Re: Ruling please
[ QUOTE ]
The flop came 7Q7, and the SB then goes to say that the CO never called his "re-raise." The SB re-raised the CO, but did not say anything, and even allowed the flop to proceed when asked if ok. Whats the ruling of the hand here? The SB placed chips in the pot unannouced after being raised, so is that a raise under the "any chip in the pot pf not said to be a raise is a call" princple, or is the SB right in his claim he should just get the hand outright?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't follow. Did the Sb put in one oversized chip? If so he called the original raise and there's no problem. If he put multiple chips in, then the principle you cite is inapplicable--when you put in more than one chip that is the size of your bet and you do not have to say raise.
Assuming he put in multiple chips that would comprise a legitimate raise, I don't see a rule that covers this situation in Robert's Rules of poker. The idea that SB automatically wins the pot is ridiculous, however.
IMO you could go one of three ways here. 1. Allow the CO, (who has now seen the flop) to complete the PF action and either call the SB's raise or fold and then continue with the flop action if he calls--(Sb can check or bet then action on Co).
2. You can proceed as normally except that Co will have to match the PF raise in addition to any other action when its his turn--so if Sb checks Co cannot check behind but must match the PF raise. If Sb checks and Co wishes to bet he must put in the PF call plus his bet and SB just has to match the bet and not the PF call. If Sb bets out, and Co calls or raises he must call or raise plus put in the PF call.
3. The Sb gets his raise back before action proceeds on the flop.
I like number three. Mistakes happen, and this was one of them. Number three does the least violence to the proper action of the rest of the hand.
In either one or two, the the CO can simply fold and the Sb loses any benefit from his PF raise. Too bad for him.
--Zetack
|