Author Topic: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets  (Read 899 times)

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
I've always found Rule #51 peculiar - not quite a rule, but rather a dealer procedure.  Also, Rule #37 could be more clear with a little bit of work.
 
Here are the existing 2015 rules:

37:  Methods of Betting: Verbal and Chips
A: Bets are by verbal declaration and/or pushing out chips. If a player does both, whichever is first defines the bet. If simultaneous, a clear and reasonable verbal declaration takes precedence, otherwise the chips play.
 
B: Verbal declarations may be general (“call”, “raise”), a specific amount only (“one thousand”) or both (“raise, one thousand”).

C: For all betting rules, declaring a specific amount only is the same as silently pushing out an equal amount. Ex: Declaring “two hundred” is the same as silently pushing out 200 in chips.


51:  String Bets and Raises
Dealers will call string bets and raises.

Perhaps something similar to the following would help #37 and eliminate #51.

Proposed 2017 wording - #37: Methods of Betting and Raising
 
A: Bets and raises can be made verbally by declaring both, an action and an amount.  For example: “Raise, two hundred.”

B: Bets and raises can be made silently by pushing chips totaling the amount in a single forward motion.  For example: “Silently pushing two chips forward that total two hundred.”

C: Declaring simply either, “bet” or “raise,” is an incomplete bet.  A complete bet includes an amount.  To complete an otherwise incomplete verbal “bet” or “raise,” a player can push chips forward, in a single motion, for the total amount.  Optionally, to complete an incomplete verbal “raise”, a player may first push chips exactly equal to the calling amount, and then follow with a second push of chips, representing the total amount of the raise.

D:  Except as allowed above, pushing chips in multiple forward motions is an illegal string-bet.  Dealers will call string-bets.

E: If an amount of a verbal declaration conflicts with an amount of simultaneously pushed chips, the verbal declaration takes precedence, provided it was clear and reasonable.  Otherwise, the amount of chips pushed will determine the actual bet or raise.


What are your thoughts?

Regards,
B~
« Last Edit: April 22, 2017, 07:59:17 AM by BillM16 »

Dave Miller

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
  • Lead dealer / rules guru for World Free Poker
    • Poker For Roulette
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2017, 07:40:02 PM »
It should also specify that "Raise, X" is the same as "Raise TO X", not "X more.

Also what to do if X is not a valid raise, and the difference if it is preceded with "Raise".
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown.
But how much does it cost to knock on wood?

BROOKS

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #2 on: April 20, 2017, 09:39:43 PM »
It should also specify that "Raise, X" is the same as "Raise TO X", not "X more.

Rule 43 B
Without other clarifying information, declaring raise and an amount is the total bet.
Example: A opens for 2000, B declares "Raise eight thousand". The total bet is 8000


Also what to do if X is not a valid raise, and the difference if it is preceded with "Raise".

Rule 37 C
For all betting rules, declaring a specific amount only is the same as silently pushing out an equal amount. Ex: Declaring “two hundred” is the same as silently pushing out 200 in chips


So if someone says "X" you treat it the same way you would if he had silently just put out X amount in chips.
If it's at least 50% of a raise you make him complete the min  raise.

If he says "Raise X" and it's not enough for a min raise, he must do a min raise because he said raise. It's the same as saying raise, and pushing out an amount in chips that is not enough for a raise.
[/color]

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2017, 10:05:52 PM »
I've always found Rul51 peculiar

What are your thoughts?

Regards,
B~
What is it about the current rule that needs work?

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #4 on: April 20, 2017, 10:09:12 PM »
It should also specify that "Raise, X" is the same as "Raise TO X", not "X more.

Rule 43 B
Without other clarifying information, declaring raise and an amount is the total bet.
Example: A opens for 2000, B declares "Raise eight thousand". The total bet is 8000


Also what to do if X is not a valid raise, and the difference if it is preceded with "Raise".

Rule 37 C
For all betting rules, declaring a specific amount only is the same as silently pushing out an equal amount. Ex: Declaring “two hundred” is the same as silently pushing out 200 in chips


So if someone says "X" you treat it the same way you would if he had silently just put out X amount in chips.
If it's at least 50% of a raise you make him complete the min  raise.

If he says "Raise X" and it's not enough for a min raise, he must do a min raise because he said raise. It's the same as saying raise, and pushing out an amount in chips that is not enough for a raise.
[/color]
Brooks' response is spot on IMO because he's looking at ALL THE RULES simultaneously. And that's exactly the way the TDA Rules should be applied

Boris Mauboussin

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2017, 12:25:02 AM »
Hello folks,

I'm glad we discuss about betting methods.

I would like to suggest to write down what saying "Pot" in a No-Limit game induces.

Should it be a binding bet seen as an incomplete one which needs an amount to be completed ? Or, it is another case of "Please, clarify your intention"

-

About Bill's suggestion :

Quote
E: If a verbal declaration including an amount conflicts with a simultaneous push of chips, the verbal declaration takes precedence, provided it was clear and reasonable.  Otherwise, the amount of chips pushed will determine the actual bet or raise.

I am not comfortable with the "reasonable" wording. It depends on what facts you base yourself to determine if this actually reasonable or not, and it could change a lot from one person to another. (Or maybe I did not understand the way reasonable is used there)

About uncleared betting method, didn't we talk about something about "I bet 5" considered as betting 5 of the smallest 10-factor available ?
(5 Hundred if 100 and/or 500 chips are in play, 5 thousands if both 100 and 500 have been removed, 50 thousands if 5K are out, etc)

I'm pretty sure I had this conversation, but can't remember when and where.



MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2017, 04:42:31 AM »
Hello folks,

I'm glad we discuss about betting methods.

I would like to suggest to write down what saying "Pot" in a No-Limit game induces.

Should it be a binding bet seen as an incomplete one which needs an amount to be completed ? Or, it is another case of "Please, clarify your intention"

Hi Boris. Please see 2015 TDA Rule 50-C.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #7 on: April 21, 2017, 07:07:54 AM »
Ah...the simplicity of limit poker :) Saying raise was never a problem and certainly understood. The problems all began with no limit. Many of the players that switched from limit to no limit have issues with the current rule. When a player bets 5 and the next player says "raise 10 more" are you going to rule his total bet 10...or what you know he intended his bet to be?

 The TDA rule clearly states the way they would like it to be interpreted but, the rule easily could have gone the other way. When a player says "raise" followed by an amount, the mentioned amount could have been the amount above the bet he was facing. Example: Player bets 5...next player says "raise 10"....total amount to call=15.

 All I know is, it took me quite a while to get used to the TDA rule. Never used to be that way. ???

 Of course I can live with it...but like so many other rules, I don't like it!  ::) To me, it's not making your intentions clear.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2017, 07:10:18 AM by Nick C »

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #8 on: April 21, 2017, 11:58:29 AM »
I've always found Rule #51 peculiar - not quite a rule, but rather a dealer procedure.
What is it about the current rule that needs work?

The rule identifies that dealers are responsible for calling string bets and raises - a dealer procedure.  It doesn't define a rule that players must follow.  It doesn't describe a string bet or why it isn't allowed.  If fact, it doesn't even say that string bets are not allowed. 

Regards,
B~

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #9 on: April 21, 2017, 01:21:14 PM »
Keep in mind that TDA Rules are not intended to be a complete set of all poker rules, but merely for rules pertaining to tournaments and for situations where the conventional rules are not existent, contradictory, or unclear. String bets not allowed in poker is so fundamental to conventional rules so declaring them illegal has been considered unnecessary.

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #10 on: April 21, 2017, 02:56:29 PM »
Keep in mind that TDA Rules are not intended to be a complete set of all poker rules, but merely for rules pertaining to tournaments and for situations where the conventional rules are not existent, contradictory, or unclear. String bets not allowed in poker is so fundamental to conventional rules so declaring them illegal has been considered unnecessary.

How does "Dealers will call string bets and raises." fit into that description?  How can it be important to say dealers will do, but not important to say players shall not?   Shouldn't the dealers have more familiarity with this than the players?
« Last Edit: April 21, 2017, 03:02:33 PM by BillM16 »

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #11 on: April 21, 2017, 09:38:03 PM »
Keep in mind that TDA Rules are not intended to be a complete set of all poker rules, but merely for rules pertaining to tournaments and for situations where the conventional rules are not existent, contradictory, or unclear. String bets not allowed in poker is so fundamental to conventional rules so declaring them illegal has been considered unnecessary.

How does "Dealers will call string bets and raises." fit into that description?  How can it be important to say dealers will do, but not important to say players shall not?   Shouldn't the dealers have more familiarity with this than the players?
Again, it's important to look at all the TDA Rules in their entirety. Rule 2 Player Responsibilities include "... speak up if they see a mistake..." and that would absolutely include a dealer missing a string bet.

In summary, looking at the entirety of this issue... string bets are an important error by all conventional rules, the primary responsibility for calling them lies with the dealer, but every player at the table has a responsibility to "...follow the action..." and "...speak up if they see a mistake..."
« Last Edit: April 21, 2017, 09:39:45 PM by MikeB »

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #12 on: April 22, 2017, 08:26:14 AM »
Again, it's important to look at all the TDA Rules in their entirety. Rule 2 Player Responsibilities include "... speak up if they see a mistake..." and that would absolutely include a dealer missing a string bet.

In summary, looking at the entirety of this issue... string bets are an important error by all conventional rules, the primary responsibility for calling them lies with the dealer, but every player at the table has a responsibility to "...follow the action..." and "...speak up if they see a mistake..."

I agree that it is important to look at the TDA Rules in their entirety.  Accordingly, I believe that refactoring, rewording, and reordering existing rules can improve the ability to comprehend the rules in their entirety.  The OP is a small step in that direction.  The OP suggests changes that include content from #37, #42, and #51.  I think it possible to include more, if not all, of #42 for a new single Methods of Betting and Raising rule, that combines these three rules.  It would be easier to comprehend this important aspect of the rules. 

Mike, I appreciate that you have contributed immensely to the evolution of the rules in 2002-2004, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015 and now in 2017.  I find it very interesting to see how the content has changed over time.  It obviously takes a lot of work and cooperation.

Thanks,
B~

p.s. The new iPhone beta app includes hyperlinks between rules, recommended procedures, and illustrations.  That feature really helps to bring related rules onto a single window to be read together.  (More links are possible in the future.)
« Last Edit: April 22, 2017, 08:43:04 AM by BillM16 »

BROOKS

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
Re: Suggestions on Rule #37 - Methods of Betting & Rule #51 - String Bets
« Reply #13 on: April 23, 2017, 03:14:35 AM »

About uncleared betting method, didn't we talk about something about "I bet 5" considered as betting 5 of the smallest 10-factor available ?
(5 Hundred if 100 and/or 500 chips are in play, 5 thousands if both 100 and 500 have been removed, 50 thousands if 5K are out, etc)

I'm pretty sure I had this conversation, but can't remember when and where.

Rule 53 Non Standard and Unclear betting

Players use unofficial betting terms and gestures at their own risk. These may be interpreted to mean other than what the player intended.
Also, if a declared bet can reasonably have multiple meanings, it will be ruled the lesser value.
Example: NLHE 200-400 blinds
Player declares "I bet five". If it is unclear whether "five" means 500 or 5000, the bet is 500.
See also Rule 2, 3 and 42
See illustration addendum


So it's not determined by what chips are in play. It's  determine by the blinds, and the smallest allowable bet that would involve that number.
The blinds could be 500-1000 and 100 chips are still in play. If a player says "two" , they are betting two thousand, because even though 100 chips are still in play, 200 is not an allowable amount to bet.
If they say five, they are betting five thousand.
If they say twelve, I'd make it twelve hundred.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2017, 03:16:59 AM by BROOKS »

Brian Vickers

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 451
  • Poker Manager
I've always found Rule #51 peculiar - not quite a rule, but rather a dealer procedure.  Also, Rule #37 could be more clear with a little bit of work.
 
Here are the existing 2015 rules:

37:  Methods of Betting: Verbal and Chips
A: Bets are by verbal declaration and/or pushing out chips. If a player does both, whichever is first defines the bet. If simultaneous, a clear and reasonable verbal declaration takes precedence, otherwise the chips play.
 
B: Verbal declarations may be general (“call”, “raise”), a specific amount only (“one thousand”) or both (“raise, one thousand”).

C: For all betting rules, declaring a specific amount only is the same as silently pushing out an equal amount. Ex: Declaring “two hundred” is the same as silently pushing out 200 in chips.


51:  String Bets and Raises
Dealers will call string bets and raises.


What are your thoughts?

Regards,
B~

My suggestions for edits to current wording are very minor but are as follows:

37:  Methods of Betting: Verbal and Chips

A: Bets are made by verbal declaration and/or pushing out chips. If a player does both, whichever is first defines the bet. If simultaneous, a clear and reasonable verbal declaration takes precedence, otherwise the chips play.

B: Accepted verbal declarations may be general (“call”, “raise”), a specific amount only (“one thousand”) or both (“raise, one thousand”)  Please note that, "raise, one thousand" may be interpreted to mean "raise to one thousand total" or "raise, one thousand more;" as such, either of the latter two phrases are preferred.

C: For all betting rules, declaring a specific amount only is the same as silently pushing out an equal amount. Ex: Declaring “two hundred” is the same as silently pushing out 200 in chips.

51:  String Bets and Raises
String bets are not permitted.  The Dealer will be solely responsible for identifying and denying string bets and raises.