Etiquette question - call-raise (1 Viewer)

[Choker]

I dropped in the local senior center yesterday for the nickel-dime dealers choice game. They have a strict no-check/raise policy. During one hand gunplay was narrowly averted when one player raised after calling. Several players claimed that was the same as a check-raise and not allowed.

There's plenty on line about the check-raise rule but I can't find any mention of call-raise - have any of you heard of such a rule?. I suppose there could be cases where it would be construed as sandbagging, but it seems like a stretch to me...

 

[upNdown]

Do you have to keep your cards face-up too?

 

[DJ Mack]

How does that make any sense? That would mean that anybody who doesn't raise in the first betting round can't raise for the rest of the hand.

 

[Shaggy]

Are we talking calling on a previous street and then raising on a future street (same as DJ Mack is asking)? Or are we talking on the same street... like:

Player A bets
Player B calls
Player C raises
Player A calls
Player B raises?

In this scenario, I would call player B's action as a "call-raise." Is it similar to a check-raise... yeah I guess... kinda. Still lame.

 

[Choker]

How does that make any sense? That would mean that anybody who doesn't raise in the first betting round can't raise for the rest of the hand.

No, the check-raise is just for one betting round. Even that is a ridiculously outdated rule, especially for a nickel-dime game, but I've never argued it - those guys' canes can hit pretty hard...

 

[Trihonda]

Game seems like it has more nits than this girls hair...

But for real, I don't think that interpretation makes any sense. Nor do I understand that the anti-check raising rule. However the two are distinctly different.

Check raising is feigning weakness, then hammering in the same round of betting.

Calling a bet, and in the same round of betting, it gets three Bet, the action has changed. So now the only option you have is to flat call the raise? BS. Shenanigans

 

[v1pe]

No check raise policy? Yikes...

To answer your question, I would consider this action very similar to a check raise, yes. Assuming it's something like the situation Shaggy noted above. Definitely don't agree with that rule though.

 

[bergs]

That's an old school thing. I played in a work tournament at the first sales meeting after my old company got acquired. I check raised the Chief Marketing Officer and he maintained that it wasn't allowed. He was not familiar at all with NLHE or modern day poker.

(Busted the CTO and the CEO. Didn't even get fired. Won the tourney. Obviously I was the only one who could spell NLHE because I am AWFUL at tourneys)

 

[Choker]

I'm really just curious if anyone has ever heard of a no check-raise policy also applying to a call-raise?

 

[v1pe]

I'm really just curious if anyone has ever heard of a no check-raise policy also applying to a call-raise?

Frankly I've never even heard of a no x/r policy, but I've only been playing poker since 8-10 years ago.

 

[Shaggy]

The closest thing I have ever come to playing a game that didn't allow check raising was a game with my dad's old crew... and they announced that "checking and raising is allowed."

 

[Trihonda]

I would consider this action very similar to a check raise, yes.

I disagree. A check is a "pass" on taking a betting action. It could theoretically checked around. If there's a bet, and you call, you're
Putting money in the middle, this announcing you want to participate in the action. If a
Reraise occurs Buy a player who has yet to act, then this has changed the action

 

[justsomedude]

Calling a bet, and in the same round of betting, it gets three Bet, the action has changed. So now the only option you have is to flat call the raise? BS. Shenanigans

My thoughts exactly. Sounds like a dumb rule/game.

 

[Psypher1000]

Nearly 30 years ago when I was playing poker for pennies and nickles with my father and a couple of family friends we had the "no sandbagging" rule, which was strictly check/raising (we did this to keep the game "friendly", but the game was already friendly because the max bet was 3c). I would argue that a call/raise is different than a check/raise and should have been allowed. If call/raising is also disallowed, it needs to be distinctly declared ahead of the game, similar to their declaration of no check/raising.

 

[v1pe]

Functionally I don't see how a call/raise would be viewed as any different than a check/raise. The spirit of the rule as I interpret it is to force a raise on the initial opportunity to raise, and not allow a "sneaky" play. In that context, I would view x/r in the same spirit as a c/r.

Not that I agree with any of it anyway, not allowing x/r takes a lot out of the game IMO.

 

[BGinGA]

I've never heard of not allowing call/raise during the same betting round. I am aware of the ancient no check/raise rule, but have never seen it actually used in any tournament or cash game, regardless of stakes or format (stud, limit, no-limit, etc.).

It's a stupid rule. The no call/raise rule is even more so. Both remove a considerable amount of strategy from the game, and add nothing positive.

 

[BigLittleSlick]

It's been a while, but I remember this being a strategic tool to get more money in the pot. If you feel that player C is aggressive and will re-raise, you flat call. Then when player A makes the call, you re-raise and "squeeze" him for more money. I swear it was a different variant of the squeeze play when villain #3 is uber-aggressive.

 

[ekricket]

May as well invoke a "hand can't be beat by one more than two ranks higher" policy.

 

[Trihonda]

May as well invoke a "hand can't be beat by one more than two ranks higher" policy.

Better yet, we need a "no bluffing" rule...

 

[Jeff]

Did they call you a four-flusher? Very old timey group!

 

[ekricket]

It's been a while, but I remember this being a strategic tool to get more money in the pot. If you feel that player C is aggressive and will re-raise, you flat call. Then when player A makes the call, you re-raise and "squeeze" him for more money. I swear it was a different variant of the squeeze play when villain #3 is uber-aggressive.

Careful, your starting to bring strategy and skill into play.

Did they call you a four-flusher? Very old timey group!

And did they add "you varmint"?

 

[Mental Nomad]

I think "no check-raise" and "no call-raise" are similar in that they are both rules against delayed aggression.

These rules, and the old "jacks or better to open," seem to be about giving people more opportunity to draw without having to pay much. Maybe old folks playing poker to kill time are looking to make their nickels last longer.

 

[v1pe]

I think "no check-raise" and "no call-raise" are similar in that they are both rules against delayed aggression.

These rules, and the old "jacks or better to open," seem to be about giving people more opportunity to draw without having to pay much. Maybe old folks playing poker to kill time are looking to make their nickels last longer.

Jacks or better to open?! LOL!

 

[pltrgyst]

I've never heard of not allowing call/raise during the same betting round. I am aware of the ancient no check/raise rule, but have never seen it actually used in any tournament or cash game, regardless of stakes or format (stud, limit, no-limit, etc.).

It's a stupid rule. The no call/raise rule is even more so. Both remove a considerable amount of strategy from the game, and add nothing positive.

Agreed on all counts. And I've been playing poker all over the world since, oh, 1954.

 

[Kain8]

About 10 years ago I played at a friend of a friend's dad's house. I checkraised during a 5 card stud hand, yes 5 card not 7, when I got an ace and I got read the riot act for doing something as nefarious as checkraising. So I proceeded to just bet the max in the spread limit game from then on. They all call the same way and just fold away on the river. Just meant bigger pots!

 

[justsomedude]

I think "no check-raise" and "no call-raise" are similar in that they are both rules against delayed aggression.

These rules, and the old "jacks or better to open," seem to be about giving people more opportunity to draw without having to pay much. Maybe old folks playing poker to kill time are looking to make their nickels last longer.

I need to introduce these guys to Poke-Em!!!

 

[Choker]

Thanks for all the feedback - glad I'm not the only one who never heard of such a rule.

The nickel-dime game would be a silly waste of time except that I've joined a higher-stakes group that plays the same bizarre games, so it's good practice for card reading, getting a feel for what's playable, when to fold etc.

 

[Lemonzest]

no c/r