So this happened yesterday in Razz.
Two players heads up on 4th street.
First player to act does nothing. Second player to act makes a verbal declaration, "I call if you bet". Secondarily after his verbal declaration he puts in chips to call.
Floor is called.
What would you rule and why.
There are 2 WSOP rules that cover this situation, #90 and #89. I don't see any specific TDA rule that covers the topic. I think it needs to be addressed. Rule #37 covers Action in Turn and Verbal declarations but not Out of Turn. Nor does rule #38 cover verbal actions Out of Turn.
Thomas: Very nice catch on 37. I'd say the intent where "verbal declaration" is mentioned is to apply to all betting action, verbal or silent chips. i.e. probably should read: "Players must act in turn.
Bets in turn are binding
and must stay in the pot" The original intent of singling out "verbal declaration" I believe was referencing blanket declarations such as "Call" and "Raise" as binding to
full action.
Rule 38 applies to all betting action out of turn, and Rule 51 may be applicable here re: conditional statements.
The example has alot of non-standard action. As I read it, player 2 makes a conditional statement followed by an out-of-turn bet by push of chips. The out of turn bet is unquestionable, he's bound to it if the action to him isn't changed. The main question is whether you would bind the conditional statement here or not under rule 51. If you would, then Player 2 is limited to a call if Player 1 bets. So the options here under current rules seem to be:
Back up the action to Player 1:
If player 1 bets, Player 2 is released from his out-of-turn bet, but may still be locked into a call at TDs discretion using Rule 51.
If player 1 checks, Player 2 is definitely locked into his out of turn bet by Rule 38.
Definitely a warning against this type of betting.
Lastly, your example also involves the question of whether out of turn action heads-up should be binding. Some interesting viewpoints on this are likely come up at the Summit.