question on declared action

[maxpowers21]

I had a very interesting situation that occured at a 5-150 spread limit-holdem game at Casino Arizona.

It was heads up, checked to me on the river. I declared raise. My opponet said: "i call whatever he raises". I then proceded to raise to $150 , the maximum bet, then she thought for a minute and folded. I immediately asked for the floor because after i made my declared action: "raise", she said "call whatever the raise is"

The floor-lady then told me that her action was not binding because i had not declared what the amount of the raise was therefore my action was not completed, therefore her saying that she would call any raise was not action.

I was extremly angry with this decision, because I had the nuts and would've made $150 from this action. Also, in any limit game if someone says "raise" and the next person to act says "call" it is binding.

Thoughts from you guys? I am very reluctant to ever play this spread game again because of the seemingly subjectivity of some of the rulings, but am i just over reacting; what is this ruling in other cardrooms?

Would you agree her action to be binding, or no action was made?

[dicelumpY2005]

That should have been a forced call...without a doubt in my mind. In a 5-150 spread limit game, the opponant should be prepared to call the max bet just for making a stupid declaration. It works both ways, also...if your hand was marginal, you could have thrown a nickel out there... but in this instance, the floor should have forced your opponant to call whatever you wanted to put out there. It was some kind of shot that was taken and she got away with it...

[FouTight]

thats definately an angle shoot.

She was trying to get you to bet small by saying she was callnig anything, then when you continued to bet big anyways, folded. Thats serious BS, and I agree, she should have been forced to call.

[IceKing]

This action is binding. Unfortunately, this isnt the case in every cardroom. Because of lousy dealers and incompetent floor, some rooms are practically ruled by players. No rules are enforced, angle shooters and others just acting stupid can do whatever they will. Welcome to the jungle.

[Chipr777]

The action is most definatly binding. Whoever voted no is a complete moron.

[Seether]

The only reason I can see why the floor made the decision is since your action was not complete, and she was acting out of turn, and actions made out of turn are not considered binding. At casino arizona it seems like stuff like this happens all the time, i.e person doesnt notice its a kill pot, puts money in, realizes it is a kill pot and can take their money out.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
At casino arizona it seems like stuff like this happens all the time, i.e person doesnt notice its a kill pot, puts money in, realizes it is a kill pot and can take their money out.

[/ QUOTE ]

He should be forced to put his money into the pot in this case too. I think floor people need to start enforcing stuff like this. If a player screws up, the player screws up. It's better that he learns how to pay attention to the game and properly act before going to another casino that is less forgiving.

[jrobb83]

As I told you last night, this decision was indeed terrible and the lady was making an obscenely obvious angle-shoot. BTW, when everyone checks to you you are allowed to "bet," not "raise." [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
I am very reluctant to ever play this spread game again because of the seemingly subjectivity of some of the rulings

[/ QUOTE ]

I would be reluctant ever to play in this game again because the structure sucks, I'm not good at nl, and there is a beautiful 20/40 game going 10 ft away... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[maxpowers21]

Sorry jrobb, she actually bet into me about $25 on the river... so it wasn't checked to me ont he river.. just had a brain fart there.

[maxpowers21]

The action was actually, 3 players to see the flop, AKx 2 diamonds. i was on the button 2-handed with K9s of diamonds. I bet about a pot sized-bet around 15-20$ on the flop when checked to me, 1 fold, she quickly calls in the SB. Turn is x-rag with no diamond, she checks.

She is quietly looking down at her cards.
Looks like she wants me to bet ie.. weak means strong tell. I check behind for 3 reasons:

1. my hand is probably not good here if i get called with 2nd pair.
2. If I hit my draw on the river I will probably get paid off more after showing weakness on the turn.
3. Avoid getting checkraised against a strong hand.

Flame me if this is a bad check.

So i check the turn:

Approxiametly $50-$60 in the pot.

River come the Jack of diamonds, i have the nuts.

she bets $25 into me on the river. For this type of game, it seemed to me very quickly that people rarely bluff into opponets on the river, I noticed some small bluffish plays when people are on the button and action is getting checked around, but no bluffing into aggresion.

Then i paused for a moment thinking about how much to raise, i wanted to raise around twice her bet, around $40-$50, is this a good amount?

I think I would make more on this type of raise more so then a big raise in this type of game. People just seemed to rarely bet teh max $150 without the nuts.

Anyways what do you guys think about the action?
Thoughts?

After the huge debate, she folded and mucked, i did not get teh call i wanted, she told me she originally had flopped 2-pair but who knows. I feel cheated both ways out of the $150, or if i had known it wasn't action, at least a $40-$50 call.

Oh well, at least I know now to call the floor the instance that my opponet says something like that to get a ruling before i complete the raise.