NLH Decision – “more angles than a protractor!” - Page 3

Rick Nebiolo · #21 10-12-2005, 05:47 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The ruling should be a call and it's not even close Rick.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you think I'd disagree? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

~ Rick

Photoc · #22 10-12-2005, 05:51 AM

Randy, I believe the ruling was correct as well. I'm glad the angle shooter got what he deserved. Although he could have used a nice swift kick in the nuts by Capone. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

This is where I find Cali vs Vegas much different...

[ QUOTE ]
Normally in NL you can return for your stack for more chips;

[/ QUOTE ]

In Vegas rooms, I'm not aware of one that will allow this. You either have to state the amount or more all the chips out in on shot. No returning to the stack as that was causing angle shots between bettor and possible callers. I dont need to go into that much, I'm sure most of you can figure that part out.

On a side note, I had something similar happen to me at MGM.
Story: 1/2 NL with a betting line. Rule had just been changed to whatever you cut out is a bet, not whatever is in your hand is a bet, over the line. Well, I had top 2 pair and was about to bet 50, so being the dealer I am, I took a stack out, started to cut and had dropped 25 (5 chips) and the other guy shouts CALL!! So i take my hand out and he tries to tell the dealer that now everything in my hand was a bet. The dealer stated the rule and it was an obvious angle shot as he just hit trips and was a giant tell that he coulnd't wait for me to get that entire hundred over the line. I almost called Al to come kick him in the nuts for trying to shoot an angle. I just told him to learn to the rules and go in turn before he screws himself out of more $ again.

Randy_Refeld · #23 10-12-2005, 05:52 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Acting on a hand out of turn is not binding, but deliberately acting out of turn will not be tolerated."

[/ QUOTE ]

I would rewrite this to read "Action out of turn may be binding."

I am not big on rulebooks and this is why. If this guy gets this rule book he is going to point at that and say "see, it says right there action out of turn is not binding" while ignore the part about it not being tolerated adn the part where the floorman will rule in the interest of fairness etc.

Photoc · #24 10-12-2005, 05:56 AM

One thing that these players seem to forget also..."Managers decision is FINAL". Go bitch to whomever you want and try to get it changed, floorperson ruled, it's over. Hopefully they make the correct decision.

Randy_Refeld · #25 10-12-2005, 06:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]
In Vegas rooms, I'm not aware of one that will allow this. You either have to state the amount or more all the chips out in on shot. No returning to the stack as that was causing angle shots between bettor and possible callers. I dont need to go into that much, I'm sure most of you can figure that part out.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a new devolopment in Vegas. From 1999-2001 I was involved in spreading the only small stakes NL game in town. Some other places tried to spread the game, but one of the things the regular palyers didn't like about other palces is they just didn't know the rules (continuous action and what reopens betting they jsut couldnt' get right other places).

I haven't been there in ages, but I would be very suprised if the big games they sometimes spread at Bellagio don't have a continuous motion rule.

I know a lot of poeple like RObert's Rules of Poker so here is what he says about it
[ QUOTE ]
6. 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thikn a lot of the confusion comes from teh TDA mandating a limit rule for NL tournaments. At the time I was in favor of that TDA rule becasue most people playing touranments had never seen a live NL game. With NL becoming popular as a cash game I see no reason to play NL tournaments by limit rules.

edit to add: I know the above applies to raising, I see no reason that the same should not be true betting. Put your bet in in a continuous motion.

Rick Nebiolo · #26 10-12-2005, 06:18 AM

[ QUOTE ]
One thing that these players seem to forget also..."Managers decision is FINAL". Go bitch to whomever you want and try to get it changed, floorperson ruled, it's over. Hopefully they make the correct decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought I was the only one who burns midnight oil.

As far as I could tell Player B wasn't asking that the decision be changed; rather, he wanted to be proved right.

~ Rick

Photoc · #27 10-12-2005, 06:19 AM

I, for one, am a proponent of the single motion rule. So many players are new to NL nowadays, that it decreses confusion amoung the other players that have probably only played limit before. For those that do play often, this seems to be the same rule that they are all used to because they're all quick to chime in when someone goes back for more after saying raise, lol. Even if they aren't in the hand. I always get a good laugh out of this.

Randy_Refeld · #28 10-12-2005, 06:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I could tell Player B wasn't asking that the decision be changed; rather, he wanted to be proved right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe today he will play and someone's out of turn action will be ruled non-binding to his detriment.

Rick Nebiolo · #29 10-12-2005, 06:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Acting on a hand out of turn is not binding, but deliberately acting out of turn will not be tolerated."

[/ QUOTE ]

I would rewrite this to read "Action out of turn may be binding."

I am not big on rulebooks and this is why. If this guy gets this rule book he is going to point at that and say "see, it says right there action out of turn is not binding" while ignore the part about it not being tolerated adn the part where the floorman will rule in the interest of fairness etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

No problem with your revised wording.

Player B actually wasn't going around waving a rulebook. He was mostly reciting his understanding of the rules from memory.

In LA, the only club that seems to have rulebooks readily available is Commerce but they are sort of hidden behind hotel information at the concierge's desk [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

~ Rick

Rick Nebiolo · #30 10-12-2005, 06:33 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Randy, I believe the ruling was correct as well. I'm glad the angle shooter got what he deserved. Although he could have used a nice swift kick in the nuts by Capone. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

This is where I find Cali vs Vegas much different...

[ QUOTE ]
Normally in NL you can return for your stack for more chips;

[/ QUOTE ]

In Vegas rooms, I'm not aware of one that will allow this. You either have to state the amount or more all the chips out in on shot. No returning to the stack as that was causing angle shots between bettor and possible callers. I dont need to go into that much, I'm sure most of you can figure that part out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that this is the better way. Either put it out all at once or clearly state your bet. That said, with a hundred different languages spoken in a noisy casino nothing is "clearly stated".

~ Rick