Author Topic: Some undercall cases  (Read 3806 times)

Ash

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 45
Some undercall cases
« on: September 20, 2018, 06:13:03 PM »
Some new easy situations for you guys, how would you rule them?

All are post flop situations, blinds 2k/4k

1) A open bet 20k, B throws only one 1k chip, do we consider this undersized chip as a call?
2) A open bet 20k, B throws 2 1k chips, same ruling as for 2)?
1) A open bet 20k, B throws 4k (he is all for 16k), considering the rule, would you force B to put all his chips to call?

Thank you

Boris

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • International Poker dealer (EU)
Re: Some undercall cases
« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2018, 07:13:23 PM »
Hello Ash,

In heads up situation, an undercall is a mandatory call
1. Call 20k
2. Call 20k
3. Call All-in 16k

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3310
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Some undercall cases
« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2018, 09:10:56 PM »
I agree with Boris but I believe the same rules would apply even if there were multiple players.

Boris

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • International Poker dealer (EU)
Re: Some undercall cases
« Reply #3 on: September 21, 2018, 03:15:40 AM »
In multi ways pot, it would apply the same because B is facing the opening bet.

But if we consider a player between calling the bet, then it's different.

1. Definitely call (1 chip call is a bad habit from players)

For 2 and 3, most of the time the player did not see/understand the amount of the bet.  I would rule as the following.

2. Complete or surrender, warning
3. Complete or surrender, warning


Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3310
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Some undercall cases
« Reply #4 on: September 21, 2018, 04:16:54 AM »
Boris:
 I have always believed that as long as the next player (after the short bet) had not reacted, that the action could be corrected. However, unless the TDA rules have changed: "Action in turn is binding and commits chips to the pot that stay in the pot." There are many other rules that are too vague, in my opinion. Rules that will not allow the "short" bet to withdraw his wager. He or she may complete the bet or surrender the underbet. There are numerous debates in the archives that will support what I say. I prefer the ability to "freeze" the action and clarify the short wager before the next player acts. If the short bet was a mistake I've always supported a retraction of the short wager instead of forcing a surrender of chips, or an unintentional call. This, however was not favored by the TDA Rules.

I am currently unable to access the addendum to see if there is a better explanation. I'm just going by past discussions. They are worth looking at if you have the time.

Bottom line: I agree with you but there are many that will not.

Ash

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 45
Re: Some undercall cases
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2018, 08:44:48 AM »
So in heads'up case, throw only one chip is always a call whatever it is an undersized or oversized chip?

In situation 1), if we have another player calling the 20k before the player throwing a 1k chip, the latter could complete or surrender ( but force him to complete the big blind)

Am i right?

Boris

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • International Poker dealer (EU)
Re: Some undercall cases
« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2018, 07:27:52 AM »
Hey Nick,

I might understand that someone would rule it in another way if this happens on a regular casino tournament because you probably need customers to be satisfied, but I work only on multiple days events. Most of the players are seasonned and some are pro players and they want the game to stick to the rules and this the way I want to satisfy them.

Players are supposed to pay attention to the game, if they want to watch their favorite show on their ipad, it is a call they make.
Also, by allowing a bet to be withdrawn from time to time you do not reward players who are actually paying attention to the game.

So in heads'up case, throw only one chip is always a call whatever it is an undersized or oversized chip?

In situation 1), if we have another player calling the 20k before the player throwing a 1k chip, the latter could complete or surrender ( but force him to complete the big blind)

Am i right?

I think I would pay attention to which street the action happens.
If it's on a river and the 1K player is the last to act before showdown, it could be a trick to make the other player to show their hands and use the undercall rule at his advantage to avoid putting the 19k chips overlay. (It is not fictionnal, case happened in Paris last year)

If this is another street, and the action has been frozen by the dealer, I would rule as complete/surrender. But if this is an all-in situation and 1K player last to act with no further action possible, It would be a mandatory call.

In the case 1K is less than a big bling and the player want to surrender, he would have to surrender a full big blind bet. It makes sense to me.

Ash

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 45
Re: Some undercall cases
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2018, 05:30:32 PM »
Thank you Boris for the clarification

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3310
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Some undercall cases
« Reply #8 on: September 26, 2018, 07:29:54 PM »
Boris,

 There are times when the call is an obvious mistake. I will never be in favor of forcing a player to call when it is quite obvious he or she had no intention of calling. Head to head action could be more of a problem but in a multi-way hand as long as the next player has not reacted, I am in favor of a retraction. Too often we are quick to assume that the player making the obvious mistake will learn a lesson by his lack of attention. The fact is, too often he is awarded a windfall of chips he did not deserve to win. Consider BB of 300...raised to 3,000 followed by a call in the amount of 300. It's obvious the calling player was unaware that the pot was raised. Could you imagine being the player that raised to 3000 on a bluff? A bluff that would have succeeded if the next player was allowed to withdraw his bet.