PokerTDA
POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Suggestions for new TDA rules and amendments to existing rules READ-ONLY ARCHIVES Pre-2015 Summit => Topic started by: MikeB on March 30, 2014, 11:53:34 AM
-
A player recently inquired about a ruling he received where he used the word "pass". The house ruled he had folded, even though he intended just to check.
The term "pass" was considered for inclusion in Rule 3 "Official Betting Terms" at the 2011 TDA Summit but was not approved.
Any change in status?
-
Mike,
We have discussed this at great length on earlier posts. My feelings have never changed...pass is, and always will be, accepted (and understood) wherever I've played, whether in a casino or a house game. The word is used in rule books and certainly in any draw game. I'll take a look back and I'm sure I can find some of our interesting discussions on this subject.
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=557.0
-
Here's how RROP defines it:
PASS: (1) Decline to bet. In a pass-and-out game, this differs from a check, because a player who passes must fold. (2) Decline to call a wager, at which point you must discard your hand and have no further interest in the pot.
I've already heard from some who say "it's definitely a check when facing no action", however notice that RRoP says "it differs from a check"... i.e. he only applies it in a bet or fold game. Then if you're facing action (option 2), he calls it a fold.
So far we have at least 4 meanings for pass: 1) check if no action; 2) fold if no action (what the "complainer" experienced from a major European venue); 3) fold if in a bet or fold game, or 4) fold when facing action...
....it's this plethora of different or situational meanings that we ran into when discussing it in 2011. From memory that's why it didn't get included in Rule 3....
-
Mike,
What about the reference in RR about taping the table is a pass? While we're on the subject, how did "complete" make the list?
-
Re: "I'll complete the bet"....
Per RRoP: COMPLETE THE BET: To increase an all-in bet or forced bet to a full bet in limit poker.
...made it because it's a certain unmistakable action in games where completion is allowed.
-
Mike,
What about the reference in RR about taping the table is a pass? While we're on the subject, how did "complete" make the list?
There's no doubt that the term is out there. It will be interesting to see if it's adopted. The way the language reads now, "pass" is not eliminated from consideration, it just isn't specifically mentioned. I do think there's enough confusion about it that if it is specifically included it may need to be defined, perhaps in the Illustration Addendum so space isn't taken up in the rules themselves.
-
Mike,
In your "complete the bet" example...the word "call" is sufficient. *This is incorrect and I've addressed it on later posts on this thread.That's why I've never heard the word complete used in any game I've ever played in...never!
The word pass: When playing a game calling for openers (Jacks or better), after the initial deal, the action begins. Each player is asked, clockwise from the dealer, if they have openers...at this point players pass when they chose not to open the betting. They are not out, and they will have all options open to them (call, raise, or pass/fold) if another player opens, and they decide to participate.
I also think we should consider gestures, also. Rapping the table, for example, when it's your turn to act has always been accepted as a check (or pass) in any game. What do you think?
-
Call is not sufficient. Completion is a form of a raise. I definitely agree that it's not heard that much; in large part because it's only used in limit games., there's no option to complete a bet in NL or PL... but when it is used the action is unmistakable.
Gestures should be considered IMO.
-
In your "complete the bet" example...the word "call" is sufficient. That's why I've never heard the word complete used in any game I've ever played in...never!
Hey Nick,
Where I'm at, in MN, no-limit cash games are not legal. So our cash games are all fixed limit or spread limit. 'Complete' gets used quite a bit. It also gets used quite a bit in stud.
-
Tristan,
Sorry but I never heard it. I also can not agree with Mike when he said "complete" is a form of a raise.
-
So, in $2/$4 stud, if Player A has the low card and brings it in for $1 and Player B says "complete to $2", what is it if not a raise?
Another example:
$2/$4 limit hold'em. On the turn Player A bets $4, Player B goes all-in for $5. Player C wants to raise...the dealer, correctly, informs Player C that since Player B's all-in was less than half of a raise, all Player C can do is call or complete the bet to $8. Player C decides to complete it to $8. You don't view that as a raising action?
-
Tristan,
Both of your examples are different situations in two different games. In Stud completing the bring-in to the min bet is never considered to be a raise...never. It is the first bet and is never considered in the equation as a raise. Completing the bring-in to the minimum bet is never considered for the three raise limit for most stud games. I'll stand by my answer for stud...completing the bring-in is not a raise.
Your limit holdem example is far different. so your answer is correct. If your all-in player had $6 instead of $5, completing the bet would not be possible. By the way, when the player announced raise the dealer could not inform Player C that the all-in was less than half the required bet. The player is committed to making it $8 because verbal is binding.
-
Tristan,
Both of your examples are different situations in two different games. In Stud completing the bring-in to the min bet is never considered to be a raise...never. It is the first bet and is never considered in the equation as a raise. Completing the bring-in to the minimum bet is never considered for the three raise limit for most stud games. I'll stand by my answer for stud...completing the bring-in is not a raise.
Hi Nick: well, these are semantics. A completion is certainly not a call. So if it's not a call, and you insist it's not a raise then... what is it :)
Here's how one source describes the bring-in and first-round betting options:
Assuming the player who brings the hand in does do so for the minimum [the bring-in], the next player to act (action, as in all forms of poker, moves in a clockwise direction) may choose to fold, call the minimum bet, or "raise" by "completing" the bet. For example, in the $3-$6 game [with a $1 bring-in on the low upcard on the initial deal] the first raiser would increase the bet from $1 to $3, a raise of only $2. Any further raises during this round would be in normal $3 increments.
I think the semantics are that if a first round player completes the bring-in (in the above example, from $1 to a total of $3), there are still 3 raises open, yes? So in that sense it doesn't count as a raise towards the maximum number of raises for a betting round. But it's still not a call of the $1 bring-in, so saying "call" to a $1 bring in is not the same as saying 'complete". From RRoP, Section 8: 7 Card Stud, Para 6: Increasing the amount wagered by the opening forced bet up to a full bet does not count as a raise, but merely as a completion of the bet. For example: In $15-$30 stud, the lowcard opens for $5. If the next player increases the bet to $15 (completes the bet), up to three raises are then allowed when using a three-raise limit.
Note the semantics there... it's an "increase" of the bet. So there's yet a third term: we have a call, we have a raise, and now an "increase" :)
What is really important is that the terms used in TDA Rule 3 be unmistakable. That's why there is a minimum of them. Interesting that we say a pass is a check when facing no bet, but a fold when facing a bet. So we are using the "higher" more unmistakable terms check and fold to describe what a pass is. In that sense pass doesn't quite reach the same standard as check and fold. It will be interesting to see how this discussion unfolds, presumably at Summit VII. BTW: the 2015 Summit I can about guarantee will be less stressful than 2013. There are some really important issues to consider, but we don't have that huge heavy lifting of 2011 and especially 2013.
-
The player is committed to making it $8 because verbal is binding.
Do you see what you just did there? You are saying that since the player said raise, he is committed to completing the bet because he verbalized "raise".
Doesn't that mean you see 'complete' as the same as 'raise'?
-
Mike and Tristan:
You are both correct when you criticize my reference to a call being appropriate in that situation but, it is still not a raise because it does not count in the raise limits for any game.i.,e. Three raise limit.
Mike, I question your source on the following quote: Here's how one source describes the bring-in and first-round betting options:
Assuming the player who brings the hand in does do so for the minimum [the bring-in], the next player to act (action, as in all forms of poker, moves in a clockwise direction) may choose to fold, call the minimum bet, or "raise" by "completing" the bet. This is not a raise, and the proper procedure is to simply announce the amount. i.,e. "make it three", or "I bet three." For example, in the $3-$6 game [with a $1 bring-in on the low upcard on the initial deal] the first raiser would increase the bet from $1 to $3, a raise of only $2. Any further raises during this round would be in normal $3 increments. This causes too much confusion when trying to explain the limit to the number of raises allowed in limit games. I understand all about "completing the bet." My argument is based on the single word "complete." It does not read well without completing the short statement by adding "the bet."
Mike, you also quoted RR: From RRoP, Section 8: 7 Card Stud, Para 6: Increasing the amount wagered by the opening forced bet up to a full bet does not count as a raise, there you have it! I rest my case! but merely as a completion of the bet. For example: In $15-$30 stud, the lowcard opens for $5. If the next player increases the bet to $15 (completes the bet), up to three raises are then allowed when using a three-raise limit. Note: does not count as a raise...
I suggest the player just say 15.
[/color]
-
I'm not even sure what you guys are debating anymore... ??? ::)
Complete is an important term - in limit betting, and especially in limit stud variants.
It is a type of raise, in that a player is wishing to wager something more than the amount needed to call, but it is not technically a raise for the purpose of a betting cap (which is usually a bet and three/four raises).
Therefore, I think that "complete" is worthy of having its own distinct status as a poker term, even though it is very similar, but not the same as, a raise in all aspects. It's short for "complete the bet being faced to the full amount of the bet defined for that betting round". We say "complete" for short, and that's well understood.
I think you all kind of agree, but want to engage in a little bit of boxing. :P
-
Hello Ken,
I still don't agree with you on this one. The game is limit stud 3 and 6...the bring-in is 1...now what's easier to say, "make it 3, or complete?
While we're on the subject, it only applies for a structured limit or fixed-bet, which ever you prefer. Completing the bet does not apply in spread limit, does it? So what we are talking about is a structured/fixed bet game like 1 and 2...or 3 and 6...or 5 and 10...or 30 and 60...and so on. We are also only talking about the initial betting round...so if you want to increase the bring-in to a bet, just announce the amount...what could be easier? I played stud poker for many years and never heard "complete" used the way some of our members say it is.
Okay, let's get back to "PASS"...it absolutely can not be omitted from any poker glossary :(. On a more positive note: It is very encouraging to know that Mike is in favor of adding gestures to our rules. ;)
-
It's good to re-visit the reason for Rule 3 in the first place: to try and convey to a global, multi-lingual poker world with alot of new players entering every year, that the responsibility for getting their intended betting action right lies primarily with the player. This is consistent with the language adopted in 2009 that "it is player's responsibility to make his actions clear".
In that context, including some unmistakable "time honored" gestures definitely makes sense...
These specific words and gestures are there not so much for their own sake, but to provide examples of how best to conduct an event for maximum clarity of action and minimal problems regarding how to interpret action.
btw, can't resist this one: whenever a player is facing a bet and says "make it ___X___", that's the same as saying "raise to a total of X". You never say "make it" when facing a bet if you just intend to call :) HOWEVER, here's the problem with "make it".... Let's say I'm facing a 1000 unit bet, and I say "make it..." then hesitate. Have I locked myself into a raise? IMO I haven't. I could just then say "Make it... 1000", and call... the TD might grumble about my disruptive choice of words, but I think by rights my call would stand. For that reason IMO, "make it" doesn't reach the same level of clarity as "raise".
-
While we're on the subject, it only applies for a structured limit or fixed-bet, which ever you prefer. Completing the bet does not apply in spread limit, does it? So what we are talking about is a structured/fixed bet game like 1 and 2...or 3 and 6...or 5 and 10...or 30 and 60...and so on. We are also only talking about the initial betting round...so if you want to increase the bring-in to a bet, just announce the amount...what could be easier? I played stud poker for many years and never heard "complete" used the way some of our members say it is.
Like I said, our room primarily has fixed limit games. 'Complete' gets used on a regular basis and it is not just in the initial betting round, but all rounds. We also run stud on a semi-regular basis. So I'm telling you that we hear that term quite a bit. Keep in mind the dealers will announce the completed bet as "completed to x" so that players accurately know what the action is. So, like I said, the word flies around pretty regularly here. Now whether it is easier to say it one way or another is just a moot point since we cannot make all the players use the terms we want them to. All we can hope to do is agree on a standard of what to do when the situation arises.
-
Tristan,
Sorry but I never heard it. I also can not agree with Mike when he said "complete" is a form of a raise.
Definitely not a raise.
-
Let's introduce the phrase "I'm Clean" as official poker terminology Tristan. ;D
-
Thomas: I think many of our members are confused enough without your "added humor" ;D Next thing you know, someone will introduce it as an official betting term! :D
-
Here's my contribution:
3: Official Terminology of Tournament Poker
Official betting terms are simple, unmistakable, time-honored declarations like: bet, raise, call, fold, check, all-in, pot (in pot-limit only), and complete (in fixed-limit only), and pass (a dual purpose term meaning either A: to check if player is facing the option to check or B: to fold if player is facing a bet) . Regional terms may also meet this standard. The use of non-standard language is at player’s risk because it may result in a ruling other than what the player intended. It is the responsibility of players to make their intentions clear. See also Rules 40 & 49.
-
Brian: I'd certainly agree to your suggested change...all we'd need then is the mention, and acceptance, of certain gestures , such as: rapping the table on your turn to act. How does anyone play draw poker, and not allow the word "pass" as an unmistakable, time-honored term?
-
Thomas McGee, I was expecting some support from you on this subject, especially since the Rule book glossary for R.O.P.E. (by Thomas McGee) makes no mention of the word "complete" yet has multiple definitions of the (unmentioned and not recognized by the TDA) word "pass" :-X
-
In NLH tournaments I have heard the small blind "complete" to call the big blind.
-
BillM16:
It sounds logical, and I'd certainly understand it's meaning in that situation. However, "call" would be more appropriate, and I don't believe it was intended for a flop game. It's my understanding that the term is only recognized, as a "simple, unmistakable, and "time honored" declaration for stud. ::)
Besides, even if "complete" remains a part of TDA Official Terminology of Tournament Poker...it has nothing to do with the word "pass" which I believe definitely deserves to be on that list.
-
Thomas McGee, I was expecting some support from you on this subject, especially since the Rule book glossary for R.O.P.E. (by Thomas McGee) makes no mention of the word "complete" yet has multiple definitions of the (unmentioned and not recognized by the TDA) word "pass" :-X
You had me for a second there Nick. Straight from the my copy of R.O.P.E. glossary:
COMPLETE THE BET: To increase an all-in bet or forced bet to a full bet in limit poker.
It doesn't specifically say "Complete" or "Completion" but maybe in the next edition. In addition there's multiple references to the word "Complete" in the Rules of Stud betting section.
As far as Pass goes.....
PASS: (1) Decline to bet. In a pass-and-out game, this differs from a check, because a player
who passes must fold. (2) Decline to call a wager, at which point you must discard your hand and
have no further interest in the pot.
Definitely a simple, unmistakable, time honored, declaration not only for Stud, but Draw games.
-
Thank you Thomas, I've always said "pass" belongs...and I've always said "complete" needs more, as you stated "complete the bet." I rest my case! ;D