Ruling for discussion from Wynn

[MicroBob]

in a normal situation (i.e. - not in the blinds) the half-bet is the rule.

If I'm playing 15/30 and want to raise a $15 bet but accidentally throw only $20 out there then I'm ONLY allowed to call. I did not put out more than half of the raise so 'completing' the raise would be a string-bet.

If I throw $25 out there then I HAVE to raise. I have put out more than half so it is a raise. If I said "sorry...I only meant to call" then the floor ruling would be 'well, you put out more than half the raise, so now you are forced to complete the raise.'
I am NOT allowed to pull back the 2 extra-chips and just say it is a call. It's out there....it's more than half the amount of the raise...so it's a raise.


This rule is enforced ALL the time.

It helps prevent angle-shoots like:

"well...I didn't put out the FULL amount of the raise...so it isn't really a raise"

vs.

"well....it's obvious when I put the extra-chip out there that i MEANT to raise....so it isn't really a string-bet. I should be allowed to raise."


The half-bet thing really DOES have a purpose.
I see no reason why this should be any different in the blind situation.
Allowing the player to put out one chip at a time is just inviting angle-shoots. Saying that the half-bet rule doesn't apply if you're in the big-blind just isn't consistent.

I stand by my previous position that this is a terrible ruling by the floor (with the qualifier that I am significantly less experienced at B&M poker as most posters here).

[IceKing]

They key thing here is that there is no option to CALL in this situation. Thus only action you are doing when you throw chip/s in is raise.

[captswifty]

[ QUOTE ]
If I throw $25 out there then I HAVE to raise. I have put out more than half so it is a raise. If I said "sorry...I only meant to call" then the floor ruling would be 'well, you put out more than half the raise, so now you are forced to complete the raise.'

[/ QUOTE ]

You should be more clear. If that is a single $25 chip, then you have not raised. An oversized chip is a call unless the player announces raise before they put the chips in the pot. If it's multiple chips, then your action will most likely be considered a raise.

Relevant sections of Robert's Rules:

SECTION 3 - GENERAL POKER RULES - BETTING AND RAISING

14. Putting a full bet plus a half-bet or more into the pot is considered to be the same as announcing a raise, and the raise must be completed. (This does not apply in the use of a single chip of greater value.)

15. If you put a single chip in the pot that is larger than the bet, but do not announce a raise, you are assumed to have only called. Example: In a $3-$6 game, when a player bets $6 and the next player puts a $25 chip in the pot without saying anything, that player has merely called the $6 bet.

[MicroBob]

right.
i neglected that part.

When i said "puts $25 out there" I should have said "puts 5 red-chips out there". Obviously putting 1 green-chip out there makes it different.

[ QUOTE ]

They key thing here is that there is no option to CALL in this situation. Thus only action you are doing when you throw chip/s in is raise.

[/ QUOTE ]



I don't have robert's rules of poker or anything like that (but would be interested in getting it) but I have not seen anyone mention any kind of 'exceptions when check or raise are the only options'.
Since there are no exceptions listed I would assume it applies to all situations...including in the blinds.

There is a certain amount of sense to the idea that an exception could/should be made in such a situation. But since it is not covered I think you have to go with the default rule to prevent angle-shoots.

These are the rules that EVERYONE is working with.
Are they going to make an exception for the next guy in the BB who does the same thing (puts one chip out there) and THEN says he didn't mean to raise...and it doesn't count as a raise anyway since it was less than half the raise.
If you now rule AGAINST him then doesn't he get to protest and say "what?!?! now you're saying the half-bet rule DOESN'T apply?!?!"

the rules need to be uniform.
If there had already been an exception about 'since he has only 2 options in the big-blind' then fine. But there isn't one.


Also - they COULD have made the rule that if you put ANY chips out there beyond the amount of the call that it would count as a raise. But they didn't do that...they made the half-bet cut-off.
It gets enforced all the time.
8/16 game and some guy bets 8 and the next guy is drunk and puts out 11 instead of 16 (can easily happen....he puts out 2 red and a single instead of 3 red and a single). If he didn't declare raise as he did this then the ruling should be that it's less than half...so he can't raise now (or else it would be a string bet).
If he puts out 12 (2 red and 2 singles instead of 3 red and a single) then he is raising since he put out exactly half the amount of the raise.


They have these rules in place to help alleviate confusion.
Changing it up because of 'intent' or because 'he doesn't have as many options here anyway' or just because they 'felt like changing it for this situation' isn't consistent and causes problems.

[captswifty]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have robert's rules of poker or anything like that (but would be interested in getting it)

[/ QUOTE ]

It's available at http://www.pokercoach.us/

[IceKing]

There are many different situations in B&M, that may at first look/sound same, but they arent. Thats why you cant always go by the book, infact there really isnt a rule for everything in rulebooks. Usually most stupid rulings are made by people, who read the rulebook, enforce it, but dont have enough understanding or experience of B&M poker.

[Budget Boy]

I can't believe the floor ruled that way. I've seen that happen a million times where someone doesn't put at least half out, and every single time it has been ruled a call. This one isn't even debatable, clearly not a raise.

[Maura]

It's the lack of a verbal declaration that causes all the confusion.

Why is it so hard to simply say "Raise" ?

~Maura

[IceKing]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't believe the floor ruled that way. I've seen that happen a million times where someone doesn't put at least half out, and every single time it has been ruled a call. This one isn't even debatable, clearly not a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

How could have this been ruled as a call, if there is no option to call? This one can be ruled both ways, debending where do you play, whos the floor etc. But I wouldnt say this was a horrible ruling.

Like Maura said, these things would never happen, if people would make clear actions, by verbal declarations or just putting the right amount out. And we would avoid many bad situations, if players paid freaking ATTENTION and would FOLLOW whats f...ing happening at the table. Its not that hard. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]