ QUOTE ]

NICE. Thats where I want to spend all my free time playing. How can I make sure he is on duty? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

TT /images/graemlins/club.gif

[canis582]

Lay off our boy and make yourself a floor person for a second.
Name any circumstance when you should take money out of the pot and give it back to someone.

[Chipr777]

I believe we've been talking about one.

[Chipr777]

I know this isn't the case but if the floorperson was aware that he KNEW he could't raise in that spot and was doing it purely to shoot an angle, as he put it "I am surely going to take advantage", I would pull him off the table and explain if he tried it again he'd be done for the night. What he did was not only unfair to the inexperienced dealer it was unethical. He shouldv'e known he'd get blasted for making that post, he only has 1184. Lay off? No thanks.

[canis582]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe we've been talking about one.

[/ QUOTE ]

The guy already bet, shouldnt his money come out of the casino's 'cash register'?

[Randy_Refeld]

[ QUOTE ]
Name any circumstance when you should take money out of the pot and give it back to someone

[/ QUOTE ]

Anytime the floor has decided that it is fair and in the best interest of the game.

Randy Refeld

[cardcounter0]

you left out the part where after you left the boyfriend of the couple you tried to angle shoot gets you in the alley and kicks you square in the nuts.
/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Chipr777]

Ask yourself this question. Who CAUSED the error? If he was unaware that he couldn't raise in that spot and raised he made an honest mistake. The fact is he was aware of two things. The dealer was weak and he can't raise!!! These facts are not disputed. Under normal circumstances the money stays in the pot but in this case? Nope. The error was intentionally caused by a player that knew exactly what he was doing. The decision to take the money out of the pot may or may not be the correct floor call but the casino shouldn't be responsible. If the casino pays for this mistake what prevents you and I from doing this on a larger scale in a bigger game as a set up to cheat the casino? There has to be a line drawn at some point.

[Abe]

I think this is a great floor decision. It got the cheater to leave and made the rest of the customers happy.

I'll play at the Aladdin Poker room next time in LV.


Seriously, a WORST floor decision of all time would have to include some of the following;

--inconsistency over time or between tables,
--blatent favoring of regulars over tourists,
--blatent favoring of angle shooters over inexperienced players.

[cardcounter0]

I was thinking the same thing. Sounds like a great place to play.

"First, a couple at the table is sharing chips whenever one wins a big pot. Now, they were the worst players at the table and were constantly reloading, but the dealer said nothing to stop this."

Great! This makes a 2+2er nit mad, I say let the donating fish do what they want as long as it keeps them happy and at the table.

I also notice that the UTG player identified as a 'regular' didn't know the guy couldn't raise in that situation.

The floor made a decision favorable to a player that was screwed by a dealer mistake, and basically screwed an angle shooter. Great!

Sounds like a good place to play.

[pudley4]

You guys are so quick to jump all over him, yet the majority of you aren't correctly understanding what he wrote:

1 - He did not say he had a problem with the couple sharing chips. He only brought up that point to show that this room seems different from what he expects out of a normal poker room. Maybe they even have different rules (like sharing chips is allowed).

2 - He did not say that he knew beforehand that he was not allowed to raise! He said:

[ QUOTE ]
Now I know in any well run casino, I am NOT allowed to raise. But, every room is different.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what harm is there in asking if he is allowed to raise? Maybe there are rooms out there where any raise reopens the betting. And since he's already brought up the first point, maybe there are other rules that are "different" (or enforced differently) from normal.

Now, if he had already come across this situation earlier in the night and been told a reraise was not allowed, but he still asked anyway, then I would consider it an angleshot. But since it doesn't appear he had any reason to know the answer beforehand, coupled with the strange indifference towards other seemingly obvious infractions, I pronounce the OP innocent here.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
If you wouldn't have tried to angle-shoot, you would have that $40, possibly more.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't know. I know if they play by the standard set of rules, it is the case. But I also figured there was a pretty good chance they might not. I didn't want someone else taking advantage of the same rule when I cannot. I did not try to angle shoot, since I asked and double asked "Can I do this".

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
This is funny: you were willing to let someone else get screwed by a dealer error but you are FURIOUS when you're the one on the losing end.

You shot an angle and got what you deserved. Too bad for you the angle was such that your shot ricocheted and hit you square in the forehead.

SpaceAce

[/ QUOTE ]

How is an angle shot one where I make sure of the rules before I make my move? If someone is allowed to make this move on you, and the floor lets it stand, would you not want to be able to do the same thing? I expected to just call the raise anyway, but was quite surprised when the dealer told me I was allowed to raise again.

Taking called bets out of a pot based on a dealer error is a far bigger mistake. I'm glad everyone missed the point. Maybe you nits think I should have folded preflop.

[TomCollins]

Thank you Jeff, I'm glad someone out here has a frickin clue.

[andyfox]

He didn't say he knew he wasn't allowed to raise. He said in a well-run casino, which I take to mean a casino with well-thought-out rules, he's not allowed to raise. "But every room is different." So what is wrong with him asking if he can raise? Different rooms have different rules about when you can come into the game when you first sit down (do you have to post? can you "buy the button"?) and about what your options are when a guy has only enough for a partial bet or raise.

Since the dealer made a mistake, resulting in the guy who had put in $40 forfeiting a chance to win the pot for $3 more, which he surely would have called, I agree with you that the $40 should have remained in the pot and the $40 made up to the guy who had to forfeit it.

I too am suprised that dealers, floorpersons, and managers don't know the rules all too often. The cardrooms should have regular meetings going over the rules with all relevant personnel. They should also review general policy: should the dealers announce a raise or remain silent? Should they announce a player's hand when he turns it over on the river?

BTW, I must have just missed you yesterday, I left around 3:45. My favorite incident yesterday was when I was on the button and everyone checked around to me on a 2-4-6 or somesuch flop. I said, "I don't have any of that" and checked and the dealer said, unsolicited, "Of course not, why should you?" The guy should be announcing on TV. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
So what harm is there in asking if he is allowed to raise? Maybe there are rooms out there where any raise reopens the betting.

[/ QUOTE ]

NAME ONE!!!

Name one casino in the world that would allow a re-raise in this spot.

You can't use the "different casinos use different rules" defense, unless there has ever been a case of an exception.

Otherwise, you'd also be asking if a flush beats a full house, because "every room is different".

[Toro]

I read this thread before I went to lunch and as I was walking back to the office decided that the responders were being too harsh in condemming Tom as an angle shooter.

Your post says essentially what I was going say. Rules vary so much from room to room and he asked and was told it was legal. Can't see how this is an angle.

If I were the floorman I would either comped the guy worth the $40 or let the bet stand since there was action after the "illegal" bet. Then the others could decide if they wanted to call the re-raise.

I'm off to Vegas tomorrow and my best friend is a floorman at Harrahs and I'm going to pose this one to him to see what he would do.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
In NL or PL it must be at least a full raise to reopen the action. The half bet is strictly a limit rule. example. player bets $50, next player calls $50 third goes all-in for $99, first players cannot raise becasue the all-in did not have a FULL raise. I am aware by law in AC they play NL by limit rules and there are some other places where they play NL by limit rules, but most of those other places it is a matter of management being unfamiliar with the rules and procedures for big bet poker.- Randy Refeld

[/ QUOTE ]

Good explanation. Others might want to note that most clubs (at least here in LA) use a half bet "guideline" to correct the size of a bet when the chips are deep. Example: Player bets $50, next player calls $50, third (who has plenty of chips) puts in $80. If the floor is called his bet must be corrected to the minimum raise to $100. Had he put in $70, his bet would be corrected to a call of $50.

~ Rick

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So what harm is there in asking if he is allowed to raise? Maybe there are rooms out there where any raise reopens the betting.

[/ QUOTE ]

NAME ONE!!!

Name one casino in the world that would allow a re-raise in this spot.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know about any room that would allow a reraise after the $3 raise. However, I've also never played in a room where if I bet $40 in NLHE, someone calls and someone reraises to $62, I am now allowed to reraise. But according to Randy, that is the rule at some cardrooms.

So, given that, I don't think it's unreasonable for this poster to ask the question. And the dealer clearly gave him the wrong answer and let him raise. Which is why I think it's pretty clear the $40 should stay in the pot and the other player should get paid back by the house, not from this guy's pot.

[ghettorat]

Tom,

If they had been strong players sharing chips, would you have complained? My guess is yes. You tried to take advantage and got the southside of a decision. Too bad and its definitely not the worst decision ever.

[Rick Nebiolo]

Hi Diablo!

You wrote: "I don't know about any room that would allow a reraise after the $3 raise. However, I've also never played in a room where if I bet $40 in NLHE, someone calls and someone reraises to $62, I am now allowed to reraise. But according to Randy, that is the rule at some cardrooms."

The last several years circumstances force me to mostly stay in LA for poker so I learn what goes on elsewhere by reading the forum or talking to visitors. My understanding was the rule as Randy stated was quite standard. For example, here (http://www.pokercoach.us/RobsPkrRules5.htm) is a link to Bob Ciaffone's latest rules (check out number 3 in the no limit section). Bob's rules are very close to the ones used in the big clubs in LA (he worked on the "more or less" standard rulebook for the major cardrooms in 1997.

I'd be very interested in hearing any more input on this (perhaps it deserves a lead post on the no limit forum).

Also, if you get the chance, read my response to Randy above regarding the half bet "guideline" for correcting bets.

You continued: "given that, I don't think it's unreasonable for this poster to ask the question. And the dealer clearly gave him the wrong answer and let him raise. Which is why I think it's pretty clear the $40 should stay in the pot and the other player should get paid back by the house, not from this guy's pot."

I agree with this. Some clubs/rooms have funds for this sort of thing. But what if this was a big game and the bet was $5000 rather than $50?

Regards,

Rick

[The Armchair]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"I make it 40 to go, and the player next to me is all in for 43. The original two callers call, and I ask the dealer if I am allowed to raise. Now I know in any well run casino, I am NOT allowed to raise. But, every room is different. And if someone can use the rule on me, I am surely going to take advantage."

[/ QUOTE ]

You know you aren't allowed to raise, but you attempt to take a shot at getting some free "incorrect information" that can only work to your advantage from a weak dealer.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if he's wrong and, for some reason, he is allowed to raise, but because he knows what the rules should be, he neglects to ask? The disadvantage he'd endure versus a different player (either one who knew the house rule or was ignorant to the standard one) is immense.

The way to fix that is, if online, to not have the "Raise" button available. You can't raise because the software won't let you.

The way to fix that in a B&M is to ask the dealer if you can raise. Which, apparently, is what the original poster did and should be expected to do. That the dealer got it wrong is not his fault.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
And the dealer clearly gave him the wrong answer and let him raise. Which is why I think it's pretty clear the $40 should stay in the pot and the other player should get paid back by the house, not from this guy's pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup.

[shummie]

ditto Jeff. As written, this is not an angle shot.

[detroitplayer]

I can't even believe some people are blaming this on the guy because he "should have known" that he wasn't allowed to raise even though he was given permission to do so.

Sorry, there are plenty of people out there playing hold 'em who have no clue there is a minimum amount required to re-open betting (obviously, the dealer didn't even know!)

To punish a player who could have been geniunely 100% ignorant about such a rule because he took the dealer's word on it is just flat out wrong. The casino should pay for those kinds of mistakes, not the player.

[Cleveland Guy]

Some players at the table wake up, and start telling the dealer that I am not allowed to raise. Dealer calls the floor, who also rules that I am not allowed to raise. I take my $100 back, and call the $3.

I am gonna post a different view on this.

I blame the guy who mucked his cards. The $40 should remain in the pot, and he should not be paid back by the casino.

I know this sounds harsh, but it's buyer be ware. Obviously other players felt this was not right, and spoke up to question the dealers rule. This is what the floor person is there for.

I blame the player who folded for also not knowing the rules, and not knowing this is standard.

He should have been aware enough to protect his cards - and say something to the dealer and call the floor himself.

If a guy sits down, and doesn't know that 3 of a kind beats 2 pair, or how to read the board. Player 1 has QQ on a 9-9-6-4-2 board.

Player 2, thinking he can't beat the queens, throws his cards to the muck. The dealer turns over Player 2s 9 as he is collecting the cards.

Should player 2 have won the pot since he didn't know the rules?

I know the example seems extreme, but Tom here asked a question and got an answer. Right or wrong he got his answer.

Player 2 should have known enough to question the ruling himself before mucking his cards.

If the casino feels bad and wants to comp him - that's fine, but it shouldn't have been taken from the pot!

[Aces McGee]

There a couple of points that I think are missing in this discussion.

1)Anyone saying that the original poster "got what he deserved" for angle-shooting (regardless of whether he was or not) and saying that the decision seems reasonable is forgetting that the floor didn't make the decision to punish the poster for angle-shooting. He did it to reimburse the player and correct a dealer error. If the $40 should stay in the pot -- and it seems clear that it should -- then it should stay in the pot, regardless of the original poster's intentions. Especially since...

2)This decision was made prior to the original poster's eventual win of the hand. Even if the floor somehow knew that he was angle-shooting (and whether he was or not is still up for debate), it would be ridiculous to take the $40 out of the pot. What if the "idiot girlfriend" or the allin player won the pot? Why should they lose the $40 because of another player's (debatable) angle shooting?

Whether or not you agree with what the original poster did, it seems hard to argue that taking the $40 out of the pot is a good ruling.

-McGee

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Diablo!

You wrote: "I don't know about any room that would allow a reraise after the $3 raise. However, I've also never played in a room where if I bet $40 in NLHE, someone calls and someone reraises to $62, I am now allowed to reraise. But according to Randy, that is the rule at some cardrooms."

The last several years circumstances force me to mostly stay in LA for poker so I learn what goes on elsewhere by reading the forum or talking to visitors. My understanding was the rule as Randy stated was quite standard.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you may have misread my post. Randy explained the standard rule as written in Bob's rules. However, Randy also mentioned that there are rooms where NL is played with limit betting rules. That was the example I gave above and is not, as far as I know, quite standard. That rule was news to me and thus the original poster's question is not necessarily an angle, as it's not unreasonable to think that cardrooms might exist with even less standard rules. What better way to make sure than to ask the dealer?

[ QUOTE ]
But what if this was a big game and the bet was $5000 rather than $50?

[/ QUOTE ]

My thoughts on this wouldn't be any different. Again, it's not the player's fault that the dealer screwed up. While I think the correct decision is for the house to compensate the player, I think not compensating him and telling him that he mucked his cards and should have objected if he thought something was wrong about the raise is a better decision than taking the money out of the pot.

[TomCollins]

Not a B&M Room, but Prima Networks lets you do this. I routinely take advantage of this and underbet a player by a buck or even a penny simply to allow others to call and let me reraise myself in essence.

Am I a scumbag? I argue no, since its fair game for anyone else to do against me, and they often do.

I didn't even realize the player to my right only had 43. It's not like I had these dirty intentions of trying to get just small enough of a raise to reraise.

[lapoker17]

Hey Man - I think you got hit way too hard for this, and that it's not that big a deal. FWIW, I think the $40 should stay in the pot, I was just a little bothered by your outrage after you implied that you knew what you were doing may be wrong - Regardless, that $40 should've been yours.

[Randy_Refeld]

[ QUOTE ]
Otherwise, you'd also be asking if a flush beats a full house, because "every room is different".

[/ QUOTE ]

You obviously have nwever played Mexican Poker (or any game with a stripped deck).

Randy Refeld

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]

Otherwise, you'd also be asking if a flush beats a full house, because "every room is different".

[/ QUOTE ]

As Randy has pointed out in numerous posts previous to this, there is often debate about whether or not a half bet reopens betting or not in NL. Rooms do have differing rules. Whether or not one is better or if it should be played that way is not the question. This is not as black and white as your issue.

[Don Olney]

First of all - ONLY PART OF THIS STORY IS TRUE -----
This did happen at the Aladdin ----that part is true-------
No one at the table was sharing CHIPS ---
Now as for your HAND ---------
When you made it 40 the next guy moves all in for 43 ----
Guy to my left or seat 2 calls --- You shove a stack ---
action moves VERY FAST AFTER THIS --- and the guy next to me mucks -- YOU SAID NOTHING UP TO THIS POINT ----
Dealer stops the action --- and counts the all in chips---finds out it is only 43 as you say ---and calls the floor ---she then askes me if the raise is ok BECAUSE SHE JUST DOES NOT KNOW ---I told here if the all in was 2* the first raise or mre then the action is good to go --- floor comes over -- finds out what went on ---and after some table talk GIVES SEAT 2 BACK his chips -----
When all was done and over ---
THE RIGHT DECISON WAS MADE ---
AND AT NO TIME DID THIS DEALER EVER EVER EVER SAY ANYHTING ABOUT A TIP OR PUSHING YOU A BIG POT ------

THIS IS FROM SEAT ONE IN YOUR GAME ---
Next time get the story right and the chip amounts right ---
I HOPE NEXT TIME YOU DO PLAY SOMEPLACE ELSE --- CARD ROOMS DO NOT NEED PLAYERS LIKE YOU

[Randy_Refeld]

[ QUOTE ]
Rooms do have differing rules.

[/ QUOTE ]

Usually if they avtually have rules the rule is it must be a full bet to reopen action. In some places the floor staff and management are unaware of what the normal rule is and use the half bet in limit. I once worked in a large club where a floor man inssisted it was a half bet to reopen action until I showed him the clubs own rules that it is a full bet.

In this particular case nobody has noted what the TRUE error was. The dealer should have called the floor when a player asked about a rule he wasn't sure of. After the dealer makes this mistake and the floor is called he migth be in a really bad spot. It is not that uncommon for a floorman to not have the authority to spend casino money. It is possible that he needs to find a fair solution and is not authorized to refund the player his $40. When something like this happens in limit poker it is pretty common to take the money out of the pot. I am not going to speculate as to what I would rule in this case because a lot depends on the players sitting at the table, the amount of time that passed until an objection was raised etc.

This reminds me of something I have told any floorperson that wanted my input. Do not EVER speculate as to what a ruling would be. 99% of the time when a player comes up to a floorman (often towards the beginning of his shift) and asked what should happen if x, y, and z occurred, they had something simmiliar happen and want to argue some more or get another opinion. Players often take one situation and say it is the same as another, but there is often a subtle difference. So to any floor people that are out there when someoen wants to know what the rule is (well if they really want to know a rule tell them the rule) tell them "the dealer will call the floor and the floor will rule on that specific situation." A corralary to that for players is "don't be an idiot/jerk; just becasue I have retrieved a hand thrown towards the much the last 50 times it has occurred, I might rule yours dead if you are being an idiot/jerk."

Randy Refeld

[TomCollins]

First off, you were off smoking, so I don't know how you saw this. I was also fairly quiet in asking the dealer, as I didn't want the players on the end knowing I wanted to raise. So I can understand why you might not have heard me.

You were the one, if I remember correct, to point out the rules after you got back from smoking. This I agree on. How sad is it that a dealer needs to ask a player in the game the rules? But I guess since you get to decide all the rules, I can see why you like this game.

As for the chip sharing, your observational skills were not quite so good. The first hand I played, the one player next to me had AA, and cracked my JJ. After he won, he gave half his stack to the girl next to him.

Second, I did not shove a stack, I had $200 cash behind, and $44 in chips.

I asked the dealer TWICE. Dealer did not ask for a tip, correct. But she did make some snide comments about how I still won a big pot anyway and I took it to mean that she wanted her tip as well.

The chip amounts I posted seem to be identical to what you saw, so I don't see the debate there.

The dealer was totally unaware of who even raised the $40, let alone if it was legal to reraise.

You obviously are clueless as about 10 respected posters have stated that taking money out of a pot is the absolute worst decision.

But if you want to stand up for your buddy in the 2 seat, I understand. Keep grinding out the tourists buddy. I went to the Mirage and took home a nice 2k win. Probably more than you grind out in a month at that pisshole.

[Chipr777]

Sure helps to have another perspective. I stand by my posts in this thread.

[TomCollins]

Where do you floor? Remind me never to play there as well. I tend to avoid places where floormen will do anything to cheat internet players to give it to their regulars (fish).

[Chipr777]

Internet player.. That speaks in volumes.

[Don Olney]

Tom ---
I was in the hand till the raise came about then tossed ----
No big deal ---- You felt you got a raw deal ---- You left -- made money -- went back to Texas ---
Come back anytime and enjoy all Las Vegas has to give ---
/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Clarkmeister]

Don,

I side with Tom on this one, but that was a hella good response.

[TomCollins]

To Chip-

Unfortunately, the state I live in prefers to keep gambling illegal, even for poker. So I play on the internet. I prefer not to get hijacked or arrested (probably the worst bad beat). I can play more hands per hour and make more money. If I lived in Vegas, I would probably play a lot more live. Playing live is a lot more fun (usually).

Why the bitterness towards the typical young internet player? I tip your dealers, I drop rake the same, I'm nice to other players in the game. What's the deal? I don't do the WPT staredown on every hand. I usually act fast and am polite. You would prefer some bitter old rock who throws cards at dealers? I don't understand. Before that incident, Don can vouch for me, I was pretty quiet (there was not much talking at that table) and kept to myself. I did get pretty obnoxious during the incident, as I was in total disbelief that the dealer could take a called bet out of the pot. The dealers were slow and basically incompetent, and the players were not even remotely friendly.

And to Don- Sorry I came across a little harsh. I guess the CAPS got to me a bit. You were probably the only person at the table who I had any respect for their play. I'll play at your table any time (as long as its not at the Aladdin). I have no problem with you correcting the dealer. You obviously knew the rules at the casino better than she did.

[Don Olney]

It was a tough choice in my opinion --- I can see it going either way ----

Not sure what I would have done in this spot --- I do know the Aladdin is trying HARD to make this a friendly place to play.
And not all the floor decisions are going to be SMOOTH at this time -------

[Don Olney]

Tom, Not a problem --- I over use the CAPS ---

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you may have misread my post.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right and I'm sorry about that. Next time I'll finish my morning coffee before making my first post /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Randy explained the standard rule as written in Bob's rules. However, Randy also mentioned that there are rooms where NL is played with limit betting rules. That was the example I gave above and is not, as far as I know, quite standard. That rule was news to me and thus the original poster's question is not necessarily an angle, as it's not unreasonable to think that cardrooms might exist with even less standard rules. What better way to make sure than to ask the dealer?

[/ QUOTE ]

In Los Angeles we have many good dealers, but the reality is that some (who are otherwise good and hard working) do not answer questions very well. In this case I suspected (since the all in raise was so small) that the player knew the correct answer beforehand.

[ QUOTE ]
I (Rick N.) previously wrote But what if this was a big game and the bet was $5000 rather than $50?

You responded: "My thoughts on this wouldn't be any different. Again, it's not the player's fault that the dealer screwed up. While I think the correct decision is for the house to compensate the player, I think not compensating him and telling him that he mucked his cards and should have objected if he thought something was wrong about the raise is a better decision than taking the money out of the pot."

[/ QUOTE ]

Very good analysis. Thanks for your time and once again I apologize for misreading your original response.

Regards,

Rick

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey Man - I think you got hit way too hard for this, and that it's not that big a deal. FWIW, I think the $40 should stay in the pot, I was just a little bothered by your outrage after you implied that you knew what you were doing may be wrong - Regardless, that $40 should've been yours.

[/ QUOTE ]

As an aside I once again agree with LAPoker.

~ Rick

[Voltron87]

If you knew the rules about when a raise is allowed you never should have attempted to raise in that situation, I kind of can't feel bad for you if you conciously tried to make an illegal move.

[TomCollins]

Reading comprehension lessons are not expensive buddy, maybe you should get some.

I didn't know the official rules of this poker room. Like I've said, I have seen it played two different ways. Which is why I asked. I was pretty certain I could not raise. But just in case, I did ask.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]

If a guy sits down, and doesn't know that 3 of a kind beats 2 pair, or how to read the board. Player 1 has QQ on a 9-9-6-4-2 board.

Player 2, thinking he can't beat the queens, throws his cards to the muck. The dealer turns over Player 2s 9 as he is collecting the cards.

Should player 2 have won the pot since he didn't know the rules?


[/ QUOTE ]
No. However, if he asked the dealer whether three 9's beats two pair and the dealer said "no", then it would be a different story. Here, the guy who mucked his cards did so because the dealer said that the raise was legal. If the OP had said "raise" and the guy had mucked without any dealer invervetion, that would be analogous to your example, but this was different. Players should be able to trust the dealer to correctly inform them of the rules. Since the dealer said that there was a raise, I can't fault this guy for folding (although certainly if it were me, I would have kept my cards and called the floor).

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
Reading comprehension lessons are not expensive buddy, maybe you should get some.

I didn't know the official rules of this poker room. Like I've said, I have seen it played two different ways. Which is why I asked. I was pretty certain I could not raise. But just in case, I did ask.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another poster who claims to have been in seat 1 says you never asked the dealer about a legal raise. That said I'm not going to argue about the hand anymore, I really don't care.


The money should have stayed in the pot and the player should have been reimbursed his $40 from the casino coffers, as a the casino employee made a mistake which disrupted the action OR the player who mucked should have been told to protect his hand and called the floor. Once he accepts the initial ruling from the dealer (if it happened) he has no recuse if he did not call the floor at that point. I'm really not sure which one it is.

[TomCollins]

He did not hear, as I was fairly discreet about it. He folded the first time I raised, and walked away from the table (I think). By the time he was back, the hand was still going on.

[detroitplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
Players should be able to trust the dealer to correctly inform them of the rules.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a great line considering your stance on this issue. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[chesspain]

First you say:

[ QUOTE ]
Dealer begs for a tip saying I still won a big pot, and I cash out.


[/ QUOTE ]


Then you say:

[ QUOTE ]
Dealer did not ask for a tip, correct. But she did make some snide comments about how I still won a big pot anyway and I took it to mean that she wanted her tip as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe her snide comment was in regards to how you ranted and raved like a spoiled little princess even though you still won a large pot.

[Sixth_Rule]

I think that you figured that if you got a floor person involved that you could prevent the people from sharing chips but you didn't want to scare the fish.

I think you knew perfectly well that even if the dealer allowed you to raise here that it still might not be the rules of this card room. You must of known that if you where allowed to raise that it could still be overturned by a floor person if someone complained. If you didn't go this far in your thinking then you should have.

You did play an angle here.

[TomCollins]

You are correct that I thought that the decision might be overturned. So, in order to not angle shoot, what is the proper way to go about doing this? Call the floor EVERY favorable dealer ruling that goes my way just to be sure?

Is it an angle if I know if a half bet reopens the pot, and I raise just enough for a player to do this?

I was perfectly open and honest with what I was attempting to do. I did everything rationally possible (that I can think of) to avoid angle shooting. Apparently that isn't good enough. So what did I overlook?

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
I make it $100 more to go, the first guy folds......

[/ QUOTE ]


...and here is the essense of the problem. He FOLDS...He doesn't call time.....doesn't ask for a ruling.......doesn't ask to call the floor.

Now, he may not know any better, but he IS responsible for knowing the rules, is he not?

OP DID ask.....and was told (incorrectly) that he could. It sounds pretty clear to me that the folder did NOT know the rules, and simply accepted what the dealer said.

Then the table wakes up, the floor is called over and the $40 removed from the pot? BAD move by the floor, as methinks it is simply compounding the original error by the dealer.

Overall, a sad situation that should remind ALL OF US that when we are playing in a new room, we should make an effort to find out if the rules are different from what we're used to...

[Jim Kuhn]

[ QUOTE ]
Now, he may not know any better, but he IS responsible for knowing the rules, is he not?


[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this statement unless the rules are uniform across cardrooms or are posted somewhere. The worst thing about playing in B&M are the rules change from room to room and often from shift to shift.

Thank you,

Jim Kuhn
Catfish4u
/images/graemlins/spade.gif /images/graemlins/diamond.gif /images/graemlins/club.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]

The worst thing about playing in B&M are the rules change from room to room and often from shift to shift.

Thank you,

Jim Kuhn
Catfish4u
/images/graemlins/spade.gif /images/graemlins/diamond.gif /images/graemlins/club.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Jim,

I don't know if this is the WORST thing, but it certainly is a pain in the arse!!

In a perfect world, the rules would be posted plainly for everyone to see, but do you know any rooms where that happens? Have you ever asked any floor person for a copy of the rules, and if so, what kind of response did you get?

Given that it is .........."What it is"(i.e. the rules are NOT uniform across all card rooms), doesn't it make practical sense for each of us to ensure that we know what's going on before we sit down?

Yup, it bugs the hell out of me that it is this way, but if we know it, we have no one else to blame other than ourselves if we get caught in an adverse ruling simply because we didn't have the foresight to ask before we played.

[boedeker]

i swear to god someone posted this exact story a few months ago.

[NLSoldier]

At most cardrooms isn't the rule usually that an action is generally allowed to stand if there has been action behind it...

I could be wrong but say for example, a player string raises in a limit game and someone folds, and then the next guy calls him on the string raise. Wouldnt the floor rule that the raise is allowed due to the action behind it?

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]

How is an angle shot one where I make sure of the rules before I make my move?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nevermind, I crafted a whole response but it's not worth it. You knew better when you asked the dealer.

SpaceAce

[detroitplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

How is an angle shot one where I make sure of the rules before I make my move?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nevermind, I crafted a whole response but it's not worth it. You knew better when you asked the dealer.

SpaceAce

[/ QUOTE ]

The entire problem with people saying "he knew better" is that it completely ignores the fact that someone else could have been in that exact same position who geniuinely didn't know bettter... and the EXACT same thing would have happened. The dealer didn't f*ck up because of who was asking the question, she f*cked up because she didn't know the correct answer to the question being asked.

So fine, say "you deserve to lose that money because you knew better", but what would be your brilliant defense for someone who didn't know better? By your, I mean everyone who's focusing on whether or not he knew the rule before asking. Whether he knew or not is inconsequential.

[Toro]

[ QUOTE ]
At most cardrooms isn't the rule usually that an action is generally allowed to stand if there has been action behind it...

I could be wrong but say for example, a player string raises in a limit game and someone folds, and then the next guy calls him on the string raise. Wouldnt the floor rule that the raise is allowed due to the action behind it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Finally someone agreeing with me. Yes, if someone calls a string bet which is an "illegal" bet after there is substantial action(i.e. someone folding) then the bet stands. I think it would be the same here. As I said in my original post I would have let the bet stand and then the other players would have had the option of calling the $100 or folding.

[Don Olney]

One point being missed here is
*** WHATS IN THE BEST INTREST OF THE GAME***
should the bet have stayed --- MAYBE ---
BUT --- This is a room FULL OF NEW PLAYERS the have never played the game -- YES 1/2 and 2/5 no-limit with NEW PLAYERS ---in these games it is not out of line to have 4 or 5 at a table that have NEVER PALYED --- can you say NO FOLDEM NO-LIMIT ---
While Tom's bet had action after the fact and would have been good to go in a bigger game -- this time I think the floor made a tough choice in trying to fix it ---

[TakeMeToTheRiver]

Actually -- what is being missed is that this was not "The worst floor decision of ALL TIME!"

I don't think this guy was cheated and I don't think he was cheating. What is done is done.

I think that any of us that have regularly played in B&M games have seen floor decisions that were far worse.

If the casino wanted to pay for the dealer's mistake, that would have been generous of them -- but this decision was well within the bounds of reasonable.

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually -- what is being missed is that this was not "The worst floor decision of ALL TIME!"

I don't think this guy was cheated and I don't think he was cheating. What is done is done.

I think that any of us that have regularly played in B&M games have seen floor decisions that were far worse.

If the casino wanted to pay for the dealer's mistake, that would have been generous of them -- but this decision was well within the bounds of reasonable.

[/ QUOTE ]

After thinking a while I really think the wrong decision should had been made. The player who folded has a responsibility to protect his hand, and he mucked without asking the floor. After that point significant action has occured and the raise should have stood.

[detroitplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually -- what is being missed is that this was not "The worst floor decision of ALL TIME!"

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't seen many players get their money back out of a pot after action has passed him. Come on! I mean, maybe not of "all time"... but this is up there as being pretty friggin ridiculous.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually -- what is being missed is that this was not "The worst floor decision of ALL TIME!"

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely. Play long enough in the cardroom and you will see a decision that ends up with the pot getting awarded to the wrong person. No matter what anyone thinks about this decision, those decisions are an order of magnitude worse.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
I could be wrong but say for example, a player string raises in a limit game and someone folds, and then the next guy calls him on the string raise. Wouldnt the floor rule that the raise is allowed due to the action behind it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it should be, unless of course you're the poor idiot who decided to post this thread. (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=1435326&page=&view=&sb=5& o=&fpart=all&vc=1)

[lighterjobs]

what other way were they going to compensate him?

[cardcounter0]

Some thing tells me that the $40 winded up in your chip stack! hahaha. I mean the $40 that came out of "Tom's Pot", he had AA, those never get cracked, that was "his" money. hahaha. The 2+2 thing to do is pitch a hissy over a rule infraction and leave the game and all the fish.

You have a lot to learn, you probably stayed, laughed and joked, and took all the poor fish's money.

If they are good donators to the game, hell I'll buy them a drink every time they get the jack of spades, if that is what it takes to keep them happy and in the game.

I think that would be the real point, isn't it?
/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[TomCollins]

You missed one bigger point-

Big fish with smallish stack < Not quite as big fish with HUGE stack.

I could bust the tourists for $100 a pop (when I got cards), or take $1k pots at the Mirage (much more fun and profitable). There are plenty of fish in the sea, I'd rather not give a cardroom that does crazy things like this my business.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
How is an angle shot one where I make sure of the rules before I make my move?

[/ QUOTE ]

You obviously know darn well that if someone re-raises a $40 bet by going all-in for $3 more, that you cannot reraise again. And when you take advantage of an obviously new and inexperienced dealer who doesn't know the rule, you are shooting an angle.

Here's a quote from Bob Ciaffone's rules of poker, from this link:

http://www.lasvegasvegas.com/poker/rules.php

3. All raises must be equal to or greater than the size of the previous bet or raise on that betting round, except for an all-in wager. A player who has already checked or called may not subsequently raise an all-in bet that is less than the full size of the last bet or raise . (The half-the-size rule for reopening the betting is for limit poker only.)
Example: Player A bets $100 and Player B raises $100 more, making the total bet $200. If Player C goes all in for less than $300 total (not a full $100 raise), and Player A calls, then Player B has no option to raise again, because he wasn't fully raised. (Player A could have raised, because Player B raised.)

Now it should of course be noted that many rooms, including the aladdin, modify this rule to allow a player to reraise again if the all-in raise was 50% or more of the previous bet or raise. Still though, $3 more is CLEARLY far from enough of a raise to re-open the betting, and I am 100% certain that you were well aware of this before you made your "move."

So if you got reamed for your unethical behavior here, you are getting what you deserve.

In addition, these two rules (same sources as above) also apply here, and in all such situations:

1. Management reserves the right to make decisions in the spirit of fairness, even if a strict interpretation of the rules may indicate a different ruling.

8. The same action may have a different meaning, depending on who does it, so the possible intent of an offender will be taken into consideration. Some factors here are the person’s amount of poker experience and past record.

Note that both these rules apply here as well. As for the second rule, If I were to see an obviously experienced player making the angle play you made, I would have to "have a word with them."

Whether the floor's decision was great or terrible, I am not going to comment. Still, it's still kinda nice to see that you got "poetic justice" by their decision taking the $40 out or "your pot."

al

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
--inconsistency over time or between tables,
--blatent favoring of regulars over tourists,
--blatent favoring of angle shooters over inexperienced players

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent point, Abe. These things are of course unacceptable, particularly favoring regulars over tourists. This is one area where the excalibur always shined, they don't cater to anyone in particular, regular or not, they treat everyone equally.

Any floorman that would favor an obvious angle shooter is total scum in my book.

I would also add that inconsistency between different floormen in the same room in similar and frequently occuring situations would be "bad."

al

[Al_Capone_Junior]

On your first point, obviously this is not allowed, and obviously an inexperienced dealer was at the table here (as if that wasn't obvious from the rest of the original post).

On your second point, quit mincing words and looking for ways to justify tom's obviously blatant angle shot. I believe that if tom had been sitting at the table with an obviously strong and experienced dealer, he would not have taken the shot that he did.

al

[detroitplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
he would not have taken the shot that he did.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you that oblivious to the fact that there are people who honestly wouldn't know that they couldn't bet there?

Oh no, a competant dealer! I better not ASK A QUESTION! He will boot me for shooting an angle if I asked such a thing!

At least a competant dealer would have given the correct answer the first time, but to say it's the players fault for asking a question the dealer is supposed to know the answer to is obtuse.

[Photoc]

Just out of curiosity...

If someone is playing 2/5 no limit, wouldn't it be smart to find out the betting rules BEFORE You sit down to play? Or is it wiser to sit down and have shots taken at you or potentially take one at someone without knowing it and then get in trouble?

[TomCollins]

Hey Al, sorry I dont play in Vegas every day like you do. But I have played in enough casinos to know that even though Bob's rules say one thing, house rules vary.

Whether I agree or not with the fact that the rule *should* be one thing or another is not important. I think the IWTSTH rule is total BS. But if its the house rule, I'm going to flip the cards over every time. I think that the reraise on a $3 bet is BS. But if its the rule, its the rule, and I'm going to take advantage.

If I was playing at a casino that played by the book on every occasion, I still might even ask the same question. I asked "I can't raise again, can I". The dealer, who was barely paying attention, said that in fact I could. I confirmed this again before I acted. The dealer may have known the rule, but wasn't following the action one bit. All the complex math of counting up sidepots was enough to keep her occupied for 10 minutes.

Did I get what I deserved for being greedy? Prolly. I saved him money he would have called on the flop before as well.

Either way, its a bad ruling and a very poorly run room. If the dealers count on the players to enforce all of the rules, it provides a terrible environment. I think Don had more authority than the dealer, and almost as much as the floor.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

After having discussed this with all the parties involved...

I don't necessarily think that the ruling given was the exact ruling that might be given if the rules were strictly interpreted. However, the "correct" ruling may be based on the overall fairness and integrity of the game, (which you clearly violated). This fact was made even more evident after reading Don Olney's post (Don is a respected member of the las vegas poker community, and a regular and valued player at the aladdin). Thus, in this particular instance I do believe that the correct ruling was made.

As I say to most people who have a problem with how things are done at the aladdin...

"Job applications are available in the office."

Nobody, and no poker room is perfect. However, you CREATED this particular problem by pulling a blatant angle shot, thus I for one have very little sympathy for any distress you may have been caused, and very little use for your opinion that the room is poorly run. You CAUSED the problem, then you didn't like the resulting ruling, so you posted "worst floor decision ever at the aladdin." If you don't like the aladdin, the floorpersons, or the dealers, there are of course plenty of other rooms you can choose from on your next trip here. Try the orleans, it's right up your alley.

al

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you that oblivious to the fact that there are people who honestly wouldn't know that they couldn't bet there?


[/ QUOTE ]

No. But it's quite obvious that Tom knew better and was just trying to shoot an angle. There is no house in the entire country I have ever played in that would allow the reraise Tom tried to make (and I have played in a LOT of cardrooms from coast to coast).

al

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
Ask yourself this question. Who CAUSED the error?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is obvious all sides here will have a large bias, but yours troubles me.

Who caused the error? The dealer caused the error.
It is the dealer's responsibility to make sure all the rules are enforced properly, not the player's.

The dealer gets paid to give out the correct betting procedures during a hand.

[detroitplayer]

No kidding. The dealer is there for that very reason!

If someone calls Dell tech support and the rep has the person format their hard drive because the rep doesn't know what he's doing, should we put the blame on the person making the call because he "should have known that formatting a hard drive means you will lose all data" ?

No, we put the blame on the person who is being paid to give correct answeres.

Sure, if I personally called Dell with a problem and the first thing I was told to do was to format, I'd know better. But not everyone on earth knows better.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
No kidding. The dealer is there for that very reason!

If someone calls Dell tech support and the rep has the person format their hard drive because the rep doesn't know what he's doing, should we put the blame on the person making the call because he "should have known that formatting a hard drive means you will lose all data" ?

No, we put the blame on the person who is being paid to give correct answeres.

Sure, if I personally called Dell with a problem and the first thing I was told to do was to format, I'd know better. But not everyone on earth knows better.

[/ QUOTE ]

In a case such as this the blame should also be assigned to those who hire and train the tech rep.

~ Rick

[Al_Capone_Junior]

This particular section of the debate here is of little relevance since Don Olney posted his version of what "actually happened." I do believe that Don got the story closer to the truth than Tom did in the original post.

That being said, anyone who is an angle shooter will (unfortunately) have a much better time pulling this type of move in today's poker environment. The demand is SO high that EVERY cardroom in the country is flooded with new and inexperienced players, as well as new and inexperienced dealers. Anyone who's not a dealer and wants to be critical should remember these two things...

1. everyone was new at what they do at one time, and they made LOTS of mistakes.
2. any player, no matter how experienced, who wants to be critical of a dealer, should realize that it's a LOT HARDER THAN YOU THINK being in that box. Until you have actually dealt in a live poker room yourself, don't over-do it while you're up on your soap boxes.

al

[detroitplayer]

[ QUOTE ]

2. any player, no matter how experienced, who wants to be critical of a dealer, should realize that it's a LOT HARDER THAN YOU THINK being in that box. Until you have actually dealt in a live poker room yourself, don't over-do it while you're up on your soap boxes.

al

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll give you a little bit on that. Sometimes the players at my table are throwing chips and cards around like mad and the dealer is doing 10 things at once, yet still keeping it all together... and I think to myself "would I be able to keep up like that?"

Then again, I am always amazed how a waitress can take orders at a 10 person table all at once without using a pen and paper. /images/graemlins/confused.gif /images/graemlins/confused.gif /images/graemlins/confused.gif

That said, dealers should know the rules. Especially a rule like that... It's not like you'd have to break out the book to figure that one out if you're anywhere near a competant dealer.

There's a lot of things I wouldn't be critical of, but I knowing the more basic rules is a pretty friggin standard part of the job you should learn before you go to work.

[TomCollins]

Al claims that we have two different versions of the stories. We do have different accounts of the tip-begging and chip-sharing. But in the scheme of things, the only thing different, as far as I can tell, is whether or not I asked if I could raise. Since I was fairly quiet about this, not wanting to tip off my hand if I wasn't allowed to, it makes sense that Don never heard.

The way things played out, I believe the dealer had no clue who even raised it to $40. She let action continue without even being fully aware. I was perfectly willing to tell her the exact situation, and in fact gave the complete recap that was agreed to by the players, including Don. This is when the raise was forced to be taken back.

Al, I'm really disappointed that you think that a played with limited live NL expirience tried to shoot an angle by asking "I can't raise, can I". I guess dealing the typical scumbags in the casinos, its not hard to imagine. The nearest casino to me that has NL is at least 12 hours away. My expirience comes mostly from playing online, where the raise rule often (not common, but exists) that any raise opens action. I asked a question, got an answer, and acted. If youre are allowed to raise here, I know you certainly would.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
My expirience comes mostly from playing online, where the raise rule often (not common, but exists) that any raise opens action.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tom, just out of curiosity, what online site would allow this raise?

Regards,

Rick

[Trainwreck]

LOL! Worst decision of all time? hahahhahahaahhahaahhahaa What a crock right out of the gates!

Tom, you have a few too many, they are tasty though, I don't blame ya!

Did you realize this is just a classic angleshooter/dealer abuse story?

and you are the angleshooter/dealer abuser looking for sympathy?

Even if how it went down is like you say, I think the floor decision was fine.

You sir are a jerk based on your tone and choice of words, perhaps tact and class are not in your vocabulary, eh? [perhaps you had a bad day]

This 2+2 forum has gone to trolling and bs lately, so I shouldn't be surprized.

I only come here when someone points out something interesting, and I am NOT alone in thinking this was a BOZO post/scenario, but hey it's all good? [not really]

Oh yeah, I have played at the Alladdin, I don't believe this for a second, it is a well run card room, some regulars have posted so I can leave the advertising to them, I'm just giving my untainted (by NOT reading other responses first) opinion, $40 dollars taken out of one pot is not the end of the world, and I seriously doubt the dealer begged for a tip, that is where the story became complete BS, nice try! Cusses the floor to their face, yeah I bet, NOT!

>TW< calling security! LOL!

[TomCollins]

I know every site on the Prima Poker network allows this. I can't think of any other off the top of my head.

[detroitplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My expirience comes mostly from playing online, where the raise rule often (not common, but exists) that any raise opens action.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tom, just out of curiosity, what online site would allow this raise?

Regards,

Rick

[/ QUOTE ]

Pokerroom seems to reopen betting on any size raise. As a matter of fact, a tactic some use is to bet just below what a shortstack (who you know is going to push) has in front of them. Hopefully you get your callers along the way and you can push when it gets to back to you.

[soah]

[ QUOTE ]
I know every site on the Prima Poker network allows this. I can't think of any other off the top of my head.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does Truepoker still allow it as well? Or have they finally changed it?

[Al_Capone_Junior]

There is no online cardroom I have played in that allows a reraise in that situation, and I have played in many online rooms. That being said, it's possible some online cardroom might allow such a thing, but I'd like to see an actual example of it before I believed it.

The dealer DID make a mistake, that is for sure. But I believe it was more an error of losing track of what was going on rather than her actually not knowing such an important rule, because I know she does know. Bummer that it worked out that way, but she's a good person and works hard at getting better at dealing, and I know she learned a valuable lesson from this experience.

I do not believe for one instant that she begged for a tip, and I have 0.00% doubt.

All this being said, I think it's important for 2+2ers (particularly online players) to realize that problems at the table such as this one tend to drive fish away and generally make the game get real tight and not very good. I've seen it time and time again, and it bugs me to death every single time. Things need to run fast and smooth for the fish to stay happy, and this situation isn't the way to keep them happy.

Everyone who has gotten this far in the thread should consider doing all they can to keep things going smoothly at the tables, and that includes not trying to nit-pick or push to the limit every aspect of every rule in the book. Things are tough enough these days as it is without making it harder by pushing the limits and testing the dealers. A certain degree of honor and just plain courteous behavior is in order, particularly from people like us who make significant income from poker.

al

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
I know this isn't the case but if the floorperson was aware that he KNEW he could't raise in that spot and was doing it purely to shoot an angle, as he put it "I am surely going to take advantage", I would pull him off the table and explain if he tried it again he'd be done for the night.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have been known to do this - take people aside and "have a little chat" with them. I am far more likely to have these chats with players who I know are experienced and are making things difficult, as they are...

1. pissing off the fish and potentially driving customers out of the game/cardroom, which is inexcusable
2. needlessly making the job of the dealers more difficult, thus slowing down the game
3. adding fuel to the sometimes negative perception that people have of poker players

al

[Don Olney]

I find this room a great place to blow off some steam after playing the Bellagio. I can go on tilt -- have a few beers if I like (which I need to stop doing) and just have FUN playing a few hands and not have to think --- 99% of the players here are new and have no clue how to play the game --- when I get heads up with someone that is new to the game I have no problem letting them know I HAVE THEM BEAT AND SAVE THE BETS FOR LATTER -----a few other posters here have seen me do this MANY TIMES ----- for me, this room is not about the money -- it is about the relaxed way I can play, have some fun and support a new room that is getting better -----

[VTDuffman]

Hello everyone,

A little background -- I am pretty much an online micro guy. I post in the micro forums a bit and lurk here b/c I think this is a fun forum I like the trip reports and whatnot. I hope to get to a B&M cardroom in the near future.

I'm not really a NL guy, but I could see myself trying my hand at a lower blind NL for the fun of it. I see alot of people on here berating OP because he "should have known better" and/or "he was angle shooting"...so here's my question:

Up until this thread, I legitimately was unaware of this rule. To me, any raise, even a $3 raise would re-open the betting giving me an opportunity to re-raise with my aces. If I genuinely was unaware of this rule, and I ask the dealer if it's OK to re-raise, and the dealer says yes, and then all that other stuff happens (floor, giving money out of the pot, etc)...What would your response be?

I'll give you that OP could have been more professional in the airing of his grievance, but say it was someone like me in this exact situation? I would think that it would not be cool to have that money taken out of the pot...

Genuinely confused here /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Randy_Refeld]

[ QUOTE ]
To me, any raise, even a $3 raise would re-open the betting giving me an opportunity to re-raise with my aces. If I genuinely was unaware of this rule, and I ask the dealer if it's OK to re-raise

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that he asked indiacted he knows that isn't the rule. If you were unaware and wanted to rasie you woudl raise, you wouldn't ask permission first.

RR

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To me, any raise, even a $3 raise would re-open the betting giving me an opportunity to re-raise with my aces. If I genuinely was unaware of this rule, and I ask the dealer if it's OK to re-raise

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that he asked indiacted he knows that isn't the rule. If you were unaware and wanted to rasie you woudl raise, you wouldn't ask permission first.

RR

[/ QUOTE ]

If I knew it wasn't the rule, I would have just called $3.

[Clarkmeister]

Tom,

Regardless of the facts in your case here, I think you lost the title of worst floor decision of all time to this guy (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=1691037&page=0&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=2&vc=1) .

[TruePoker CEO]

If it was allowed, that was a mistake. We are fixing some instances with the programming where a less-than-complete, allin raise apparently had that effect, sometimes.


David

[TomCollins]

I've never seen this rule at Truepoker. In fact, in the last year, I know it never happens.

[soah]

A couple months ago someone mentioned it in the Zoo and you responded that it would be looked into and corrected. Just prior to that I had been considering writing an email about it since I'd seen it occur several times. However, I have not played at your site recently and cannot confirm whether or not the "illegal" raises are still allowed. I had played with Tom a number of times at Truepoker and assumed he was aware of the glitch.

[TomCollins]

You might be confused with the uncalled bet-rake glitch. So if the pot is $10 on the flop, and I bet $200 and everyone folds, the pot is raked $3. This was corrected, and rake was refunded.

[soah]

I am not confused.

edit: HERE (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=1208392&page=&view=&sb=5& o=&vc=1) is the post