Player Acts Out of Turn Heads Up: How to Handle ?

[MikeB]

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.

[K-Lo]

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.

[Nick C]

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.

[Tristan]

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.

[Nick C]

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.

[Tristan]

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.

[MikeB]

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.

[Nick C]

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

[Alessandro 'Maverick' Galietta]

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.