Author Topic: Acting OOT  (Read 732 times)

Ash

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Acting OOT
« on: June 13, 2017, 07:06:20 PM »
One topic about the rule 40: Action Out of Turn (OOT)
I have some trouble to understand exactly what should be decided in some cases

In those situations, what can Player C do?

Let say blinds 200/400
In a multipot game, post flop
1) C bets 800 OOT, then A makes an open bet 400
2) C bets 800 OOT, then A makes an open bet 1000
3) C bets 800 OOT, then A bets 800 to call the previous bet from C
4) C is all in 2500 OOT, then A makes an open bet 400
5) C is all in 2500 OOT, then A makes an open bet 3000
6) C is all in 2500 OOT, then A raises to 6000

If it happens in heads'up situation, would you rule it the same way?

Thank you

Dave Miller

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
  • Lead dealer / rules guru for World Free Poker
    • Poker For Roulette
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2017, 06:30:35 AM »
What does Player B do?
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown.
But how much does it cost to knock on wood?

Ash

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #2 on: June 14, 2017, 06:40:59 AM »
Player B in each case folds or calls the action made by A
In fact what can C do considering the action of A

BROOKS

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #3 on: June 14, 2017, 01:24:38 PM »
This is very simple and the answer is the same for all of your examples.
If "C"  bets out of turn, that bet will stay unless "A" or "B" make an aggressive action.
So in all your examples "C" bets out of turn and "A" makes a bet. As soon as "A" bets, "C" takes their bet back and has all of their options. Call, raise, fold.
If "C" bets out of turn and "A" and "B" do passive actions (check/call/fold), then the out of turn bet stays.

Your last example isn't worded correctly though.
You have "C" going all in out of turn and then "A" raising.
"A" cannot raise, it's their turn to check or bet. "C" 's action is out of turn. The only way "A" can raise, is if they CHECK (passive), which means the out of turn stays, then "A" can raise (but who is A raising?)

Ash

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #4 on: June 14, 2017, 03:04:35 PM »
In fact, whatever the amount of the open bet made by A (lower ou higher than the OOT bet), it gives C the opportunity to disengage and he is free to any action? Even an OOT all in can have all his chips back?
In that case you give a warning/penalty to C i guess

In fact i was told that the only possibility for C to disengage is if A makes a bet higher than C's bet. According to your answer it seems this is not what you use to rule.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3081
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #5 on: June 14, 2017, 03:29:56 PM »
Brooks,

 I'm having a tough time understanding your example, when you say: If C bets OOT and A and B are passive...why can't A raise C?

Ash

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #6 on: June 14, 2017, 05:37:44 PM »
I guess Nick understands what i wrote.

The idea is A bets a higher amount than C's all in

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3081
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2017, 05:48:51 PM »
Ash...I've always thought this rule much too confusing. I was always against letting the OOT bettor "off the hook" so to speak. I always felt the OOT was the offender...and then the TDA comes out with a ruling where the OOT might not be the true offender because the skipped players should speak up, to defend their right to act!!?? :o  I still don't like that rule...and I still don't fully understand "action changing to the OOT bettor...sorry, I just don't get it.

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2017, 10:29:40 PM »
This is very simple and the answer is the same for all of your examples.
If "C"  bets out of turn, that bet will stay unless "A" or "B" make an aggressive action.
So in all your examples "C" bets out of turn and "A" makes a bet. As soon as "A" bets, "C" takes their bet back and has all of their options. Call, raise, fold.
If "C" bets out of turn and "A" and "B" do passive actions (check/call/fold), then the out of turn bet stays.

Your last example isn't worded correctly though.
You have "C" going all in out of turn and then "A" raising.
"A" cannot raise, it's their turn to check or bet. "C" 's action is out of turn. The only way "A" can raise, is if they CHECK (passive), which means the out of turn stays, then "A" can raise (but who is A raising?)

Ash: See Brooks' answer above. This is all found in 2015 TDA Rule 40.

Also, in answer to your last question, it's currently treated the same whether the OOT occurs multi-way or heads-up. This rule will be up for review in 2017. In the past 2 or 3 Summits there has been a contingent that would like to limit C's options in some way. This year there has also been discussion of limiting C in heads-up play. So that will all be debated.

Ash

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #9 on: June 15, 2017, 05:42:15 AM »
Good thing if they debate and clarify the rule

BROOKS

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #10 on: June 15, 2017, 06:20:51 AM »
Brooks,

 I'm having a tough time understanding your example, when you say: If C bets OOT and A and B are passive...why can't A raise C?

It's his last example :

6) C is all in 2500 OOT, then A raises to 6000


It just didn't make sense because the OOT person C has gone all in. Then he says A raises.
Technically A can't raise because there's nothing to raise yet. It's his turn to check or bet. That all in out of turn only stays if A checks. So I was just saying A has to check, and then I guess he can raise, but raise who? C is all in. If there are other players involved in the hand, then I guess A could be raising them.

BROOKS

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #11 on: June 15, 2017, 06:28:38 AM »
I guess Nick understands what i wrote.

The idea is A bets a higher amount than C's all in

If we're taking about your 6th example
6) C is all in 2500 OOT, then A raises to 6000
Then that's not what you said.
You said A RAISES to a higher amount than the OOT all in, which is what made it confusing.

But either way, if OOT bets 2500, then A - who's turn it really is, decides to Bet 6000, that all in OOT is still taken back and he gets all his options.
The amount of A's bet will never change that.
If someone bets out of turn, and then a made is bet (aggressive action), the out of turn is always taken back, and player is given all their options.

This is the same with raising.
A bets 2k, C OOT raises to 6k

That 6k stays unless B does an aggressive action.
B calls (passive) - OOT 6k stays
B folds (passive) - OOT 6k stays
B raises (to any amount 4k,5k 10k irrelevant) - OOT 6k comes back and C has all options - call, raise, fold

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3081
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #12 on: June 15, 2017, 06:32:05 AM »
Ash,

 I'm with you on this one. Let's take a look at what happens in a fixed limit game...let's say on a 100 betting round, Player C bets 100 out of turn. Once the incorrect bet is addressed, the action is directed to the proper bettor...Player A.
 According to our rule, Player A's options are: bet $100...(which for some strange reason is defined as action changing). Or check. If Player A checks, then Player C's out of turn must stand...unless Player B raises to 200...this is where the confusion gets more complicated. Even though the action has changed, why should the OOT Player C have an option to remove his 100?

 Same scenario: Player A decides to check after Player C's OOT. Player B also checks...now we know that Player C's OOT stands. If Player B folds, Player C's bet also stands...correct?

 The way I understand the current rule: when facing no wager the OOT bettor's wager must stand ONLY when the proper bettors decide to  check. Mike, I hope you help me out with this one. If I'm correct, then perhaps the rule needs some added language that clarifies the proper bettor, or bettors, must check to the OOT in order for his OOT to be valid.

 When facing a bet, any skipped players must call the exact bet they were facing when the OOT occurred or the OOT can be retracted.
I sure hope someone follows me on this because I've asked for these answers in the past and got more confused.

 One other thought: If Player's A or B decide to raise the OOT after they check, it should be allowed. How do we proceed? Player C bets 100...Player A says, "it's my turn to bet!" The dealer says "what do you want to do?" Player A says, "Check." Player B say's "Check." The OOT now stands, but what if Player A (or, B) wants to raise? Do they have to call first and then the action goes back to them?

I won't be at the Summit this year but I'll be watching and I hope you bring this post with you! :D

 
« Last Edit: June 15, 2017, 06:58:01 AM by Nick C »

Ash

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #13 on: June 15, 2017, 09:56:53 AM »
Thank you Nick for the clarification, glad tout see i am not alone to be a bit confused by all those situations that can occur !

Ash

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Re: Acting OOT
« Reply #14 on: June 15, 2017, 10:04:02 AM »
But given that the rule says a call does not change the action, could we consider if A ou B calls the oot bet, it is not an agressive move and then the oot bet should remain engaged?
Really tricky situation