Author Topic: Rule 31 Raising  (Read 45932 times)

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Rule 31 Raising
« Reply #30 on: December 28, 2010, 02:06:27 PM »
Thanks Mike. I don't think it needs much, but I agree, it needs a little work.

JasperToo

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 328
Re: Rule 31 Raising
« Reply #31 on: December 28, 2010, 04:15:23 PM »
Yes.  This thread touches on alot of issues and perhaps some sorting-out / clarifying / illustrating should be considered at the next Summit.

So who is the keeper of the next summit agenda?  I looked around for some kind of FAQ about how that all works, maybe I missed it. 

Is it something that you pull together from these forums or is there an official way to try and get something on the agenda?

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: Rule 31 Raising
« Reply #32 on: December 29, 2010, 11:31:42 PM »
Yes.  This thread touches on alot of issues and perhaps some sorting-out / clarifying / illustrating should be considered at the next Summit.
So who is the keeper of the next summit agenda?  I looked around for some kind of FAQ about how that all works, maybe I missed it. 

Is it something that you pull together from these forums or is there an official way to try and get something on the agenda?
  The agenda is generally drafted up by the Directors prior to the Summit. It will draw heavily but not exclusively from the threads on this forum, so posting the issues you're most concerned about here and in the "rules suggestion thread" is step one. As for the timing, the next date has not been formally announced ..... It will be announced months ahead so everyone will have plenty of opportunity to make any final suggestions, travel arrangements, etc. etc.

DCJ001

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Rule 31 Raising
« Reply #33 on: January 01, 2011, 06:55:53 PM »
In no-limit poker it is as described above, a raise on the previous raise by 3x etc.

regards
Stu

Stu.

Here's an example of a commentator for an EPT main event (No Limit Hold 'em) using the terms "three-bet" and "four-bet."

At the beginning of the video, one player raised preflop to 88,000. Another player reraised "three-bet is to 260,000." At the end of the video clip, the first player "four-bet jams" all in for 1,625,000:

http://goo.gl/UDJHA

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Rule 31 Raising
« Reply #34 on: January 18, 2011, 04:36:41 PM »
 I just want to bring this important subject back to the table. We had more hits on Rule 31 this month than any other. It has nothing to do with three bets and four bets. Any other opinions for rule #31?

WSOPMcGee

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 325
    • The R.O.P.E.
Re: Rule 31 Raising
« Reply #35 on: February 05, 2011, 12:31:50 AM »
We discussed this exact topic in the 2010 WSOP supervisor meeting.

Reading through this topic, here are the nuts and bolts of it. "Completing the Bet" is a limit term. "Full bet" is a big bet term. It is Apples vs Oranges. They are not the same even though they are both fruits.

If in No Limit / Pot Limit a player must raise a "Full Bet/Raise" more than the last bet/raise, than equally the betting is reopened to a previous bettor if the total bet to them is a "Full Bet" or more. If the original bettor wishes to raise, they must raise the "Full Bet/Raise" amount more than it is to them.

I think we're all agreeing on this, just in different ways.

What is often confusing is when we say that an all-in bet is not a 'raise' unless it is a "Full Bet". A short all-in bet may not be a 'raise' ("Full Bet"), but it is still action and that action must still be called or raised. If raised, it must raised by the last "Full Bet/Raise".

Also is sometimes confusing differentiating between a "Full Bet" and a "Full Raise". Instead of saying you have to raise a "Full Bet" it is probably more correct to say you to raise a "Full Raise". Most people think you have to raise or double the bet when you say "Full Bet". But when you clarify and say that you have to double the raise or raise the previous raise, they understand better. "Full Bet" is such a universal I'm sure we can redefine it. That's English for you. Where one phrase can mean 5 different things.
@wsopmcgee on Twitter

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Rule 37 Raising
« Reply #36 on: January 23, 2013, 08:28:15 AM »
This is a very old post but, it touches on a current discussion: Perhaps the word "valid" would be more appropriate than "legal" or "full" or "complete" when defining the required amount for re-opening betting.

Tristan

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
Re: Rule 31 Raising
« Reply #37 on: January 23, 2013, 02:29:58 PM »
I don't think "valid" will clear much up.  No-limit/limit/Pot limit all have different versions of what a valid bet or raise is. 

How about this? 

Betting or raising in no-limit.
The lowest possible bet or raise amount is determined by the amount of the big blind.  In order to determine the minimum raise, in a betting round, take the largest current bet (or big blind) and add to it the amount of the big blind or largest previous raise amount, whichever is greater. All-in bets or raises that are less than the minimum are treated as if they do not exist as a raise; they do, however, count towards the amount of the current bet.  In order for a player to have the action re-opened to them, in a betting round, they must be faced with a minimum raise or greater.
Tristan
@TristanWilberg on Twitter

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Rule 31 Raising
« Reply #38 on: February 23, 2013, 08:43:51 AM »
I don't think "valid" will clear much up.  No-limit/limit/Pot limit all have different versions of what a valid bet or raise is. 

How about this? 

Betting or raising in no-limit.
The lowest possible bet or raise amount is determined by the amount of the big blind.  In order to determine the minimum raise, in a betting round, take the largest current bet (or big blind) and add to it the amount of the big blind or largest previous raise amount, whichever is greater. All-in bets or raises that are less than the minimum are treated as if they do not exist as a raise; they do, however, count towards the amount of the current bet.  In order for a player to have the action re-opened to them, in a betting round, they must be faced with a minimum raise or greater.

Tristan: I have to question the last sentence. If a player checks on a betting round, a raise is not required to re-open the betting to him, only a valid bet.

Tristan

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
Re: Rule 31 Raising
« Reply #39 on: February 24, 2013, 12:32:07 PM »
Betting or raising in no-limit.
The lowest possible bet or raise amount is determined by the amount of the big blind.  In order to determine the minimum raise, in a betting round, take the largest current bet (or big blind) and add to it the amount of the big blind or largest previous raise amount, whichever is greater. All-in bets or raises that are less than the minimum are treated as if they do not exist as a raise; they do, however, count towards the amount of the current bet.  In order for a player to have the action re-opened to them, in a betting round, they must be faced with at least a minimum bet or raise.

Good point Nick.  Fixed!
Tristan
@TristanWilberg on Twitter