Author Topic: Verbally declaring check-raise  (Read 1242 times)

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
Verbally declaring check-raise
« on: March 11, 2016, 11:42:19 AM »
Good morning,

It is a NLHE and the blinds are $100 and $200.  The UTG player raises to $600.  The Button makes the call while all other players fold.  There are two players on the flop.  After the flop, the UTG player says: “I check-raise.”  The Button asks the dealer if the verbal declaration is binding. 

#1 - Should the dealer provide an answer or should the floor be called for a decision?
#2 - If the floor is called, what should the decision be?
Which TDA Rules support your answers to #1 and #2?

Thanks,
B~
« Last Edit: March 11, 2016, 11:44:15 AM by BillM16 »

Dave Miller

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
  • Lead dealer / rules guru for World Free Poker
    • Poker For Roulette
Re: Verbally declaring check-raise
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2016, 11:18:49 AM »
Without consulting the rules, here's how I would rule, and why.

"Check" is binding. "Raise" is not.

Is his intentions really to raise if the button bets? Or did he mean to bet, but misspoke when he said check? In either case, check was the first thing out of his mouth, and is binding.

The raise part is not binding because it is similar to a third person betting out of turn. If the button bets, then the action changes, and any out of turn verbal declaration is no longer binding.

As a floor person, I would have to think that the UTG knows these rules, and might be angle-shooting, and therefore should be given a penalty. Or at least a warning.

If I was the button player, I would not ask for a ruling, but make a bet and see what he does, and, even though I think I know the ruling, ask for a ruling only if he doesn't raise. Or ask for a ruling after the hand is over.

Note that I feel this is one of those rare situations where the floor person might be obligated to refrain from ruling until all action is complete.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown.
But how much does it cost to knock on wood?

Dave Miller

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
  • Lead dealer / rules guru for World Free Poker
    • Poker For Roulette
Re: Verbally declaring check-raise
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2016, 09:27:00 PM »
Upon re-examination of this issue, I stand by my statement. I quote Rule 40A, as well as, of course, Rule 1.

On the other hand, Rule 54 seems to contradict it. Or at least suggest that the unconventional statement could be binding at the TD's discretion.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown.
But how much does it cost to knock on wood?

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
Re: Verbally declaring check-raise
« Reply #3 on: March 16, 2016, 08:08:20 AM »
Dave, I like your analysis. 

In addition, there is Rule #3 which points out that using non-standard terms or gestures is at player's own risk.

In this case, this player is known to have used this non-standard declaration on several occasions in similar situations.  Of course, it is angle shooting as the player is attempting to exploit a weakness in the rules to gain an advantage over the other player. 

Certainly, "I check-raise" is a non-standard declaration.  As we all know, the player is actually saying "I'll check and then I'll raise if you choose to bet."  However, his non-standard verbal declaration is made in-turn.  So, in this sense, Rule #40 regarding Action Out-Of-Turn (OOT) might be disregarded. 

Rule #54 on Conditional Statements seems to me to be most applicable under these circumstances.  The example given there "if you bet, I will raise" is exactly what this player has said with "I check-raise."

Therefore, I would give this player a warning on the first violation and if repeated, I might make the action binding and/or give a stronger penalty.   

Thanks for the response Dave.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2016, 08:11:28 AM by BillM16 »

Max D

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
Re: Verbally declaring check-raise
« Reply #4 on: March 16, 2016, 08:19:02 AM »
The devil is in the detail, I had written a response about 40A and how it would be binding, but then I re-read the post and looked at rule 3 about non std terms.  Then came the comment about rule 54, and I think in the end I agree with Dave and Bill, not a binding  declaration, angle shooting, and worthy of a penalty, especially if repeated.
Max D

Brian Vickers

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 451
  • Poker Manager
Re: Verbally declaring check-raise
« Reply #5 on: March 23, 2016, 09:39:09 AM »
A) It's a check
B) "KNOCK IT OFF ASSHAT!"