A player asked Matt and me a very interesting question at the Bay 101 Tourney this weekend:
The hand is down to two players heads up. Player A is on the button. Post flop he should act last but instead he forgets and acts first, pushing all in.
Player B ponders for quite awhile then silently pushes all-in himself.
***********************************************************
How do you rule in this situation?
1: Accept Player B's bet as a binding call and proceed to showdown?
2: Release Player A from his out-of-turn bet, and give him all options: either pull his chips back and fold OR call Player B
What's your answer and why?
Many thanks to Mike Harvey for the question.
By the book, A has all options open here.
He is going to get a penalty at the end of the hand. If he folds (after having made the OOT aggressive action), he is going to get a bigger penalty -- at least one round in my circles.
My rule would be #1 Accept Player B's bet as a binding call and proceed to showdown? I would not allow a retraction from the out of turn. However, if he wins the hand or still has chips after the showdown, I would enforce the one round penalty that Ken suggested.
I'm with K-Lo.
I go by the book here and allow A all actions.
The reason why is because most players are familiar with that ruling here and B may have shoved in order to get A to reconsider and fold. If I make A's action binding, I could very easily upset both players.
I think if I were to bind A's out of turn all-in, I would have to let B know before they make their action.
We have discussed this on other threads. My feelings are based on one simple fact...the OOT is the offending. Why allow him all options?
Same situation with a twist: Player A goes all-in (OOT)...Player B checks. Would you really allow Player A the option to also check? ??? Too much control in my opinion.
Quote from: Nick C on March 13, 2014, 02:42:56 PM
We have discussed this on other threads. My feelings are based on one simple fact...the OOT is the offending. Why allow him all options?
Same situation with a twist: Player A goes all-in (OOT)...Player B checks. Would you really allow Player A the option to also check? ??? Too much control in my opinion.
38: Action Out of Turn (OOT)A: Action out of turn is subject to penalty and is binding if the action to the OOT player has not changed. A check, call or fold does not change action. If action changes, the OOT bet is not binding and is returned to the OOT player who has all options including: calling, raising, or folding. An OOT fold is binding.
If A goes all-in OOT and Player B checks, Player A's bet is binding. The reason it is different in the scenario above is because the player that was skipped changed the action.
Anyone have links to specific threads on OOT heads-up? There's a ton of OOT threads but none with heads up in subject line.
Mike,
Not exactly what you're looking for but these are worth looking at again. I'm still looking for more.
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=134.0
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=217.15
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=257.0
I think to use the standard rule of OOT so i decide for the option 2 because it's different raise allin to call allin.
Action OOT is subjet to penalty, and not a mandatory penalty.
If i think that the action OOT is an error and it's not a tentative to gain an advantage (i.e. the first time), i don't give penalty to player A.