Author Topic: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?  (Read 11990 times)

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« on: April 26, 2014, 09:54:58 PM »
The TDA received a very interesting question on the subject of Out of Turn Action which we are re-posting below so that others may participate in the discussion. It should be noted that this question was specifically on a cash game situation, but it calls into question the TDA tournament rule so this is a good opportunity to review it.

***************** Begin question *********************************
From: Name Withheld
Subject: Betting out of turn ......

Message Body:
hi sir,
         This is not the first time where people in the card room come asking me "why is the player gets an advantage when he bets out of turn rather than player who is paying attention to the game"

scenario-player A on small blind and player B on big.
the dealer puts out the flop and player B acts out of turn and bets 16,000....
[action is backed up to the rightful player], player A, who puts out just 200
the floor is called and makes the decision that player B has the option of just caling the 200, [or raising] or even folding, [now that A has changed the initial action]....

The TDA rule is that if Player A doesn't change the action, Player B's out-of-turn bet stays but if player A changes the action, Player B can take take his bet back and has all options open...please advise
************************ End Question ************************

Tristan

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2014, 09:51:08 AM »
Player B does not have the advantage in the situation described, in my opinion.

Player A now gets to make a decision with information that should have not been provided to them.  Player A received free information from Player B and they now have a lot of control over what Player B can do.  What other time can you guarantee with 100% success that your check will allow you to check/raise?

Tristan
@TristanWilberg on Twitter

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3345
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2014, 04:47:19 PM »
Tristan,

 You lost me on this one...I never liked the out of turn rule for tournament poker. I agree that the offending player (out of turn) must, at least, not be allowed to retract his out of turn bet according to the following: Player B bets 200 (out of turn). The action is backed up and Player A decides to bet 300. I believe that the out of turn may call, raise or even fold. The only difference is if he folds he surrenders his 200 out of turn!

 I'll steal a line from one of the TDA's other rules (Accepted Action)...Poker is a game of alert continuous observation. It is the caller's responsibility to determine the correct amount of an opponents bet before calling....so how does the out of turn bettor evade punishment for his violation! Act in turn is probably the number one rule that every new player should learn.

 Furthermore, if you feel the out of turn is giving too much information to the proper (skipped) bettor...too bad! Pay attention to the action.

Tristan

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #3 on: April 27, 2014, 05:47:49 PM »
The scenario was on the flop.

Player B (OOT) bet 16,000.

The action gets backed up to Player A who then bets 200.

Floor ruled that since Player A changed the action, Player B has all options available.  It's a pretty standard call.  I do not feel that Player A is disadvantaged as they gained information and have a lot of control over what Player B can do. 

_______________________________________

Player B bets 200 (out of turn). The action is backed up and Player A decides to bet 300. I believe that the out of turn may call, raise or even fold. The only difference is if he folds he surrenders his 200 out of turn!

Nick,

In your scenario, I feel that we are changing the game if we bind that OOT 200.  By forcing the OOT player to keep money in the pot, we would actually reduce Player A's chance of a successful bluff.  I don't know about you, but when I explain the rule of OOT betting and then the skipped player bets into the OOT player, many times the OOT player will fold.  By forcing money to stay in the pot, we make the pot odds better for Player B to call.    It could be argued that this way disadvantages Player A more than the other way.



Tristan
@TristanWilberg on Twitter

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3345
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #4 on: April 27, 2014, 10:28:29 PM »
Tristan,

 Do you agree that the initial error was made by the out of turn bettor? I'm not speaking about a player that is mistakenly directed to bet OOT by the dealer, I'm speaking about the player who, for what ever reason, bets when he shouldn't. I believe that we need to do everything possible to prevent out of turn action. Somehow, it seems more of an advantage for player's to act out of turn, especially if all options are open to them. I believe rules should address the offending player. Do you really prefer the player on your left to act OOT?

 I guess you don't feel that Accepted Action applies to this one. :-X To me, it's the only time the rule makes sense. :D

Tristan

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #5 on: April 28, 2014, 12:14:59 PM »
Yes Nick, I do agree that the offending player was the one that acted out of turn.  But also, by doing this, they gave the skipped player a 'tell' and now the skipped player has control over the situation.  If the skipped player checks/calls/folds, the OOT action will stand.  If the skipped player bets/raises the OOT action will come back.  There really is not another situation, in poker, that the first player to decide what to do can also decide what will happen with the second player's action.  The skipped player gains this advantage because of the infraction by the OOT player. 

But we have already went through this multiple times in other threads. 


Tristan
@TristanWilberg on Twitter

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3345
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2014, 01:36:57 PM »
Tristan,

 Yes we have. You do raise an interesting question...you said: "If the skipped player bets/raises the OOT action will come back." Are you suggesting that the skipped player can raise the out of turn? I don't think that's what you meant, but, I kind of like that idea... ;D That's what he deserves for betting out of turn!

Tristan

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #7 on: April 29, 2014, 02:08:48 PM »
Lol, that is not what I meant...but that is pretty funny!


I said that because of the possibility of the scenario of Player A UTG preflop with Player B acting OOT.  In that situation (or one similar), Player A folding or calling would not change the action, but raising would change it.   :P
Tristan
@TristanWilberg on Twitter

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #8 on: May 01, 2014, 09:55:37 PM »
An out-of-turn player gives the skipped player a 'tell' and now the skipped player has control over the situation.  If the skipped player checks/calls/folds, the OOT action will stand.  If the skipped player bets/raises the OOT action will come back.  There really is not another situation, in poker, that the first player to decide what to do can also decide what will happen with the second player's action.  The skipped player gains this advantage because of the infraction by the OOT player.  

And the specific example of manipulating a check-raise:

Player A now gets to make a decision with information that should have not been provided to them.  Player A received free information from Player B and they now have a lot of control over what Player B can do.  What other time can you guarantee with 100% success that your check will allow you to check/raise?

The above pretty well summarizes the logic of the camp that prefers the current language that doesn't lock the OOT player into his/her action if the skipped player changes the action.

I would add another example: let's say the OOT player "calls" (or checks). If we lock them into that when the skipped player changes the action and bets, that's the only situation in poker where the bettor knows at least one opponent can't re-raise him. That's just an unbelieveable advantage where you can take a small shot (3 or 4 BBs), knowing that the worst that can happen is you're called and you get to see another card.

And there are other examples, but the bottom-line case for the language as it now reads is that it provides ample but not excessive control over the OOT player.

We should fully acknowledge there is a contingent in the camp that would prefer the lock-in language.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2014, 09:58:27 PM by MikeB »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3345
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #9 on: May 02, 2014, 06:46:22 AM »
Mike,

 I really think we are missing the severity of out of turn action. It should never be allowed. Consider any other card game/competition; Pinochle, hearts, rummy, etc. You must act in turn.

Chess is a different form of competition, but for this analogy, I think it's helpful. Imagine making a move when it's your opponents turn? In my opinion, we need to discourage OOT by punishing the offending player without the unnecessary language that can "let them off the hook, " if the "proper" bettor decides to make a different size wager! ???

 I've always felt that the current rules offer too much for "angle-shooters" to add to their arsenal. I'd really like to see a more severe punishment imposed for "deliberate" out of turn action.

 If you deliberately act out of turn, your wager (if any), can not be retracted and could be subjected to being raised by the proper bettor! That's what I'd like to see.

 You can't do it!    Betting out of turn is never allowed!  It violates the fundamentals of the game!   If you continue to "act out of turn" you will be removed from the cardroom!

 Perhaps we should consider imposing fines...instead of allowing them to retract their bets! Forget dealing them out for one or two rounds...hit them with a one or two big blind penalty instead!

 Anyway, I'm getting a little tired of hearing about the "poor" out of turn bettor giving too much information to the non-offending skipped player! That's it...I'm done, and thanks for listening. ;)

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3345
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #10 on: May 02, 2014, 07:16:45 AM »
Everyone:

 We haven't heard from any of the BOD (except Mike) in quite some time, so I thought I'd go back and see what I could find from the archives. Here are a couple responses directed at verbal, and out of turn:
Linda Johnson
TDA Founding Member
TDA Member & Active Poster
*****
Posts: 15
   
Re: Verbal all-in
Reply #15 on: April 15, 2010, 11:13:38 PM
Reply with quote
I agree with Stuart when he said: "By the book his bet does not stand, but then between the lines, we can take a different approach." From my viewpoint the action has changed by someone else going all-in ahead of the BB, so if asked to rule strictly by the letter of the law, I would have allowed the BB to take his all-in back. However, since TDs have discretion to act in the fairness of the tournament, I would have made him leave his all-in in the pot. My reasoning is that since he had announced that he was going all-in, he may have actually affected other players' decisons. It's possible that some of the earleir positions may have limped or raised but since they knew the BB was going all-in, they may have folded instead.

It's my personal opinion that it would be wrong to let the BB get away with this shot.
Linda Johnson

pokerfish
TDA Founding Member
TDA Member & Veteran Poster
*****
Posts: 90


Re: Verbal all-in Out-of-turn
Reply #19 on: April 16, 2010, 09:09:42 AM
Reply with quote
I agree with having the money stay for the overriding reasons that the players were mislead and acted thinking (reasonably so) that the bet would stay. That said, if the guys wins the pot or has more chips and doesn't go broke that hand, I do penalize him... he didn't just "act out of turn", he did so deliberately and that is a shot and is one thing that creates the problems as well as a hostile environment.

Good comments everyone.
Jan


MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #11 on: May 02, 2014, 12:11:19 PM »
Nick: The original question doesn't appear in the quotations above, so not sure what the exact circumstances are...

Otherwise, several thoughts on the topic in general...

1: There's clearly more than one camp on this issue. The question is whether one camp has a super-majority or not, and this language has been in place since at least 2009. I think this is one of those rules where if a given house felt so strongly about it they could structure their own exception. I wouldn't encourage that but realistically most houses have a rule or two that's "adjusted" from chapter-and-verse TDA for one reason or another.

2: Curious, what if the OOT Player B just says "raise" but you can stop him before he declares or puts out a specific amount. When you back up the action to the rightful bettor Player A, is A now entitled to a raise on top of whatever he bets? :)

3: Nobody thinks the OOT isn't the bad guy or should "get away with it"... it's really a question of how harsh the punishment should be. And btw, OOT action is certainly penalizable in fact that's the FIRST LINE of the rule: "Action out of turn is subject to penalty... " That can mean missed hands, missed rounds, whatever the TD deems appropriate.

4: Undoubtedly this issue will come up at the next Summit.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2014, 12:17:27 PM by MikeB »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3345
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #12 on: May 03, 2014, 07:28:28 AM »
Hello Mike,

 First of all, I'd like to thank you for your continued participation on the Forum. Without you, I'm afraid there would be nothing but the archives for advice!

 Out of turn has always been a hot topic for discussion on our Forum. I always thought that there should be a separation, or perhaps a different set of rules, when action is head to head, as opposed to action with multiple players. Let's consider the scenario when only two players are involved and there is action out of turn. In a no limit game, the possibility of action changing to the OOT player, is if the proper (skipped) bettor, does anything different from the out of turn. If the OOT player checks, of course we would allow any action from the proper bettor. The only option that remains is for the OOT player to bet, (he can't raise). Once the OOT player bets, the proper bettor must call that exact amount or, the OOT player can retract his bet and have all options open to him.

 Remember, the above scenario is for heads-up.

 When we get to a pot with multiple players, we now have the possibility of the out of turn bettor skipping one (or more) proper bettors. In this scenario, it is possible that a bet has already been made. I mention this because; if the action were backed-up to the skipped player, this is when a raise could affect the ruling, and the options to the OOT.

 Now lets consider the rule when applied to a fixed limit game. The game is 10 and 20. Heads-up action on the turn, Player B bets 20 (OOT). If the action is backed-up to Player A, what options does he have that would protect his right to act? If he checks, would the OOT Player be obligated to leave his 20 bet in the pot? How do we define action changing in a head to head situation? It is too confusing...at least that's how I see it. If the action were backed up to Player A, I assume, the only way Player B is obligated to leave his 20 in the pot, is if Player A decides to also bet 20? Is this correct? Because if it is, it needs to be fixed.

How does action change to the out of turn player, when he is only opposed by one other player? He has no right to bet out of turn. Because of his action, yes, I would consider his bet unretractable and even subject to a raise!

 I wrote on this subject some time ago and I've been unable to locate it but, it went something like this: I was dealing in a house game. The game was 7 card stud and I believe it was a $5 and $10 limit. After dealing the river card to the two remaining players. I addressed the (high board) player to act. This is what he said: "I check but call!" He then tossed his $10 into the pot. The other player looked at me with a puzzled look and said, "what the hell is that?" I had never seen it before but I knew it wasn't right. I told him (the out of turn) that he couldn't do that. He said, "why not?" I said, "you already had your turn and you checked." If you try that again, you'll be subjected to a raise." What would you rule?

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #13 on: May 04, 2014, 10:43:06 AM »
Nick thanks for "re-raising" (no pun intended) the question of OOT action heads-up. That's definitely going to be reviewed at the 2015 Summit. It will be interesting to see where the membership comes down on this.

http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=1007.0

Tristan

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
Re: Action Out of Turn: Is this Unfair Advantage?
« Reply #14 on: May 04, 2014, 10:50:02 AM »
Now lets consider the rule when applied to a fixed limit game. The game is 10 and 20. Heads-up action on the turn, Player B bets 20 (OOT). If the action is backed-up to Player A, what options does he have that would protect his right to act? If he checks, would the OOT Player be obligated to leave his 20 bet in the pot? How do we define action changing in a head to head situation? It is too confusing...at least that's how I see it. If the action were backed up to Player A, I assume, the only way Player B is obligated to leave his 20 in the pot, is if Player A decides to also bet 20? Is this correct? Because if it is, it needs to be fixed.

Possible scenarios when you back up this situation:

If Player A checks, which is not considered action changing, Player B is forced to keep the 20 out there.  Player A can then call, raise, or fold.

If Player A bets, which is considered action changing, Player B gets the 20 back and can call, raise, or fold.



Tristan
@TristanWilberg on Twitter