Stud quirkiness

[K-Lo]

1) In Stud-type games, if someone is to bring-in, but is all-in for less than the bring-in, can someone confirm that the next person to act must wager at the least the minimum bring-in amount on third street?  I can't seem to find a source for a rule that specifically covers this, although it seems to be analogous to the hold'em case where a player who calls pre-flop must wager at least the BB amount, even if the BB is all-in for less.

2) If a player is all-in for less than the completion amount but more than the bring-in, do you treat this as a case where if it is more than halfway to completion it is consider a completed bet and subsequent players may raise, and if under halfway, then subsequent players cannot make a full raise but can only complete?  Or do you treat anything above a bring-in amount as a completed bet, which subsequent players may raise?  I know Thomas had a discussion of this in R.O.P.E. (I think he proposed the latter approach is better), but I'm wondering what is currently the "standard"?

[MikeB]

1) In Stud-type games, if someone is to bring-in, but is all-in for less than the bring-in, can someone confirm that the next person to act must wager at the least the minimum bring-in amount on third street?  I can't seem to find a source for a rule that specifically covers this, although it seems to be analogous to the hold'em case where a player who calls pre-flop must wager at least the BB amount, even if the BB is all-in for less.

2) If a player is all-in for less than the completion amount but more than the bring-in, do you treat this as a case where if it is more than halfway to completion it is consider a completed bet and subsequent players may raise, and if under halfway, then subsequent players cannot make a full raise but can only complete?  Or do you treat anything above a bring-in amount as a completed bet, which subsequent players may raise?  I know Thomas had a discussion of this in R.O.P.E. (I think he proposed the latter approach is better), but I'm wondering what is currently the "standard"?

K, great questions:

Re issue 1: RRoP Vers 11, Sec 8 (7-stud), para 4:

"If the player with the lowcard [the bring-in] is all-in for the ante (or any player designated to start the action on a round of betting is all-in), betting action proceeds to the first active player to the left of the all-in player. If the player with the lowcard has only enough chips for a portion of the forced bet, the wager is made. All other players must enter for at least the normal amount in that structure."

Re issue 2: Sec. 3, Betting & Raising, para 7.

"In limit play [which 7-stud virtually always is... if you're playing NL 5-stud then use NL rules], an all-in wager of less than half a bet does not reopen the betting for any player who has already acted and is in the pot for all previous bets. A player who has not yet acted (or had the betting reopened to him by another player's action), facing an all-in wager of less than half a bet, may fold, call, or complete the wager. An all-in wager of a half a bet or more is treated as a full bet, and a player may fold, call, or make a full raise. (An example of a full raise on a $20 betting round is raising a $15 all-in bet to $35.) Multiple all-in wagers, each of an amount too small to individually qualify as a raise, still act as a raise and reopen the betting if the resulting wager size to a player qualifies as a raise."

[Nick C]

Hello Ken,

I think Mike gave you what you're looking for. The interesting thing about 7 card stud is applying the limit rules to "spread limit." Consider a $1 to $5 game where a bet and 3 raises could cap the bet at $4? The fixed bet games or structured games; 2 & 4 or 5 & 10 (for example) are much easier to explain.

Your second question can become confusing in some spread limit games (like $1 to $3) because a player can go all-in on sixth street for $1; where other limit games must move to the higher end of the structure on fifth street. e.g. $3 and $6, sixth street all-in bettor must have at least $3 to qualify as an amount that can be raised, otherwise the next bettor could only complete the bet to $6. e.g. sixth street all-in opens for $2, others may call or complete. All-in for $3 $4 or $5 and the next player may call or make a full raise of $6 more. What's interesting is the same rule that applies for the bring-in, does not apply on fourth street.

I always found the fourth street rule in structured games very interesting. e.g. $5 and $10 open pair on fourth street you could bet either $5 or $10. That could make for interesting discussion for all-in situations...ya think? Talk about quirkiness.

Mike, since you did such a fine job of digging up the answers to Ken's question. I think you may have found the solution for TDA #37. All we have to do is ad the following to the end of the last sentence; and is in the pot for all previous bets. Perfect!

[K-Lo]

Re issue 1: RRoP Vers 11, Sec 8 (7-stud), para 4:

"If the player with the lowcard [the bring-in] is all-in for the ante (or any player designated to start the action on a round of betting is all-in), betting action proceeds to the first active player to the left of the all-in player. If the player with the lowcard has only enough chips for a portion of the forced bet, the wager is made. All other players must enter for at least the normal amount in that structure."

Thanks, Mike.  I completely missed that when I was looking for it.

Re issue 2: Sec. 3, Betting & Raising, para 7.

"In limit play [which 7-stud virtually always is... if you're playing NL 5-stud then use NL rules], an all-in wager of less than half a bet does not reopen the betting for any player who has already acted and is in the pot for all previous bets. A player who has not yet acted (or had the betting reopened to him by another player's action), facing an all-in wager of less than half a bet, may fold, call, or complete the wager. An all-in wager of a half a bet or more is treated as a full bet, and a player may fold, call, or make a full raise. (An example of a full raise on a $20 betting round is raising a $15 all-in bet to $35.) Multiple all-in wagers, each of an amount too small to individually qualify as a raise, still act as a raise and reopen the betting if the resulting wager size to a player qualifies as a raise."

This one I did find, which is the way that I've been doing it.  Then I recall reading something by Thomas and I wasn't sure if it was something that he was proposing should be changed, or whether it actually made its way into actual usage.  Without going into too much detail now, basically he works out the various possibility when, on third street, the all-in is between the bring-in and the completion amount, and makes a good case why it should be treated as a completed bet if it is any amount between the two.  I pinged one of the mixed games pros and he believes it is still the half-rule still as you suggested, which is consistent with our understanding.

Thanks for checking!