Question about max bet rule in Commerce 40-80

[jdock99]

To keep a long story short me and 2 other players reached the river in a pot where I led the whole way. On the river, another player led out, I raised, the 3rd player in the hand dropped out, the other player re-raised, and I 4 bet.

This is where the hand gets interesting. I had a full house on a board that had an obvious straight and flush on it, but I did not have the nut hand, in fact I had #3. However, the player giving me the action was kind of wild so I felt justified making it 4 bets, partly because I thought my hand might be good, and also because I thought that 4 bets was the max because when the round started there were 3 of us in the hand. As I am sure you can all guess the other player 5 bet his hand. I asked the dealer if this was a legal move, as the round began with 3 players. The dealer nodded yes, I called the 5 bets and lost the hand to the other players nut hand. Of course, I am sure that any of you who have played at Commerce (or any other LA casino) are aware, the dealers in general know absolutely nothing about anything, and this one was worse than normal. I honestly think that she did not understand English, didn't understand a word I said, and just nodded for the same reason we all nod when someone talks to us in a language we do not understand and we really do not want to go to the effort to try to communicate this. This is not to say the dealer may have not accidentally made a correct decision, as even a blind squirrel can find an acorn once in a while.

Anyways, for those of you who have played in this game and may actually know the rule, I was wondering if you could let me know whether this 5 bet was in fact legal, where we were heads-up at the time of the 5 bet, but not at the beginning of the betting round.

Thanks.

[The Dude]

I think as long as the 4-bet isn't the bet that knocks out the 3rd player, there is no cap.

[andyfox]

My understanding is that once the hand becomes head-up, there is no cap, no matter the circumstances.

[mike l.]

if the 3rd player drops out of that round before it's capped then it's no limit on the raises from that moment on. good for the dealer for getting the rule right, many dealers and even some floorpeople get the rule wrong and think you need to wait until the next street.

[Gabe]

Even preflop, once it's heads up there is no limit to the amount of raises the two players can put in. Usually one of the Persian players, not in the hand, will shout "No limit! No limit!" to notify you.

[surfdoc]

This one confuses me preflop. I have seen it go both ways at Oceans 11. So let me get this right. When mike raises some weak limper and I 3 bet today and the limper folds and mike 4 bets I can 5 bet? Sweet.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
This one confuses me preflop. I have seen it go both ways at Oceans 11. So let me get this right. When mike raises some weak limper and I 3 bet today and the limper folds and mike 4 bets I can 5 bet? Sweet.

[/ QUOTE ]

If mike 4 bets preflop he will most certainly 6 bet you.

Just telling you to watch yourself.

[surfdoc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This one confuses me preflop. I have seen it go both ways at Oceans 11. So let me get this right. When mike raises some weak limper and I 3 bet today and the limper folds and mike 4 bets I can 5 bet? Sweet.

[/ QUOTE ]

If mike 4 bets preflop he will most certainly 6 bet you.

Just telling you to watch yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Duly noted. Thanks for the concern. BTW, when I decide to 5 bet mike I am almost always praying that he 6 bets.

[mike l.]

you 6 bet me and im folding. no flop no drop so you give me a rebate of $2. deal?

[Klepton]

[ QUOTE ]
Even preflop, once it's heads up there is no limit to the amount of raises the two players can put in. Usually one of the Persian players, not in the hand, will shout "No limit! No limit!" to notify you.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is an amazingly true response

[jdock99]

Thanks for the response everyone. Looks like the dealer made the right decision. Unfortunately, it seems most casinos have different rules, and like another poster mentioned, I have seen the ruling go either way in the same casino on several occasions (normally against me because I do not argue or fight with the floorman as much as most players, and many floormen do not know the rules anyways and so take the path of least resistance, that is agree with the person who is most likely to argue).

Looks like I could have saved $160 on that hand, but then again I did have the privelege of playing several hours with 3 players who would make plays such as cold calling early position raises with hands such A4o and 92s, and this was 40-80 full handed. It is amazing how these games get sometimes. Of course it is not normally like this, you either have to get lucky in table assignment or heavily bribe the floormen to make sure you get the right table.

[elena_elphie]

I was in a hand in the Commerce 40-80 a few days ago, and the dealer ruled the other way. I didn't realize she was wrong at the time.

[onegymrat]

Gabe's response is one of the few times I have actually laughed out loud reading a 2+2 post. So true. What's up with that?

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
if the 3rd player drops out of that round before it's capped then it's no limit on the raises from that moment on. good for the dealer for getting the rule right, many dealers and even some floorpeople get the rule wrong and think you need to wait until the next street.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo!

[Rick Nebiolo]

From the aqua colored Commerce rulebook page 7, rule #48 reads:

"In heads-up play, there is no maximum number of raises. This applies any time the action becomes heads-up before the raises have been capped. Once the raising is capped, it cannot be uncapped on that round of betting.

Bob Ciaffone was behind this well thought through rule when the LA rulebook was re-written and made more or less uniform for the big clubs in 1997. The reasoning behind Bob's capping rule was carefully explained in his Card Player column from about that time.

Essentially, this rule allows unlimited head up raising anytime the third player in the hand drops out before the cap (three raises in LA) is reached.

Ex: A bets, B raises, C calls two cold, A reraises, B reraises (third raise), C folds. Even though A and B are now head up, the betting is capped because three players were active when the third raise went in.

Ex: A bets, B calls, C raises, A calls, B reraises, C folds, A reraises (third raise), and now B and A can reraise until they run out of chips because C (the third party) folded BEFORE the third raise went in.

Lots of dealers and some floor get this wrong along with the half-bet rule for limit (both went in the 1997 book). It's worth knowing and maybe if I get time I'll post a primer. It sort of surprised me that cardroom veterans such as my friend Andy Fox don't quite have it down. Gabe was also wrong but funny. mike l. got it right.

Note that some LA clubs may do it differently but the cap rule works this way at Commerce, Hollywood Park, and The Bike.

Hope this helps clarify things a bit more.

~ Rick

[Ryno]

"Of course it is not normally like this, you either have to get lucky in table assignment or heavily bribe the floormen to make sure you get the right table. "

You've said this before...but the change list is right there on the board and often longer than the wait list for an open seat. When a seat opens at the right table, the people on the change list pop up like gophers in wack a mole. I realize favoritism goes on but I don't think it's as bad as you say.

[Klepton]

actually it is...and before i was like jdock and was opposed to it, but...

i started talking to a chip runner, and i asked him how the 40 games were, he said there was only one really good game, and the rest were tight...he said he would lock up the good game for me and sat me down at a 20-40 to "relax" until it was open. i handed the guy 10 bucks.

ever since then whenever i see him he auto locks the good games whenever a seat opens up and comes to my table and tells me in my ear. naturally i hand him anbother 10 bucjks everytime, but think about it, for a 40-80 game, 1/8bb is well worth it.

last time i went i asked him about the 100-200 games, he told me to come on the weekends.

[jdock99]

In principle I am opposed to all the maneuvering that goes on with the table change lists and bribery, mainly because I would rather focus on playing poker and having a good time than having to devote all my energy scanning the games and trying to pick the right one and get into it, in other words I am lazy at heart and wish I did not have to deal with all the bs. And also, at some level I actually feel guilty that I am going to so much trouble just to take someone elses $$. However, unfortunately, like I am sure most of you, I am not independently wealthy and so I need to win (or at least come close) in order to play and so I am forced by this necessity to employ good table selection despite any philisophical misgivings I may have.

That being said, in practice I am guilty of both using table changes and bribery in order to achieve this end. What can I say, if you cannot beat them join them.

However, sometimes the situtation with the table change board and maneuvering can become quite comical. For example, sometime there will be 4 tables and there will be a name from each table for a change, but if the floorman asks if two of the players just want to switch tables, both players will vehemently say no. Not sure what is going on there. And sometimes when a seat opens up a chip will just magically appear in the seat that belongs to noone. Like Klepton alluded to earlier, this normally means a floorman/chip runner is first locking a seat and then going to one of their "favorite" players and asking them if they want the seat even if that player wasn't on the board and had no intention of going on it. There is more, but I am tired and I do not think anyone really cares anyways so I am going to end now.

[surfdoc]

[ QUOTE ]
you 6 bet me and im folding. no flop no drop so you give me a rebate of $2. deal?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds good in theory. In reality I think I will be the one needing a rebate from your luckbox quad flopping ass. Ugh.

[andyfox]

In my observation, there is now a big group of weak players in the 40-80, so there is a lot more benefit than ever before in making a table change. I can confirm what Klepton says, bribery works wonders at Commerce. It's a wise investment. The floormen generally don't know the rules for sh*t, but they have a memory like an elephant for anyone who tokes them.

A particularly comical event is when a new game is called down and a player from that new game is called to move to the main game as a must-move before the new game is actually spread. In theory, that player is not a "must move" and should post to receive a hand. The inviolable rule in practice is that tippers are allowed to enter the game as a must-move and non-tippers are simply new players who must post.

[Gabe]

nit.

[tpir90036]

I have played at card rooms where they use the next street rule... but the rule in most every place is that if it becomes HU before the cap is reached at any point, there is no cap and people can go to it.

[andyfox]

I've never seen it enforced that way at Commerce. Any time it becomes head up at any point in the hand, they go as many bets as they want.

And don't be surprised I got it wrong, if I was forced to recite the half-bet rule, I couldn't get it right. Seems like whenever it comes up and I want to raise I either add a full bet to the partial bet or complete the partial bet to a full bet and I'm always wrong. So I await your primer. Not real anxiously though. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
nit.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. It's "Mr. Anal Retentive Nit" to you.

~ Rick

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
I've never seen it enforced that way at Commerce. Any time it becomes head up at any point in the hand, they go as many bets as they want.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's possible the Ciaffone style capping rule was discarded (they wouldn't neccessarily publish the change in a new rulebook, it might be noted in the floor's daily log).

[ QUOTE ]
And don't be surprised I got it wrong, if I was forced to recite the half-bet rule, I couldn't get it right. Seems like whenever it comes up and I want to raise I either add a full bet to the partial bet or complete the partial bet to a full bet and I'm always wrong. So I await your primer. Not real anxiously though. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen a 30 year top section floorman get it wrong on a big pot so you are not alone. I'll check on any changes before writing up a primer/quiz.

~ Rick