[ScottD]

I stand corrected. It seems that this was a valid raise, as long as it was done in a sontinuous motion. I see the following rule in Robert's Rules of Poker:

"At non-tournament play, a player who says 'raise' is allowed to continue putting chips into the pot with more than one move; the wager is assumed complete when the player’s hands come to rest outside the pot area. (This rule is used because no-limit play may require a large number of chips be put into the pot.) In tournament play, the TDA rules require that the player either use a verbal statement giving the amount of the raise or put the chips into the pot in a single motion, to avoid making a string-bet."

My post was based on an incorrect (?) assumption that the player said raise, put out $100, waited, then put out more chips. According to my interpretation of Robert's Rules of Poker, this was a valid raise if it was done in a continuous motion.

However, it seems that the "spirit" of the rule is such that very large bets (that cannot be reasonably made in a single motion) can be placed without verbalizing your bet. In this case, the player only wanted to bet $200, which, unless he's playing with $1 chips, is a pretty easy bet to make in a single motion. However, there is no qualification in the rules of a "minimum bet size for multiple moves," so it appears to be a valid raise.

In any case, I still believe that the idea that a player "can go into his stack as many times as he wants until he is finished, at which point he either announces the total raise, the amount he is raising the original bet, or motions to the dealer and/or player that he's done raising" is incorrect. A player may not say "raise" then take as long as he wants to raise more chips (in multiple
moves from his stack) until he verbalizes the end of the bet or motions to the dealer and/or player. This would cause endless confusion, because no one would ever be sure who the action was on.