Cash Game Is a straddle considered a raise or a bet in fixed limit? (1 Viewer)

ArielVer18

Flush
Joined
Feb 23, 2018
Messages
1,328
Reaction score
2,144
Location
Oakland, CA
There are different types of optional straddles. The one that most people know is one that is twice the size of the big blind posted by the UTG player in no-limit or pot-limit. The posted straddle bet sets a new minimum bring-in, is not treated as a raise, and the straddler has last action for the first round of betting.

How about in fixed limit? AFAIK, straddles are not traditionally allowed in limit. The local rooms allow one straddle to the left of the big blind and the straddler has last action for the first round of betting. However, the straddle is treated as a raise for the purpose of counting raises. This is important because California standard is a maximum of one bet and three raises (Vegas is one bet and four raises) for most games. Straddling does not raise the cap.

This might not be true everywhere. What is your experience with straddles in fixed limit?
 
There are different types of optional straddles. The one that most people know is one that is twice the size of the big blind posted by the UTG player in no-limit or pot-limit. The posted straddle bet sets a new minimum bring-in, is not treated as a raise, and the straddler has last action for the first round of betting.

How about in fixed limit? AFAIK, straddles are not traditionally allowed in limit. The local rooms allow one straddle to the left of the big blind and the straddler has last action for the first round of betting. However, the straddle is treated as a raise for the purpose of counting raises. This is important because California standard is a maximum of one bet and three raises (Vegas is one bet and four raises) for most games. Straddling does not raise the cap.

This might not be true everywhere. What is your experience with straddles in fixed limit?
Bingo. It's not a limit game anymore to a point.
 
There are different types of optional straddles. The one that most people know is one that is twice the size of the big blind posted by the UTG player in no-limit or pot-limit. The posted straddle bet sets a new minimum bring-in, is not treated as a raise, and the straddler has last action for the first round of betting.

How about in fixed limit? AFAIK, straddles are not traditionally allowed in limit. The local rooms allow one straddle to the left of the big blind and the straddler has last action for the first round of betting. However, the straddle is treated as a raise for the purpose of counting raises. This is important because California standard is a maximum of one bet and three raises (Vegas is one bet and four raises) for most games. Straddling does not raise the cap.

This might not be true everywhere. What is your experience with straddles in fixed limit?
Your phrasing is interesting, by noting the State it changes the conversation.

All poker games that I’ve played in are a max of three raises, plo, NL, FL alike. These are standard in that most games play this way. Most of the games I play in are underground games so the term standard is a commonality and not a documented legal process.

The actual legality would be better served asking the local gaming commission than that of a group of degens.

Great conversation and very provocative though.
 
AFAIK, straddles are not traditionally allowed in limit. The local rooms allow one straddle to the left of the big blind and the straddler has last action for the first round of betting.
Straddles are very much a part of limit. My local room has had mostly limit games as long as I have played. (UTG only.) The straddle is considered the first raise. In Minnesota, limit games play a bet plus up to four raises (five bets total), so there can be three additional raises after the straddle. (So yes, your comment that the straddle does not raise the cap is correct.)

The straddle is considered "live" and the person on the straddle has the option to put in a second raise (3-bets in limit terms) if nobody else has done so pre flop, or they may elect to check.
 
opps I left it out in the OP. In my experience, the straddle bet in limit, unlike the kill, does not change the betting limits. It's like a blind 2bet that only gives the player the option to act last for the first round.
Ah okay, gotcha. If it's treated as a raise as others have mentioned that's fine.
 
All poker games that I’ve played in are a max of three raises, plo, NL, FL alike.
confused-no.gif


There isn't a limit on the number of raises in PL and NL games. And often there is no cap on the number of raises in a heads up pot in limit either (depending on the jurisdiction).
 
Heads up limit is no cap provided heads up at the start of the betting round, but that IS why I mentioned it.

Ever played a game called euchre? tonk is a bit more popular.. Hoosiers, its hard living with Northerners (family is from the south, food can be very hard here; people think sweet tea is tea with sugar in it)
 
Just seems incongruent to me to treat it as raise in one type of betting (fixed limit) and then NOT as a raise in another type of betting (NL/PL).
 
Last edited:
Just seems incongruent to me to treat it as raise in one type of betting (NL/PL) and then NOT as a raise in another type of betting (fixed limit).
Yeah, this confused me too
 
Heads up limit is no cap provided heads up at the start of the betting round, but that IS why I mentioned it.

I don't recall playing in a limit game that doesn't remove the cap once it gets heads up. Doesn't matter the situation at the start of the betting round. Why would it? 3rd player keeps the cap in effect. If he folds pre-cap, the other two continue up the ladder - often one will just ask 'are we/you just putting it all-in?' I'm sure there are some house rules that are different across the country though.
 
Cook's Rules of Real Poker

I prefer Robert -- as do most players/rooms in my experience... https://www.briggsoft.com/docs/pmavens/Rules_Roberts.htm
  1. In limit poker, for a pot involving three or more players who are not all-in, these limits on raises apply:
    1. A game with three or more betting rounds allows a maximum of a bet and three raises.
    2. A game with two betting rounds (such as lowball or draw) allows a maximum of a bet and four raises. [See "Section 16 - Explanations," discussion #6, for more information on this rule.]
  2. Unlimited raising is allowed in heads-up play. This applies any time the action becomes heads-up before the raising has been capped. Once the raising is capped on a betting round, it cannot be uncapped by a subsequent fold that leaves two players heads-up.
Only difference is cap applies once it's hit for Robert (i.e. $16 cap in a 2/4 game on the river), where Cook stops it if more than 2 players put in a single bet.
 
Last edited:
Can you site The Source of Robbert's rules, not Mavens site you cited, but THE official source? (I get Bob Ciaffone, but I mean where it lives)

There are so many and it changes from version to version, source to source, this is why I prefer a few sources as to one. Another thread points out that Robert's rules won't be updated anymore, at least by Bob C.

These are very similar and I'm not saying that this is enough to call into question your assertion, but it brings up questions.

Neither source (Cook's or Robert's rules) explains the source reason, we can infer one is too protect the players the other is to foster play, but again neither really present an argument as to why one is better than the other. I would say you're bias based on your experience as I likely am on mine.

RobertRulesRaise.jpg


RobertRulesRaise2.jpg
 
I totally don’t understand why it’s an issue. I guess I find the Cook rule unnecessary? If there’s two players left, let them get it in if they want. If one guy doesn’t want to, all he has to ever do is call one big bet, and then capped or uncapped, the betting stops.
 
Regional variations. Some places allow the betting to go uncapped as soon as it's heads-up. Some places don't allow it unless the start of the betting round is heads-up.

For going all in, some places allow a verbal agreement between two heads up players to instantly go all in. Some places don't, so the two players must go through the motion of raising one bet at a time to go all in.

Wait, why are we talking about this?! My thread is about straddles! :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
 
Cook's Rules of Real Poker

We are begging you to throw that book away. Every rules thread is derailed by a misconception that you got from it.

Didn't you pay like $6 for it? I will ship you a refund in exchange for proof that you burned it.
 
Regional variations. Some places allow the betting to go uncapped as soon as it's heads-up. Some places don't allow it unless the start of the betting round is heads-up.

For going all in, some places allow a verbal agreement between two heads up players to instantly go all in. Some places don't, so the two players must go through the motion of raising one bet at a time to go all in.

Wait, why are we talking about this?! My thread is about straddles! :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:

A straddle is just a blind-raise that includes the perk/benefit of being able to re-open action because you did it blind. Complicating it more than that seems unnecessary. I'm pretty sure they were allowed in AC, but I only played 2/4 back in the early 2000s. I'm sure I played in other rooms that just called it a blind-raise since they didn't allow straddles NL or Limit.

I’ve always treaded it as another blind. Small blind. Big blind. Biggest blind. If that makes sense.

Have you ever enjoyed the torture of Mississippi or button straddles? Button straddle locations that start pre-flop with the SB are the nut low in my opinion.

Can you site The Source of Robbert's rules, not Mavens site you cited, but THE official source? (I get Bob Ciaffone, but I mean where it lives)

There are so many and it changes from version to version, source to source, this is why I prefer a few sources as to one. Another thread points out that Robert's rules won't be updated anymore, at least by Bob C.

These are very similar and I'm not saying that this is enough to call into question your assertion, but it brings up questions.

Neither source (Cook's or Robert's rules) explains the source reason, we can infer one is too protect the players the other is to foster play, but again neither really present an argument as to why one is better than the other. I would say you're bias based on your experience as I likely am on mine.

View attachment 1091329

View attachment 1091330

Those both are consistent with regards to breaking the Cap for Robert's. I have no idea where it lives since Caffoine does not appear to have a dedicated website anymore since he died. Version 11 pdf is available at plenty of sources with a simple Google search which appears to be the most recent version.

Reason why? There isn't a good reason for Cook's rule. It's poorly thought out. All it does is cap the possible betting at an earlier stage. Why would this be necessary? As long as it is heads up before the cap is hit, there is no reason to prevent adults from inflicting max desired pain on each other, either remaining player can call to limit damage. The tournament rule is different as chip-dumping and game integrity is a factor.

P1 checks, Player 2 $4, Player 3 $8 (capped at this point per Cook)
P1 folds, Player 2 $12, Player 3 $16 (unlimited for Robert)

Which seems better to you?
 
Have you ever enjoyed the torture of Mississippi or button straddles? Button straddle locations that start pre-flop with the SB are the nut low in my opinion.
This is the way I prefer to play PLO, PLO8, or BIG 0 esp when I have the biggest stack. Both the home game I play, and local card Casino that spreads BIG 0 allow straddles any position, and YES button straddles get Mississippi’d!
 
A straddle is just a blind-raise that includes the perk/benefit of being able to re-open action because you did it blind. Complicating it more than that seems unnecessary. I'm pretty sure they were allowed in AC, but I only played 2/4 back in the early 2000s. I'm sure I played in other rooms that just called it a blind-raise since they didn't allow straddles NL or Limit.
:love: Well said!

There isn't a good reason for Cook's rule. It's poorly thought out.
This is your perception, and I disagree. - have you seen this thread? I'd like to see what you think if you read through most of it.

I prefer Robert -- as do most players/rooms in my experience..
This too is your perception, and even IF its true, might doesn't make right.

Which seems better to you?
Cooke's rules, because I'm bias :wtf:, but I've already stated that, as I accuse you of your bias :wtf:

I think that brings us to an impasse

I'm just happy to see you up'ing that post count :p
 
I think that brings us to an impasse

Not really.

I prefer to use multiple sources.

TDA / Robert's Rules / Cooke's Rules

With these three I think you can navigate a situation that isn't explicitly listed.

As this is your post and Robert's was listed before Cooke's, it would be referred to first. Since Robert's has a definitive statement on the situation, no need to refer to Cooke's, even though it's for Real Poker. Sorry :D This is the issue with multiple sources.

Regarding ratholing. I don't care, whatever the host/house says goes. In a home game, it can keep a player in the game that might leave otherwise. Removing money without making it known that you are going south, I have some issue as that feels shady.

Here was a strange rule at Crown in Aus - If the river checked through, last person to bet or raise showed first. Never asked where they pulled that one from sadly.
 
If the river checked through, last person to bet or raise showed first. Never asked where they pulled that one from sadly.
THEY DO THAT HERE AS WELL!!! DRIVES ME NUTS! in most all games!!!!
 
Can you site The Source of Robbert's rules, not Mavens site you cited, but THE official source? (I get Bob Ciaffone, but I mean where it lives)
Sadly, Ciaffone passed away last year, a couple years before that his website went down and apparently was transferred to other poker coaching interests.

In the interest of keeping this Robert's v Cooke's threadjack from going too much further here, I have started another thread that has some background on both rulesets and links where freely available versions can still be found with the help of the Internet Archive Wayback Machine.

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/rulesets-from-the-wayback-machine.102309/
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom