Author Topic: Player all-in for less than a min-raise. Bet re-opening & min re-raise questions  (Read 6526 times)

GreggPath

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
I have read through this whole thread and I'm pretty sure I understand the rule in question. Would it be simpler to explain it this way:

A player may only raise when the action is on that player for the first time in the betting round OR the action they are facing is a bet equal to or greater than the chips they have already bet in the current betting round [might need to be worded differently to make it clear that "action they are facing" is referring to additional chips on top of what they have already put in]. i.e. if a player has already put 10 chips in earlier in the same betting round and the bet they are facing is 20 or more, they may call, raise, or fold. If the bet they are facing is 19 or less, they may call or fold.

Just my two cents. I believe I understand the rule anyways, but for those who are confused by it, this might be helpful. I always tell players who don't understand the rule to ignore everything that has happened and just look at the bet the player is facing. If a call means at least doubling what they already have bet, they can raise. If it's less than double, they can only call/fold.

PS This is my first post. I hope to become involved in these discussions. I'm not in the business. I run my own home tournaments but have never worked for an actual poker room/casino. I am, however, very interested in the rules and procedures of running poker games/tournaments.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Steffo111,

 Your language is an improvement, in my opinion. Consider what you wrote and then take a look at my example. Blinds 5 & 10 post flop Adam bets 10... Bill calls 10...Chet raises to 25...Donnie goes all-in for 14...Eleanor calls 25...Frank goes all-in for 29. George makes the min raise to 44...anyone disagree? The point I will try to make is the action from the short all-in players is irrelevant. they are not added together, only the raise from Chet, (in my example below) reopens the betting.

 Let's go back and look at each individual and see who can raise, who can not, and how much the min raise would be to each.

 Adam of course can raise all of his chips but the min raise would be 15 more (44+15=59)...Adam calls the 44.
 Bill would have the same option if Adam folded or he may call or raise another 15 on top of the 44 he is facing...Bill folds.
 Chet, (the original raiser) can fold, call 44, or raise any amount with at least a 15 increase. Chet calls 44.
 Donnie is all-in for the main pot with 14. (main pot 94).
 Eleanor can fold, call, or raise any amount with a minimum of 15 more. She calls 44.
 Frank is all-in for 29 which includes the main pot (94) plus the first side pot of 75...169 total.
 George can not raise because no player re-raised.
 With two all-in players in for different amounts there will be three pots to decide:
 The Main (pot A) 94 total...(pot B) 75...and (pot C) 60. Adam, Chet, Eleanor and George are in for all pots (total 229). Any additional betting on another street will be decided among the four remaining players.


MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Steffo111,

Your language is an improvement, in my opinion. Consider what you wrote and then take a look at my example. Blinds 5 & 10 post flop Adam bets 10... Bill calls 10...Chet raises to 25...Donnie goes all-in for 14...Eleanor calls 25...Frank goes all-in for 29. George makes the min raise to 44...anyone disagree? The point I will try to make is the action from the short all-in players is irrelevant. they are not added together, only the raise from Chet, (in my example below) reopens the betting.


Okay, we're now on page 5 of this thread... example after example...

Hopefully everyone has had their say...

NOW it's time to wrap this up, by getting back to the FUNDAMENTALS of the TDA Rule, because that's what this forum is about...

The TDA RULES on minimum raises are crystal clear:

Rule 43:  A raise must be at least equal to the largest prior bet or raise of the current betting round.   

NLHE, 5-10 Blinds,  on the turn Player A opens for 25. That's the "largest bet of this round".
Player B calls 25,
Player C wants to raise, and has to make it at least 50 total... Player C makes it 50 total, a min raise. The raise of 25 is still "the largest bet or raise of the round"
Player D raises to 125 total which is a raise amount of 75 over the prior total bet of 50. SO, the "largest raise of the round" is now 75...
Player E smooth calls 125
Player F wants to raise, he has to raise by at least 75, and he does so, makes it 200.
Player G re-raises to 450 total, a raise of 250. So now 250 is the "largest raise of the round". The next player who wants to raise has to "raise at least equal to the largest prior bet or raise of the current betting round",
Player H: Can either call the 450, or raise at least 250 more for total of 700.

And so on... crystal clear. And if you need any further illustration, see the Poker TDA Illustration Addendum on page 14 and 15 here: http://www.pokertda.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Poker-TDA-Rules-2015-Version-1.0-full-longform-PDF-1.pdf

Rule 44: Re-Opening the Bet.
The very bottom line, is that for a player who has already acted they must be "facing a full raise" when the action returns to them.  The shorthand is "facing a full raise"... as dealers and TDs you need to study and find out exactly what is meant by "facing a full raise" or per RRoP "a full size wager". Once you learn what is meant by that, you will always know to apply it.

Read TDA Illustration Example 44-1, page 15 "a series of short all-in wagers add to a full raise and re-open the betting". This is exactly, unmistakably, consistent with Roberts Rules language: "Multiple all-in wagers, each of an amount too small to qualify as a raise, still act as a raise and reopen the betting if the resulting wager size to a player qualifies as a raise."

Read Example 44-2A, page 16: a single short all-in wager of 7500 that does not re-open betting for Player A who has already acted by calling a 4000 initial bet. Player A is not facing "a full raise" which would be 8000 total, so A can only call.

Read Example 44-2B: where there is a bet by the BB on top of the 7500, and that does re-open betting for Player A because he's now facing more than 8000.

In Example 44-1 the full raise was reached only by adding up short all-in wagers.

In Example 44-2A the full raise was not reached by a single short all-in wager

In Example 44-2B the full raise was reached by a combination of short all-in wager and a full min raise.

BOTTOM LINE: It doesn't matter how you get to the min-raise amount, as long as a player is "facing a full raise" action is re-opened. If not, the player can only call or fold.

NOW, perhaps the language of the Rules can be tweaked, but experience shows that NO MATTER WHAT THE LANGUAGE IS, Illustrations are needed. Period. And once you have reviewed the examples, you know the intent of the rule, so the shorter the rule language the better. We will go through this thread and mine out the proposed language changes. However, there should be zero confusion about the rule itself... a series of short all-ins will re-open the betting if they total a full raise to a player who has already acted.

Thanks for all contributions, we will close and archive this thread.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2016, 12:52:22 PM by MikeB »