Author Topic: Premature call in turn, before raise amount is established  (Read 6906 times)

Andre1

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 10
Premature call in turn, before raise amount is established
« on: August 13, 2015, 05:44:24 AM »
Bet amount not established
Situation: A open, B rais, C say call before rais is declared.
Ruling: Force C to call and put out the minimum rais then give option to either surrender the calling chips (of the minimum rais) OR
complete aditional rais. Can not rais.


Basicly let player B finish action then handle it like a OOT situation with substantional action and make C commit chips to the situation he put himself in but without risk of automaticly be all-in by the mercy of player B. Let player B finish hes action, explain to player C what is going to happend (call min rais, option to surrender or complete).

Thoughts?
« Last Edit: August 15, 2015, 11:44:23 AM by MikeB »

Uniden32

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
  • Tournament Director at the Isle Casino
Premature call in turn, before raise amount is established
« Reply #1 on: August 13, 2015, 07:25:45 AM »
Unless action changes before Player C acts (ie; another player between B and C re-raises), Player C should be held to a full call of whatever Player B's raise ends up being.

Unfortunately for Player C, he is at Player's B mercy at this point.  Player B did nothing wrong, I'm not limiting his options in anyway.  Player C stated Call out of turn, and I'm treating it as action out of turn no matter what Player B ends up doing, and this includes Player B going all-in.

« Last Edit: August 15, 2015, 11:44:35 AM by MikeB »
Ralph Brandt
Tournament Coordinator
Isle Casino - Pompano Beach, FL
@uniden32

Andre1

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 10
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #2 on: August 13, 2015, 04:37:17 PM »
Rules are clear but I dont like this at all, I want to protect the recreational player and dont rule all-in here. Good spot to use 'at TDs discretion' anyone?

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #3 on: August 13, 2015, 04:57:31 PM »
Welcome Andre 1...I don't like it either.

K-Lo

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 869
  • @AskTheTD on Twitter
    • Ask the Tournament Director
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #4 on: August 13, 2015, 06:13:43 PM »
I read the original post as C saying the "call" was made before B announced raise. I see this as an OOT call, which means B's announcement of raise would change the action leaving all options open for C.

Andre1

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 10
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #5 on: August 13, 2015, 08:24:56 PM »
Thank you nick.
K-Lo: Only bet is not declared, B says rais but no amount before C says call.

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #6 on: August 13, 2015, 11:17:06 PM »
Andre:

Great question. This exact topic was brought up at the 2015 Summit, but no rule was adopted as a consensus could not be reached.

A poll was also taken of players prior to the Summit. 52% thought C should be held to a full call of whatever B bets, 29% felt C was "entitled to some protection" and should only be held to calling a min-raise, and 19% felt C was not obligated for anything because the exact bet amount was not established.

Bottom line, this is still a Rule 1 decision at TD's discretion at this point.

Andre1

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 10
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #7 on: August 14, 2015, 03:42:55 AM »
I see, thanks for your response. I guess there will be times we do want to hold C player to a full raise at B's mercy and other times we want to protect against clear miskicks. Personally, I like TD's discretion in this situation, we never have to make a decision before we have gather all info where we also let B finish his action before actually deciding. If B's raise is naturally related to pot there is no problem hold C to this raise. If B go all-in with far above what is 'natural' in the situation then hold C to stick in minraise, give option to surrender the calling chips or complete full raise.

Since the rule is not clear I will stick to as described above, please let me know if this seems unnatural or bad. Fortunately, such situations occur very rarely but when it does, I no longer going to be taken by surprise and lacking a good solution in the rules pr.date.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #8 on: August 14, 2015, 06:44:08 AM »
Andre 1,

 This might help you in your decision making process, it's from a book written by Chuck Ferry entitled Rules Of Poker: At times a situation may arise which is not expressly covered by the Rules. In such situations the floorperson shall weigh the facts and render the most appropriate decision.

Also from the same book: An unintentional error shall be construed more liberally than what appears to be a deliberate violation of the Rules.

Here's more: When strict enforcement of a Rule will cause an obviously unfair result, the floorperson shall have the unrestricted right to waive any Rule and make the decision which will cause a fair result.

There's much more, but I think you get the idea. Let's look at your original question and cover a couple different scenarios. Situation: A Open, B raise Player C announces Call before amount is decided...What if Player C did not hear the raise of B? What if Player C were seated in a position where he was not even aware of Player B still being in the hand? This situation can easily occur when a player in the 10 seat is next to act and the 1 seat player bets out of turn because he could not see the other player because the seated dealer was obstructing his view. Now let's look at the same situation but Player C deliberately acts before Player B announces the intended amount of his raise. As you can see, there is a difference...would you agree?

 I have often raised the question: When can action be backed-up (to the proper bettor) if an obvious mistake were made? I always felt that substantial action played a big part in my decision. The rules however, do not support my feelings. In my opinion TDA Rules are designed more for the experienced players, and are too strict for an inexperienced player.

 Also from Mr Ferry's Book: The Rules are primarily designed not as punishment for irregularities, but rather as redress for damage.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2015, 06:48:10 AM by Nick C »

Uniden32

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
  • Tournament Director at the Isle Casino
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #9 on: August 14, 2015, 07:13:54 AM »
For those of you willing to give Player C relief, I pose the following question:

What do you say to Player B if you're called over to the table after Player C says, "Call", but before Player B announce his raise. 
Player B is going to ask you, "What are my options ? Is his call binding ?"

  • "If you min raise, his call will stand"
  • "If you go all in, I'm going to give him relief, but make him call a min raise."

What if I raise $100 ?


Ralph Brandt
Tournament Coordinator
Isle Casino - Pompano Beach, FL
@uniden32

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #10 on: August 14, 2015, 08:16:58 AM »
For those of you willing to give Player C relief, I pose the following question:

What do you say to Player B if you're called over to the table after Player C says, "Call", but before Player B announce his raise. 
Player B is going to ask you, "What are my options ? Is his call binding ?"

  • "If you min raise, his call will stand"
  • "If you go all in, I'm going to give him relief, but make him call a min raise."

What if I raise $100 ?




I wouldn't offer Player B any information on how I'm going to rule.  He needs to first complete his bet. Then, I would make my ruling.  If Player C wasn't angling, I would most likely hold him to calling a min-raise with the option of forfeiting that and folding should the raise be larger.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #11 on: August 14, 2015, 09:55:15 AM »
Bill,

 You confirm what I said about the rules being too strict. You said: " If Player C wasn't angling, I would most likely hold him to calling a min-raise with the option of forfeiting that and folding should the raise be larger."

Tell me, what would you do if he was angling?

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #12 on: August 14, 2015, 02:23:08 PM »
Tell me, what would you do if he was angling?

See TDA #58.  IMO angling is one form of cheating (#58a).  So, a penalty would be in order(#58b).  Also, calling at least the min-raise and maybe more would be part of my ruling.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #13 on: August 14, 2015, 07:28:20 PM »
Bill,

 Is there ever a time, or situation, that would occur when you would ever allow the action to back-up to the skipped player and release the out of turn from his obvious mistake?

 Or, in our original question: if you felt certain that Player C was unaware of Player B's action, would you release Player C from his errant wager? If so, would it only be by the strict rule where action has not changed? Or would you just correct the obvious mistake, back-up the action and allow Player C all options?

 I can't count how many times I've stopped an out of turn player from acting, corrected the action to the proper bettor and continued without incident. Example: Player A (Johnny) bets Player C (Sally) calls before Player B (Tony) acts. My response: "Sally, hold on...the action is on Tony" while pushing Sally her bet back. Sally would usually reply with,: "Oh, I'm sorry, I thought the bet was on me." Problem corrected and action proceeds without incident. If this becomes a regular practice of Sally, then we're talking about something altogether different.
I would call the floor and let them know that Sally was warned about acting out of turn and she continues to not wait her turn. Let the floor handle it.

 One other point: Bill, you are punishing Player C no matter what...by that I mean, he can never retract his out of turn unless the action changes to him, correct?

 Another word that has disappeared from these discussions is the "gross" misunderstanding. We really need to put some figure or percentage, that would define exactly what a "gross" misunderstanding should be. A 100 wager would mean very little when players are betting 1000's...but in a betting round where players are betting 50's and 100's, the 100 wager could be significant.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2015, 07:31:31 PM by Nick C »

Andre1

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 10
Re: Bet amount not established
« Reply #14 on: August 14, 2015, 07:40:50 PM »
Thanks for good input, in this scenario I will let player B finish hes action before make a ruling. If hes rais is none natural and player C is obviously a new player who did make a honoust mistake I wont let him completly off the hook. He did act out of turn, action is substantional but I will not rule him all-in for hes tournament life.

This example was when player B announce RAIS, player C snap calls before amount is established. Sure this situation can turn out differently but those two factor are in play.  

Lets make a quick example where I am going to hold him to a full rais of player B's choosing:
A bets 2000, B announce rais, C calls before amount is declared. I let B finish action and he choose to rais to 5.400, I will make player C call 5,400.

Another example, A bets 2000. B announce rais, C calls before amount is declared. I let B finish action and he choose to go all-in now for 25.000,
here I will make player C call 4000 and have option to surrender the 4k or call the all-in.

Poker is a game of alert, continuous observation. Player C must learn to act in turn

I have ruled simulare spots where player A rais 800, player B go all-in, player C toss out 1-chip of 1000. Again if a new player misclick I wont make him call
the all-in but put 800 in the middle and make him choose between surrender 800 or call full all-on.

A freshman wont learn by hes mistakes if he is completly off the hook and  hes action do impact the hand so he should always be forced to commit chip into the situation IMO.

Again, thank you for input. I am always trying to gather as much information about the the situation and I will also make B finish hes rais (amount) before ruling either way's. If it is natural to the SPR C will be held to player B's rais. But I wont force anyone all-in by a clear misclick.

Warning will be issued, but no penalty. He already are penalised with the commited chips on the call.