[EasilyFound]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The out-of-turn is binding only if the interveing player folds. In that situation, there is no valid reason to allow Player 3 to change his mind. His call, out of turn, reveals his intent to call the all-in if nobody else had called or raised before him. So when the intervening player folds, you should make the verbal declaration out of turn binding.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I can think of a scenario where the players out of turn action didn't indicate an intent to call if there was no call or raise before him. Suppose that that player two is thinking about his action, and says something which is misheard by player 3. Player 3 mistakenly believes that player two has called. Player three had decided that if player 2 had called he would call because of the pot odds, but he would not call if player 2 folded. Player three announces his call thinking Player 2 had called. Now player two says hey I didn't act yet. This is particularly prone to happen if there is a player sitting between player 2 and player three who is already out of the hand

[/ QUOTE ]

You are correct. I didn't think about the hypothetical that you posited.

Your hypothetical reveals why there shouldn't be an iron-clad rule. As soon as you create a rule, someone can think of a situation where the rule might not apply.

It is much more important to think about the reasons why acting out of turn is prohibited, and to impose a solution that is consistent with those reasons.

In a home game, a person will almost always act out of turn by mistake. They are not trying to gain a tactial advantage or shoot an angle. They forget someone else is supposed to act or they think that the intervening player has acted in a particular way (the hypothetical you posit).

In these situations, the solution to the problem is to do the best that you can to play the hand the way it would have been played if everyone had acted in turn.

So in the hypothetical at the top of this thread, that would mean that the call is binding if the intervening player folded.

In psandman's hypoethetical, I think you should make that action binding. The intervening player pretty much knows now that the out of turn player has no intent to raise. And there is no reason for the out of turn player to raise after calling out of turn, unless he's attempting to influence the action of player 2. Once player 2 knows player 3's intent, there really is no way to have the hand play out according to how it would have played out if everyone had acted in turn. So you should just make the out of turn call binding. Any other ruling opens the door to cheating.