NLH Decision – “more angles than a protractor!”

[Randy_Refeld]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the house rule is that chips that cross one's cards have been wagered (e.g. if I bring 10 chips in front of my cards in my hand, I must bet all 10), then Player A's bet is however many chips he has in his hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Having this rule in a NL game is a very poor game structure. IN a case like this the player puts soime chips out and returns the rest to his stack. How would you suggest we determine how many were in his hand?

Normally in NL you can return for your stack for more chips; however, with the rapid growth of NL poker there are a lot of people both playing and working in poker rooms that are unfamiliar NL rules and procedures.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not advocating for the rule you quoted, and I agree it is problematic for deeper stacked NL games. I simply stated that IF it is the rule in effect (and I have often seen that exact rule enforced), then that is the way the ruling should go. Point being is that even if the rules suck, they must be enforced.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know as of spring 2002 the NL rules in most (or all) of LA county were the standard return to your stack as many times as you like in NL (I knew this and won a bet with an inexperienced floorman at the club I worked in). The problem even places that have the traditional NL rules might not know what the rules are because until jsut a coupel years ago NL was very rare and the staff becasme familiar with limit rules.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
When people start shooting angles, I think the best thing to do is to instantly get right to the letter of the rules and begin enforcing it. Also, I am assuming this is a heads-up affair.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was head up.


[ QUOTE ]
If the house rule is that chips that cross one's cards have been wagered (e.g. if I bring 10 chips in front of my cards in my hand, I must bet all 10), then Player A's bet is however many chips he has in his hand. Player B announced call when this bet was made (doesn't matter that the chips hadn't been cut... they'd crossed "the line"), so Player B must call and cannot raise.

If the House rule is that a bet is made when chips hit the felt in front of one's cards, then the bet is $50 plus however much Player A wants to wager from the remaining chips in his hand. If Player A started with 20 $5 chips in his hand, he can bet up to $100 in all... it is his action and he doesn't have to stop making his bet/putting chips on the felt just because Player B said something. So however much Player A bets, Player B must call. Player B may not raise and he may not fold. To hold Player B to any other standard would not only encourage but reward players acting out of turn. In big bet poker, acting out of turn can have a massive impact on how betting unfolds, as we see in your example. In a limit game, among casual players, Player B might be able to raise since the increment is only 1BB and it is possible the out of turn declaration was an honest mistake. Nonetheless, this is big bet poker, and Player A's action must be protected.

[/ QUOTE ]

The "house rule" (more or less) for NL is a bet or raise isn't a bet/raise until it's released into the pot or in the case of several stacks the player's hands come to rest after pushing them in in rhythm. Of course with inexperienced players (i.e., most of the player base these days) we see the type of betting described in my lead post and many players calling or raising before players release. It does cause problems (which I hope to address later - I'm on the way out).

~ Rick

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok so im kinda confused on the whole in one motion thing. I know that in limit, you must make one forward motion with all the chips to raise someone, or verbally declare a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

My observation is that much of the player base is confused. In the past NL used to be played by experienced players. That isn't true today and IMHO the rules need a bit of a tuneup. I'll try to get back on this later.

~ Rick

[AngusThermopyle]

If you allow his "call" to be ignored and let him raise, you would have to let another player say "call" in a similar situation and then muck without calling (say if the bettor continued and put a huge bet in).
If the second situation is not tolerable, then you cannot allow him to rescind his "call" and raise instead.

[IceKing]

Player B acted out of turn and that affected on player A. Player B shouldnt be rewarded for this(maybe punished by Al[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]). Call stands. End of action. Showdown.

In big bet poker it is very important to make sure what kind of bet/raise your opponent is making before acting. Trying to act too quickly will bring you nothing but trouble.

[Lawrence Ng]

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

Lawrence

[Ulysses]

As usual, I agree w/ Randy's ruling and reasoning here.

[TiK]

I think that player B's stating "Call" was not out of turn, being that "there [was] a brief dispute regarding how many chips were cut off." I'm assuming the dispute was over how many chips Player A had released when player B stated "call." Therefore, Player A's action ended when Player B said call, thus I would rule that the call stands. Action ended when player A stopped cutting chips, which is also when Player B said call.

[IceKing]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that player B's stating "Call" was not out of turn, being that "there [was] a brief dispute regarding how many chips were cut off." I'm assuming the dispute was over how many chips Player A had released when player B stated "call." Therefore, Player A's action ended when Player B said call, thus I would rule that the call stands. Action ended when player A stopped cutting chips, which is also when Player B said call.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can not end somebody elses action by stating call. There for your reasoning is a bit strange. You came up with the right ruling thou.

[Rick Nebiolo]

.....nailed it. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

The Floorman first listened to the dealer then Player B who made it very clear that he knew he acted out of turn when he said "call". Player B then indicated that since his action was out of turn he could raise all-in since "verbal action out of turn is not binding".

At this point there was a little confusion as to how much had to be left in the pot by Player A. Player A wanted to retrieve all but the $10 minimum bet. After conferring with other players the Floorman ruled that $50 hat been placed in the pot at the time Player A stopped cutting chips. So he ruled that Player A's bet of $50 stood.

The Floor then ruled that deliberately acting out of turn was not proper and that Player B could only call, this being in the best interest of the game. Player B had an under-full and won the pot. Most of us thought this was a good decision.

As the game resumed Player B took an "out" button and went to the Lead Floor, the Shift Manager, the Poker Manager, and at least one well-known top section player to plead his case. When he finally returned to the table and continued to debate it, I told him I'd write up the incident and post it on the Internet for expert analysis. He gave me his email so I could send him a link but unfortunately I can't decode the last two characters in the main body of the address (three emails bounced so far [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] ) so we won't get his input.

The actual rulebook isn't quite as clear on this as I thought (I have an electronic copy on my hard drive). I couldn't find a passage that says "verbal action out of turn MAY be binding" as Randy noted but there is a section that states the following:

"13. A verbal statement denotes your action and is binding. If, when it is your turn, you verbally declare a fold, check, bet, call, or raise, you are forced to take that action.

14. Players must act on their hands in turn. Rapping the table in turn constitutes a pass. Acting on a hand out of turn is not binding, but deliberately acting out of turn will not be tolerated."

I think this is sufficient to make the proper ruling.

~ Rick


PS Note that this situation is somewhat similar to a heads up hand between Charlie (Charles?) Shoten and Noli Francisco at a WPT final table a few years back and discussed in detail somewhere in the nearly impossible to search archives of this forum.

Here's a quick recap from my failing [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] memory: Shoten bet, Noli said “raise” and was stacking off behind his cards using the normal procedure. Shoten said “call” before Noli’s raise was pushed forward. Since Noli was bluff raising, he asked if he could raise the minimum (this was allowed). Shoten’s call stood and Shoten won the pot.

Some people wondered had Noli pushed his entire stack (had he had a big hand) would Shoten’s verbal out of turn call have to stand (I would think not). Others wondered if Shoten could reraise or fold had Noli pushed in the planned raise (I would think so, but it bothers me a little when used against inexperienced players).