PokerTDA
POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General => Topic started by: Motobaka72 on April 29, 2021, 05:36:34 PM
-
Is there a rule or procedure preventing the dealer from announcing how much more a player needs to call?
For example
Albert bets 100
Bernard raices to 400
Dealer says to Albert: its 300 more to go.
I've always instructed my dealers to state the amount of the raise or the bet, but lately I've been trying to document it and I'm not sure where I got that from.
-
I'm a lead dealer and train new dealers for a pub league in NJ.
I wrote a 7 page "Dealer Guidelines" document that is intended to help new dealers that may know the basics, but not some of the nitty-gritty.
In it I state:
Dealers are encouraged to count and announce bets whenever possible and practical.
Some of our players object, stating it's not the way they do it in casinos. I respond saying that I've seen it plenty of times and think it's more of a 'house rules' sort of thing.
-
I should have checked first.
There’s a 2019 TDA procedure for that.
Dealers should routinely announce non-all-in bet values as betting proceeds around the table. All-in bets will be counted only on request of the player currently facing action. Accepted action continues to apply (Rule 49). Scheduled and discretionary color-ups improve bet countability.
Of course, kinda happy my guidelines agree - except I don’t make the exception for all-ins.
-
What I'm trying to say is if its ok for the dealer to say how much more a person has to call rather than the complete bet amount.
Let me try to clarify my example.
For example
Albert bets 100
Bernard raises to 400
Dealer says to Albert: its 300 more to go. Instead of dealer says to Albert: raise to 400.
-
Oh. That’s covered too.
Dealers should routinely announce non-all-in bet values....
Announce the total amount.
I would think that if the player ask how much more, then it’s ok. And probably automatically ok if the player asks for the initial bet to be brought in.
-
Thanks for taking the time to point me to the rule.
I'm aware of the rule. Its just that some clients say that a dealer should not announce how much more to call, but I can't find documentation on it.
-
The TDA Rules and Recommended Procedures are meant to facilitate orderly games that are friendly, accurate, and timely.
Rule #49, in part, says: "It is the caller’s responsibility to determine the correct amount of an opponent’s bet before calling, regardless of what is stated by others."
It recognizes that others, including the dealer, might attempt to help the caller with information that may or may not be accurate.
Recommended Procedure #12 encourages dealers to announce the bet as action proceeds around the table. Clearly, the intent is to facilitate accurate game play.
Your question asks whether or not it is acceptable for a dealer to help the caller determine the amount required to call versus simply stating the total bet amount, thus leaving the required math exercise to the caller. As you note, some of your clients think that the dealer shouldn't help with the math.
That seems a bit silly to me. Do these clients think that an accurate and timely amount to call is some sort of arcane secret advantage not to be freely shared?
-
That seems a bit silly to me. Do these clients think that an accurate and timely amount to call is some sort of arcane secret advantage not to be freely shared?
Its certainly seems that way.
It quite comon where I'm from for people in the industry to frown upon a dealer helping with the math (arcane secret).
:)
-
It is always important for the dealer to provide helpful information in a manner that avoids influencing action. Obviously, it is inappropriate for a dealer to say: "It is only one small chip to make the call."
There can be concerns of psychological factors like the power of suggestion and cognitive bias, either real of perceived. For example, there have been many studies supporting the notion that lower prices ending in .99 sell better than a one cent higher price. Others show that by first anchoring a larger or smaller number it will often influence a subsequent decision. This can come into play in your situation.
By definition, the total amount raised is more than a previous amount called. As in your case, the amount to make the call is smaller than the total amount raised. So, the "silly client" is perhaps arguing that a dealer who states the larger total amount raised is likely to produce different action by the caller than when the dealer speaks of the smaller amount to call. The raiser might want the opponent to fold to the larger number and is afraid of a call given the smaller number.
The end result seems to be that the silly client gave the opponent more information by objecting to the dealers help.
-
If I may, I would like to extend a question with a kind of similar matter.
Flop
Albert bets 500
Bernard raises to 2,500
Charly thinks for a while and then asks the dealer what happened.
Is the dealer supposed to tell Charly? Chips are in the correct place and everything is cristal clear.
-
If I may, I would like to extend a question with a kind of similar matter.
Flop
Albert bets 500
Bernard raises to 2,500
Charly thinks for a while and then asks the dealer what happened.
Is the dealer supposed to tell Charly? Chips are in the correct place and everything is criatal clear.
Here’s the beginning of a couple items from the TDA rules.
Rule 49: Accepted Action
Poker is a game of alert, continuous observation. It is the caller’s responsibility to determine the correct amount of an opponent’s bet before calling, regardless of what is stated by others. ...
Procedure 12: Dealers Should Announce Bets & Raises
Dealers should routinely announce non-all-in bet values as betting proceeds around the table. ...
Based on this, I’d say the only thing the dealer should say is, “The action is to you.” and/or “It’s 2,500 to call.”
-
I agree with Dave. The dealer should tell Charly that it is 2,500 to call. Descriptions of chronological actions should not be stated by the dealer or other players. One player per hand.
-
It's rather simple: A bets 2000, B announces: raisec 5000! B must put in 7000 chips. If he were to say: raise to 5000 then he only had to put in 3000 on top, total of 5000
-
It's rather simple: A bets 2000, B announces: raisec 5000! B must put in 7000 chips. If he were to say: raise to 5000 then he only had to put in 3000 on top, total of 5000
This has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.
It’s also wrong.
Without other clarifying information, declaring raise and an amount is the total bet. Ex: A opens for 2000, B declares “Raise, eight thousand.” The total bet is 8000.
-
Ok, I'll simply for you: it's a $1/$2 cash game. Small blind completes. After the flop he bets $5. The BB says: I raise $15! It literally means: " I call your $5 and then I raise another $15". So he must put in $20! Very simple. If he were to say: " I raise to $15 then he had to put in $5 first and then another $10 to complete the fraise in total of $15. I hope I explained it in way that you understand. Do not change the English language, you have no right or the ability...
-
This is the original question: Is there a rule or procedure preventing the dealer from announcing how much more a player needs to call?
To say that Lado's reply has nothing to do with this post is stretching it a bit. I believe that Lado is explaining why dealers should control the game and give direction to players. I have to admit, some of the TDA Rules contradict logic...and the English language!
Somehow, if this continues, we will resort to action only and eliminate all verbal bets! Just do it!
Players need to make their intentions clear, and as long as our rules, (even the simple ones) need to be translated, or differ from card room to card room, these issues will never go away.
There's no rule that says a dealer should or should not announce how much is required to call, however, when a good dealer is in control of the game, it's a beautiful experience to watch.
-
Nobody is changing the English language.
It’s simply that there is room for ambiguity, and without clarifying terminology it can be interpreted two ways. Therefore, a rule was created.
If you don’t like the rule, you can argue your point at the next TDA meeting.
-
I've been to a TDA meeting in 2011. I don't understand why it is necessary to attend a meeting held in Las Vegas every 2 years in order to voice an opinion. I'm sure there are many members across the world who have much to offer to the Forum. Who wouldn't want to go to Las Vegas? I even lived there for nearly 20 years! However, it is not always practical or possible for all of us to attend. That's why we have this Forum.
-
Yeah, I’m sorry about that comment.
It just struck me as odd that you were suggesting a rule change like that.
-
Dave,
I have no problem with anything you have to say. You have always contributed great insight into our discussions. Whenever I see a question that goes back and forth with page after page of questions and debates, I know there is something that absolutely needs to be addressed.
I believe I can explain raise rules for limit poker in a way that everyone will understand exactly how they apply. Take a look back through the years on this forum and you will see that tens of thousands of posts all pertain to raise rules for no-limit poker.
Of the thousands of TDA members, less than 5% actually participate in the discussions. Do you really think that the non-participants are silent because they agree with the written rules? I doubt it.
Rules need to be simplified. When dealers and players understand the rules that's when a good dealer takes control of the action. How can dealers do their job when so much confusion exists?
-
Thanks.
But the more I think about it, the more I can see both sides of this argument. But a lot of it has to deal with interpretation. And rules are designed to be black and white without need for interpretation.
What I mean is, suppose a player says raise, and then there’s a pause before he says the amount. I would always rule that as the amount being the total. On the other hand, if the player says raise and put in chips for a call and then specified an amount, it seems likely that the amount is the raise. The longer the pause, the more likely that the amount is the raise.
I don’t know. I think I’m overthinking this.
-
I don't know if it's overthinking. Let's bring the dealer back into this situation. If I'm dealing and a bet is made and the next player says "raise"...I will freeze any further action until the raise amount is determined.
When a player bets 4000 and the next player says, "raise 4000"...or "4000 more"Is it a raise to at least 8000? or is it a call?
If I'm dealing and that happens, I want to clarify the action, especially when I know the intent was to raise the bet to 8000. If the dealer stops the next reaction there should be no confusion. This is the perfect time to tell the raiser that the next time he makes an unclear raise, he may not like the ruling.
Remember, it is also a TDA rule for players to make their intentions clear.
I haven't read Roberts Rules in a while but I do not recall any raise rule that would follow our TDA rule. Albert bets 100...Bonnie raises 200...my logic says the total bet for the next player to call is 300.
That is not what the TDA rule says. To my way of thinking, it's no different than Albert bets 100...Bonnie says 100 more...the total is 200...it can't be 100. Too much confusion.
It is nice to start seeing a little action brewing once in a while. This pandemic has taken it's toll on all of us.
-
Nick -
My response to your two examples is gonna sound like nit picking. Sorry. And it's a long post.
Note that I'm ignoring short all-in raises for these examples.
For the record, I am not against changing the rule, except that it seems to be a well known established rule. As such, it probably shouldn't be changed. Also note that the rule is about ambiguous statements. Using the word "To" or "More" makes things clearer - but not entirely clear as you'll see in my own examples.
BTW, I checked Robert's Rules and couldn't find anything that applies.
Mind you, I deal in a pub league where some players are very sharp and some have no clue. But I gotta treat them the same so that they are prepared for when they go to a poker room. I.E. The clueless can at least get a clue, while the sharp player learns how to play against the clueless since poker rooms also have clueless players. And some clueless dealers, but that's another story. Some of the players call me the Rules Guru. Some call me the Rules Nazi. Whatever.
In your first example: A player bets 4,000 and the next player says "Raise 4,000".
A minimum raise is for 4,000 more, so the fact that the raise was ambiguous is irrelevant.
A better example would be if he said "Raise 6,000". TDA rules say that it's a raise TO 6,000, which is less than a minimum raise, so he'd be forced to put in 8,000, even though he probably intended to raise it to 10,000.
It's very hard to not agree that he did intend to raise to 10,000.
But would you apply that same logic if he had said "Raise 16,000" while putting in a four 5K chips? Did he mean additional or total? Would you make it 20,000 total or 16,000 total?
The case could be made that if the original player asks if it's more or total, that the raiser gets a read and changes his intention. That invites angle-shooting.
In your second example: Albert bets 100, Bonnie raises 200. "Raises" is a word that is used when describing the action after it has occurred. I.E. It's the kind of word someone might use when describing the situation to a floor person, but not a word a player will use when acting. And, as you suggest, it implies the 'more' amount.
If I were the dealer talking to the floor, I would say, "Albert bet 100, Bonnie said 'Raise 200', what's the total bet?" As a floor person, I would say the total is 200.
Again, allowing a player to make an argument that influences the decision invites angle-shooting.
Last is my own two part example: Blinds are 200/400. Albert is SB for 200. Bob is BB for 400. Charlie raises to 800. Dave reraises to 2000. It's back to Albert who removes his 200 and puts in two 5K chips while saying "Raise, 6000".
Is the total bet: 6000, 6200, 6400, 6800 or 8000?
Same situation, but he leaves his 200 out there and says "Raise, 6000 more". Or he says something I've seen small blinds do far too often, say "Raise, 6000 on top".
On top of what? The small blind they left out there? Is the total bet: 6200, 6400, 6800 or 8000?
I've seen players make arguments for all the different totals that I suggest.
Note: The answers for my examples are 6000 and 8000.
-
I appreciate all of the time that you put into your reply. My simple answer to you is this: Before the TDA came up with this rule, I never had a problem with raises. A raise is an increase in a prior wager. A player either pushes out the total amount of his intended wager, or he will be accused of making a 'string" bet, which we all know is not allowed, or the improper raise is corrected before the action continues. That's it.
The TDA could have easily said that when a bet is 200 and the next player says raise 600...the total bet will be 800 and not 600. This is where the problem originated. A 600 raise should not be the total amount. It is what it is and I don't imagine it will change, but I don't like it and it's certainly worthy of debate. Why? Because it creates an unintentional raise amount.
-
I'm having the exact same question as the OP here where I work.
There's an understanding that the dealer can't help the players so the player are responsible for all the actions however in my understanding and apparently in TDA also the rules and TD decisions are to help the game flow the best way we can.
So, even though saying it's 300 to call might have some psichological effect on a player because 300<400 if directly asked I believe the dealer should say the ammount to call.
As a standard rule announce the total value.
If asked "how much" total value
but if asked directly "how much more" or "how much to call" I don't see any problem in saying the correct amount to call and not the total value of the bet/raise.
-
I have dealt for many years. I always announce the proper bet amount or the amount necessary to call a bet. Why not?
Happens all the time. Action begins and there are multiple raises...whats wrong with the dealer telling the next player how much it is to call?
I founf that announcing the proper amount speeds up the game and prevents incorrect betting.
-
@Lado
Did you read the TDA rules?
-
Motobaka72
This is a very old post but I thought I would tell you how I've always done it when I was dealing.
Six players called the 200 BB...The BB raises to 500...As the dealer, I announce RAISE! looking to the under the gun I say 300 more to call!
Raise, three hundred to call! That's it and that's the best way to handle that situation. When a player pushes all-in, that is a different situation. Never waste time counting down a bet until the bet is called.
Player pushes all-in with large stacks of chips...do not count them down unless it is requested.
Clarifying each bet amount will avoid confusion and make the hand move along smoothly.
-
I didn't go back and read through all the old replies, but I do not agree with Nick's most recent reply.
The dealer should not be telling the player how much 'more'. They should just be stating the total bet amount.
Telling them how much more is helping them make their decision.
Same thing when a player goes all in, we don't say the amount, we just say they are all in.
Dealer announcing 'all in' to a player that isn't really paying much attention, that player might just fold, because all in sounds like a big bet. But if the dealer says 'all in for 225' or 'all in - 25 more', they are basically pointing out that it isn't much more to call.
The all in amount isn't announced until a player whose turn it is to act, asks. For this very reason.
It's the same for raises that aren't all in. Dealer should just be announcing the total bet size. Not 'helping' the player decide that it's a 'good deal' and only "x" amount more.
It's the same reason we don't tell them how much is in the pot.
The players should be paying attention and making their decisions based off of their own observations without the dealer offering extra information.
-
I agree with the logic and reasoning for not counting down an all in bet.
For the record, in my bar league, we always count down every bet that isn’t obvious. But that’s primarily because our games are short stack turbo: 1,500 chips, with blinds that start at 11 minutes and get shorter as players are knocked out. We don’t have time to fart around with people trying to guess the bet amounts. Similar for going into the tank. Anyone can call clock, even the dealer. And when the clock is called, it starts to immediately, and is only 30 seconds.
Our games last about an hour or so, and we do three in an evening.
-
I can see this issue will never be settled.