PokerTDA
POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General => Topic started by: Brian Vickers on March 18, 2012, 02:22:40 PM
-
First off, Hi guys! Haven't posted here in a while.
34: Verbal Declarations / Acting in Turn
Players must act in turn. Verbal declarations in turn are binding. Chips placed in the pot in turn must stay in the pot.
In tournament today - Blinds are 150-300, player A calls 300, player B raises to 1200, player C puts out a single 500 chip and says "call" because he did not see the raise ahead of him and thought he was calling 300. I ruled that he may forfeit 500 and fold or call 1200. The players almost unanimously disagreed with me saying that he should only have to forfeit 300 because that was the amount he thought he was calling, essentially that the overchip rule should apply... I disagreed with that and kept to my original ruling and he forfeited 500 and folded.
Anyone disagree with this? If so, I'd like to know why.
Thanks!
-
Welcome back Brian!
Most that post on the Forum seem to have a different approach than I do, so I'm sure you'll hear from others that agree with what you did. I would consider that action as an obvious unintentional mistake and as long as substantial action has not occurred, I would have allowed the player every option including retracting his total bet.
-
Hi Brian:
This is one of those situations that I can see going different ways, and it could depend on the history with the player. Was the 1200 clearly visible?
I cannot disagree with your ruling. I don't necessarily think the overchip rule should apply... he said "call" and not "300" so if anything, he should be bound to put in 1200; but keeping the 500 in there and giving him an option seems like a reasonable compromise.
On the other hand, this does seem to be the classic RROP "gross misunderstanding" situation, and if he's not known to be trying to play an angle, I also have no problem allowing the bet to be retracted and reconsidered as per Nick.
Tough one. I think it would really depend on the players involved.
-
Brian I'd rule the same as you. It is chips in turn. 500 is punishment enough for the misunderstanding and it will prevent him from doing it again. Forcing the call is a bit extreme. Fold for 500 or call 700 more but no free lessons!
-
I'm curious to know what people would think about this situation, if all the facts were the same as in the original tournament EXCEPT C put out a single 5000 chip, because that's all he had, and then he said he did not mean to call the 1200 but only the 300?
-
K-Lo,
Based on the differring opinions of just a few of us, to me it just points out how weak some of the rules are written. You can go any number of ways with your ruling and point to a TDA rule that justifies whatever call you make!
K-Lo has mentioned it eairlier and I've echoed the same feeling on many other posts...the reputation of the player and the intent of the player must be considered. An unintentional call, or raise, that is obviously a mistake should be adjusted.
We always speak of the lesson that will be "taught" the hard way, to the new inexperienced player that doesn't pay attention, or is not quite clear of the action in front of him. Why not ask some of the players that are attempting to steal the pot by raising how they feel about your decision? The floor ruled that your raise was called by a player that really had no intention of calling but is forced to. He didn't want to call your all-in, but the decision of the floor just changed the outcome of the tournament . Think about it. If that were you, wouldn't you like to say; "oh that's okay, he doesn't have to put in the call! Please don't let him call, :'( please!"
K-Lo, I wanted to address your last situation where the player puts in the 5000 chip...Wow, that does change things doesn't it? I think in a multy handed pot,(which is the situation in the original post) with other players still to act, the player could be locked-in to the 1200 call. The difference is the oversized chip covers the amount of the raise.
-
Just to clarify my original question, I'm 100% of the time going to make him leave some chips in (per rule 34 and also my belief that players not paying attention should still be liable for thier action) the only question is whether I'm going to make him keep in 300 (because the Big Blind was 300) or 500 (the chip he put in in turn).
-
Well, if I'm forced to choose one it will be the amount of the call. Return his 200, for sure.
-
I'm curious to know what people would think about this situation, if all the facts were the same as in the original tournament EXCEPT C put out a single 5000 chip, because that's all he had, and then he said he did not mean to call the 1200 but only the 300?
1200. Oversize chip rule. This misunderstanding is not enough for a return of 4700.
-
I'm curious to know what people would think about this situation, if all the facts were the same as in the original tournament EXCEPT C put out a single 5000 chip, because that's all he had, and then he said he did not mean to call the 1200 but only the 300?
1200. Oversize chip rule. This misunderstanding is not enough for a return of 4700.
LOL, oops on my typo Spence. I meant for that to say a "500" chip.
-
In our poker room during tournament play we would make the player call for the whole amount as long as player B's raise is clear (1200 sitting out in the field of play). We figure it's the player's responsibility to pay attention. If B said "raise to 1200" softly (judgement call on that), the dealer did not announce the raise loud and clear, and also B did not push his chips forward, C would get the benefit of the doubt and would get a full refund.
In our cash games we use the Robert's Rules and they allow a refund for misunderstandings in no-limit and pot-limit regarding this sort of thing. In tournament rulings we are stricter because a ruling affects everyone in the tournament instead of cash play where it only affects the people in the hand.
-
mooredog,
I like your way.
-
In our poker room during tournament play we would make the player call for the whole amount as long as player B's raise is clear (1200 sitting out in the field of play). We figure it's the player's responsibility to pay attention. If B said "raise to 1200" softly (judgement call on that), the dealer did not announce the raise loud and clear, and also B did not push his chips forward, C would get the benefit of the doubt and would get a full refund.
In our cash games we use the Robert's Rules and they allow a refund for misunderstandings in no-limit and pot-limit regarding this sort of thing. In tournament rulings we are stricter because a ruling affects everyone in the tournament instead of cash play where it only affects the people in the hand.
Sorry, but I don't agree with this at all. There is no reason to turn this into a judgment call scenario when both parties are going to have a bias in the matter - The dealer doesn't want to admit that he didn't announce it clearly and the player won't want to admit that he wasn't paying attention... We tried the same thing in my old poker room when it came to straddles because so many players would put out $2 even after the dealer announced a straddle... The dealer would always say he announced it and the player would always say the dealer didn't.
RROP are practical in most spots, but this one seems to be a bit outdated. The trend and more widely accepted rule these days is that money put in the pot in turn remains in the pot. The Poker TDA rules state the same way and I agree with the TDA rules 100% on this matter. The ONLY question I have is whether in my original example the guy who put in a single 500 chip would forfeit the entire 500 (I think so) or 300 for the size of the big blind.
-
Brian,
Before I disagree with you, I want to say it's good to hear from you, always. I thought that I covered this earlier with the mention of the oversized chip (5000). In the original post, why do you want to force a player to surrender his chips when it is obvious he did not understand the bet? Why would he place a lesser amount than the bet into the pot? The bet was 300 it was raised to 1200 the player in question puts in a 500 chip ???...Why? The only logical answer is an unclear bet. Any way you slice it, you will either be giving extra chips to the winner, or forcing a player that had no intention of competing for the pot, (at that price) a chance to win it, when he shouldn't even be in it!
-
Because of rule #34 of the TDA rules.
If the player had just put out 300 chips because he thought it was a 300 chip bet but was actually raised to 1200 first, he would have had to surrender the 300 or call 1200 per rule #34. Putting out a 500 chip in turn does not, IMO, change his obligation to the pot. Having a 1200 chip bet in front of you is hard to mistake no matter what the dealer says, so it is clear that the player was not paying attention.
Also, please note that when I said 5000 in my 2nd post it was a typo and meant to say 500.
-
Brian,
I did catch the mistake but K-Lo resubmitted another question because of your mistake. I guess I prefer allowing the player to retract his bet as long as substantial action has not followed. I also believe that this was mentioned at the summit, allowing the player to retract his unintentional wager. Or does substantial action not apply in this situation?
-
Brian,
I did catch the mistake but K-Lo resubmitted another question because of your mistake. I guess I prefer allowing the player to retract his bet as long as substantial action has not followed. I also believe that this was mentioned at the summit, allowing the player to retract his unintentional wager. Or does substantial action not apply in this situation?
Nick, it's funny you should mention the summit and some TD's saying that a player may retract an unintentional wager when we are currently arguing about Rule 41 on another thread. Rule 41 was put in place when it seems that there would have already been opoosition to it. I wish I could have been at the summit...
For the record Rule 41 is:
41: 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 the dealer or players. If a caller requests a count but receives incorrect information from the dealer or players, then places that amount in the pot, the caller is assumed to accept the full correct action & is subject to the correct wager or all-in amount. As with all tournament situations, Rule 1 may apply at TD’s discretion.
-
Spence,
I'm not following what you're saying. Are you agreeing that rule 41 is flawed? or are you in favor of it? The issue on this thread is if a player is obligated to any amount that he announces or pushes (in turn) even if it was based on an unclear bet. Should the player be allowed to retract his bet as long as the next player has not acted?
-
I am not in favour of rule 41.
I am in favour of this circumstance the player who put chips into the pot in turn having to leave them in.
-
Sounds fair to me. Out with #41! We can continue to debate how much (if any) of a players bet is committed to the pot after an unclear bet.
-
I think its different here Nick as he did not bet out of turn. If he did then I would allow him to retract his bet if there is no bet/raise on the players before him. I would say if he had said call before the 500 chip hit the surface, then I would bind him to the 1200.
Makes sense I hope.