News:

SMF - Just Installed!

Main Menu

Recent posts

#81
Quote from: Vincenzo Morabito on April 16, 2025, 01:01:04 AMHello Guillaume!

As the rule says: "If Player A declares "bet" or "raise" and B calls before A's exact bet amount is known, the TD will rule the bet as best fits the situation including possibly obliging B to call any amount."

In my opinion, the possibility of losing any minimum raise could open up scenarios that should be properly regulated by a specific written rule.

I also think that we cannot properly speak of out-of-turn action, since this is a different specific case. There is no action in the declaration of the raise amount, that is, the action is already defined as a raise.

I believe that defending the strength of the verbal declaration is fundamental in a interpreting the spirit and the principles of all the regulation and the written rules as well. So in a very few cases I will fit the situation in a different way to obliging B to call any amount.

TY very much for your answer Vincenzo.

To be honest my final conclusion was slightly different from yours because, for the moment, I will usually use the #2 solution and only in very few cases I will fit the situation to choose the #1 obliging B to call any amount. Plus for me C is OOT because the decision of B is NOT over (and so not clear).

But be sure that your answer is IMPORTANT for me, even if slightly opposed to mine. And I will count with it if some other TDs answer me the same way as you.
#82
Hello Guillaume!

As the rule says: "If Player A declares "bet" or "raise" and B calls before A's exact bet amount is known, the TD will rule the bet as best fits the situation including possibly obliging B to call any amount."

In my opinion, the possibility of losing any minimum raise could open up scenarios that should be properly regulated by a specific written rule.

I also think that we cannot properly speak of out-of-turn action, since this is a different specific case. There is no action in the declaration of the raise amount, that is, the action is already defined as a raise.

I believe that defending the strength of the verbal declaration is fundamental in a interpreting the spirit and the principles of all the regulation and the written rules as well. So in a very few cases I will fit the situation in a different way to obliging B to call any amount.
#83
2024 TDA Rules Translations / 2024 TDA Rules German translat...
Last post by N4m3l3ss - April 11, 2025, 12:40:30 PM
Hi there!

The following is a link to the 2024 Poker TDA Rules translated to German.

https://lpvnrw.de/tdarules.php

This translation is courtesy of the Landespokerverband NRW e.V.
#84
Hello!

A > bets 10.000
B > says "raise"
C > says "call" (before any amount is announced by B)

1 > Does C must now call any amount announced by B (from 20.000 to many more)?
2 > Or does C can also forfeit a min raise of 20.000 if the amount is too big for him?
(knowing that C will anyway receive a penalty for speaking out of turn). 

TY in advance - GG
#85
Hello!
Did I understand correctly the UNDERCALL with no verbal declaration:

1) Check + Open bet + Fold + Call + Undercall > THE UNDERCALL MUST BE COMPLETED 
(because here we only face the open bet, even after the first call that changes nothing right?)

2) Check + Open bet + Fold + Raise + Undercall > THE UNDERCALL CAN BE COMPLETED OR FORFEIT
(because here we don't face only the open bet but multiple bets right?)

3) Big Blind + Fold + Raise + Undercall > THE UNDERCALL CAN BE COMPLETED OR FORFEIT
(because the Big Blind is actually an Open bet right?)

Conclusion (if I'm right) : The most numerous cases oblige to complete the Undercall.
Finally only the raises can give the choice to forfeit the Undercall.

Tell me ...  :)
#86
Quote from: Dave Miller on December 27, 2024, 11:21:37 PM
Quote from: Guillaume Gleize on December 27, 2024, 09:55:07 PMNobody around?  ::)
Yep. This forum does not get much activity.

I deal in a bar league where we keep it friendly. I'd be using option 2. Hell, I'd even back it up if seat C did get a card.

But official TDA rule/procedure? Dunno.

Anyway TY for the answer Dave.
Happy to read an human being around here!
#87
Quote from: Guillaume Gleize on December 27, 2024, 09:55:07 PMNobody around?  ::)
Yep. This forum does not get much activity.

I deal in a bar league where we keep it friendly. I'd be using option 2. Hell, I'd even back it up if seat C did get a card.

But official TDA rule/procedure? Dunno.
#88
Nobody around?  ::)
#89
Hello!

In a poker tournament:
Player A has placed his SB
Seat B is free
Player C has placed his BB
The dealer only deals the very first card to A and at this moment a player comes to sit at B.
What is the procedure:

1) The first card being given, the deal has started, B does not play and C remains BB?
2) B must place the BB and play and C recovers his BB and will be UTG?

TY in advance - GG
#90
Event structuring / Re: How Do You Manage Bounties...
Last post by Dave Miller - December 13, 2024, 10:28:28 PM
I've played in such a tournament online where the math and tracking is automatic and easy, but I've never even heard of this being done live. The tracking and security issues seem like a nightmare.

I'm just spitballing here, but here's my idea:

Instead of bounty chips, give each player an All In button (so that those players who like to toss in the bounty chip to indicate they are all in will have a something to toss in), and a bounty slip with the starting bounty value.

When a player is eliminated, he and the player who eliminated him turn in their bounty slips.

The dealer, or floor person, gives the player a new bounty slip with the new value written on it, as well as a cash out slip for the portion that they keep.

If the player has additional knockouts, they will also turn in the cash slip to get a new cash slip with their new cash total.

In this manner, there doesn't need to be excessive rounding.

You'll probably have to use three part forms and have other security protocols etc. to get gaming to approve it, but that's my thoughts.