Can we please start using the word "reraise" correctly?

[slogger]

It's a problem when discussing hands in general, but it seems to me that the 1-table tourney forum suffers from an epidemic of referring to bets as raises, and even moreso, referring to raises as reraises (this is most distrubing because it often comes from some of the better SnG players we have here).

Maybe I'm nit-picking a little, but this board contains some fairly advanced and impressive poker discussion and I think we do a disservice to any less experienced players AND ourselves by using terminology that is not technically correct.

E.g., 10+1 (Party): 8-handed (blinds are 15-30), Hero [Kh Kd] raises to 90, Button calls, BB calls. Flop: Ks Jc 7d.

BB bets (NOT raises) 100, Hero raises (NOT reraises) to 300, Button folds, BB REraises (correct!) all-in..., etc.

My apologies if anyone thinks I'm wasting bandwidth, but I've gained so much from these boards that I feel an obligation to help maintain a certain standard of accuracy in our posts.

Keep up the great posts and play well! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Sam T.]

Is some of this a function of Bison's hand converter? It may be tough to teach the finer points of poker language to a bot.

Question on the first example:
[ QUOTE ]
10+1 (Party): 8-handed (blinds are 15-30), Hero [Kh Kd] raises to 90, Button calls, BB calls. Flop: Ks Jc 7d.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that here the Hero is betting, not raising? I considered the blinds to be a forced bet.

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
Is some of this a function of Bison's hand converter? It may be tough to teach the finer points of poker language to a bot.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, bisonbison's converter doesn't use the re-raise terminology, it uses "bet", "raise", "3-bet" and "cap". (I'm not sure if it handles betting past 3 raises.) I think he's just talking about written hand histories.

[ QUOTE ]

Question on the first example:
[ QUOTE ]
10+1 (Party): 8-handed (blinds are 15-30), Hero [Kh Kd] raises to 90, Button calls, BB calls. Flop: Ks Jc 7d.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that here the Hero is betting, not raising? I considered the blinds to be a forced bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I think he's saying that is correct. He takes issue with the second line:

[ QUOTE ]
BB bets (NOT raises) 100, Hero raises (NOT reraises) to 300, Button folds, BB REraises (correct!) all-in..., etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

edit: verified bisonbison's hand converter logic

[slogger]

No, I was just laying out a preflop scenario that would set up a sequence on the flop with a bet, a raise and a reraise.

As you note, the blind is a forced bet and Hero raises to 90. My apologies for the confusion.

Also, addressing the point about bison's converter, I wouldn't have brought this point up if it only appeared in formats that were clearly spit out by a computer. This is something that it seems a high percentage of posters have allowed to slip into their narrative descriptions of various situations over the course of a hand.

[slogger]

n/m

[CountDuckula]

Agreed; I know exactly what you're talking about. Earlier, I read one account in which the poster claimed that the first player to do anything other than call or fold had "reraised", and I stopped in confusion and read through the action again to see where I had missed the first raise (I hadn't).

-Mike

[BradleyT]

your definately write, it happens alot!

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
your definately write, it happens alot!

[/ QUOTE ]

Well done. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[t_perkin]

I can see what you are saying. But I can't think of many situations where it is really all that confusing.
I have long argued for a (Machine readable) standard poker notation/format. But good luck to you on that one.

Tim

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm nit-picking a little

[/ QUOTE ]

Nit-picking is a two-edged sword! /images/graemlins/grin.gif



From Daniel Kimberg's Poker Dictionary ( link (http://www.seriouspoker.com/dictionary.html#rack)):

[ QUOTE ]
Re-raise:

Any raise after the first raise in a round. Player A bets, player B raises, player C (or A) re-raises.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, I believe what you say is a bit inaccurate (according to Kimberg). First, it comes from the fact that we don't have a standard way to describe the first "bet" in a round, if it was folded to the player, and he didn't simply call.
Second, if you imply that the use of "reraise" is correct only if the action went back to the original bettor, who is now "reraising", than you are wrong (again, according to Kimberg), since ANY raise, that follows the inital raise, is a "reraise".

You wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
E.g., 10+1 (Party): 8-handed (blinds are 15-30), Hero [Kh Kd] raises to 90, Button calls, BB calls. Flop: Ks Jc 7d.


[/ QUOTE ]

Was it folded to Hero here? If so, I'm not sure the correct term here is "raises to 90". It could be "bets 90". This is debatable.

However, after the flop:

[ QUOTE ]
BB bets (NOT raises) 100, Hero raises (NOT reraises) to 300, Button folds, BB REraises (correct!) all-in..., etc.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you've used "raised 90" for the pre-flop play, why do you use "BB bets 100" here, instead of "BB raises to 100"? He's the first to act on this round, and he certainly isn't calling. If you do use "raise" for his action, then Hero's action is indeed a "reraise", as opposed to what you say. Otherwise (if BB only "bets"), then Hero's move is a "raise", but if button here raised 300 more, instead of folding, then his action would be described as "reraised to 600".

So, your example is quite confusing, in context of what you're trying to say here. And, if we take Kimberg's definition, it looks to me that "reraise" is usually used here in the correct manner.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[slogger]

[ QUOTE ]
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, here goes:

The reason you're misunderstanding my example is because I made the mistake of setting up a hand from the beginning without noting the likely source of people's misuse of the word "re-raise." I wrote out the hand including preflop and flop action using the correct terminology for all bets, but didn't mention that the first "voluntary" bet before the flop is different from the first bet on the flop (preflop, the big blind makes a forced bet; I haven't seen too many hold'em hands get started without this happening, so I took it for granted that you would assume that; maybe my sarcasm meter needs new batteries /images/graemlins/tongue.gif).

Preflop: the blinds are the first "bets," which all players not in the blinds must either "call" or "raise" if they are going to play the hand. If the blind is 30, then we can say that the "bet" on this round is 30. The next person to put out 30 will have made a "call." If another player puts out 60, it is called a "raise." He called the original bet and "raised" the amount required to play to a higher number of chips. It is only now that a player may be said to "re-raise." As many would gather from the prefix "re-" (even without the esteemed Mr. Kimberg's lexicon), something must be done before it can be re-done.

The Flop (and all future streets): As you are well aware, on these streets, there is no forced bet. The first player may "check" (keep his hand without putting any more chips in) or "bet" (put more chips in). After one player has "bet," the next player who desires to keep his cards has two choices: "call" (discussed above) or "raise." This player cannot re-raise because there has not yet been a first raise (see discussion of prefix "re-" above). Once one player has bet, and then another player has raised, a third player OR the initial bettor (I'm clear on the fact that it can be either) has two options if he would like to keep his cards: call the "raise" or "re-raise" (i.e., raise a previous raise).

If you want to really split hairs, you could drone on about how the word "re-raise" is actually unecessary to begin with because we could just call it another raise (or a second raise) when someone re-raises. But the point is that the first bet on all streets from Flop to River is NOT a "raise" and the first bet on such streets that is larger than a earlier bet on said street is not a "re-raise."

Have a nice evening!

[PrayingMantis]

Nice post! You are correct of course. Sorry for re-nit-picking... /images/graemlins/grin.gif, but I really wasn't sure what exactly do you mean.

I'll make sure I'm using "reraise" only in the proper places. Yes, english is tough...

[MaqEvil]

Yeah, this annoys me too, there are a lot of people at the cardroom who announce "reraise" when putting out the first raise.

[ohgeetee]

I wonder if they think its a raise if they put in more than min bet in a no limit game or something? I too find it curious and sometimes frustrating to reread the action when its misused, but there has to be some sort of logical explanation for this, right?

If not, I guess we can just chalk one up to another "Innernat" victory.