Cash Game Mistakes in Live Cash Games Rules (1 Viewer)

[MuckingPro]

Hey poker peeps!

During a live cash game blinds are $5/5NL.

There is a straddle to $10 and re-straddle to $20, a player bets out $35 by mistake because he thought the straddle was only $10.

What would be the ruling here?

A: This is called a "short raise" and the player takes back $15 of his $35 and only allowed to call the $20 straddle.
Or
B: He is not allowed to take back his bet and he must put out an extra $5 to complete the minimum raise of $20 to $40.

This player did not say raise but acknowledged he wanted to raise but raised the wrong amount right after betting.

If you agree with B, what if a player puts out $25(multiple chips, not just one $25 chip) without saying raise when the straddle is $20?

Does he take back $5 or is he forced to min raise?

If he takes back $5, what is the minimum amount he has put in the pot to require him to min raise?

Thanks!

 

[casinochipper22]

Depends on house rule. Some places if you throw out anything less than a min raise, then it's just a call. Some places it's 50% or more. The poker room I supervised in would call that a min raise to $40. Doesn't matter what he wanted to do. It's $40. We did the 50% rule. So if he opened for 21-29 that's a call. 30-39 is a min raise to 40.

 

[LeLe]

It depend on if he bet at > 50% of the min raise. It is mentioned in WSOP and the official poker rules

Most poker house follow that and in this case will be allowed to be min raise at $40

 

[BGinGA]

With a $20 straddle in play:

If betting $35, it's a min-raise to $40 (to be corrected).

If betting $25, it's a call for $20 (to be corrected).

If betting two $25 chips, it's a raise to $50.

 

[casinochipper22]

There should be a rulings thread on here. It's fun to go over some crazy situations. I know I've seen my fair share.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

From RROP v11, Section 14 (No Limit and Pot Limit):

If a player tries to bet or raise less than the legal minimum and has more chips, the wager must be increased to the proper size (but no greater). This does not apply to a player who has unintentionally put too much in to call.

So by this, I'd say that any amount over $20 but less than $40 (except for a single chip) would be considered a min-raise and would have to be brought up to $40.

But a lot of places have house rules that are different, so "whatever house rules say" is the real answer.

 

[casinochipper22]

From RROP v11, Section 14 (No Limit and Pot Limit):


So by this, I'd say that any amount over $20 but less than $40 (except for a single chip) would be considered a min-raise and would have to be brought up to $40.

But a lot of places have house rules that are different, so "whatever house rules say" is the real answer.

"This does not apply to a player who has unintentionally put too much in to call." That is funny statement. Where did this come from, just out of curiosity?

Everything I've learned about managing games and making decisions has told me a players intention, or perceived intention, should never factor into a ruling. When you try to do that, the door is wide open to taking shots and making things way too subjective. But again, I'm thinking about a casino with a bunch of random players. Not home games with friends.

 

[Josh Kifer]

With a $20 straddle in play:

If betting $35, it's a min-raise to $40 (to be corrected).

If betting $25, it's a call for $20 (to be corrected).

If betting two $25 chips, it's a raise to $50.

This is how we would call it.

 

[CrazyEddie]

"This does not apply to a player who has unintentionally put too much in to call." That is funny statement. Where did this come from, just out of curiosity?

I interpret this as the rule's author trying to say "If a player calls, but puts too many chips in the pot, the immediately previous rule does not apply to them (i.e. they are not required to minraise simply because they put more chips in the pot than would be needed for a call). The previous rule only applies to players who bet or raise, just like it says."

 

[casinochipper22]

I interpret this as the rule's author trying to say "If a player calls, but puts too many chips in the pot, the immediately previous rule does not apply to them (i.e. they are not required to minraise simply because they put more chips in the pot than would be needed for a call). The previous rule only applies to players who bet or raise, just like it says."

That's contradictory. If the player puts too many chips in the pot then he is not calling. That's what the rule is for.
Obviously he is trying to call. But made a mistake. and going by the rules it has to be a raise.

 

[CrazyEddie]

If he verbalizes "call" prior to putting money in the pot, he's calling. If he then puts too much money in the pot after calling, he is not forced to (and cannot) minraise.

My impression is that the rules author was trying to clarify that in that circumstance he is not forced to minraise simply because he put more money in the pot than was needed to call, but worded his clarification in such a way that it introduced further ambiguity.

 

[casinochipper22]

If he verbalizes "call" prior to putting money in the pot, he's calling. If he then puts too much money in the pot after calling, he is not forced to (and cannot) minraise.

My impression is that the rules author was trying to clarify that in that circumstance he is not forced to minraise simply because he put more money in the pot than was needed to call, but worded his clarification in such a way that it introduced further ambiguity.

Oh. I was just assuming nothing was said.

 

[casinochipper22]

Here is a awkward one along these lines. I had to make the ruling, and it was not a popular one. Lol

Player in tournament facing a 525 bet on the flop. digs through his chips, pulls out a 1k chip and a 25 chip. Then tosses both chips out and says "I'll take change" at the same time.

Is this a call or raise?

 

[davislane]

Is the restraddle to $20 a live straddle or a blind raise? In the casino in Sydney we arent allowed real straddles just blind raises that are called straddles. The reason I ask, is if its technically a blind raise then wouldn't the minimum raise required to be the difference between the $10 and $20? i.e min of $10 so $30+ constitutes a raise. Am I missing something?

 

[khp]

Here is a awkward one along these lines. I had to make the ruling, and it was not a popular one. Lol

Player in tournament facing a 525 bet on the flop. digs through his chips, pulls out a 1k chip and a 25 chip. Then tosses both chips out and says "I'll take change" at the same time.

Is this a call or raise?

Call, IMO

 

[casinochipper22]

Call, IMO

I ruled it a raise and told the guy "i'll take change" doesn't mean anything. Most of the table thought I was wrong. Almost all the other supervisors I asked agreed its a raise.

 

[davislane]

I ruled it a raise and told the guy "i'll take change" doesn't mean anything. Most of the table thought I was wrong. Almost all the other supervisors I asked agreed its a raise.

Good decision. Could have been an angle for all we know. The language wasn't binding in the context of the game so the chips had to do the talking in the end.

 

[LeLe]

I ruled it a raise and told the guy "i'll take change" doesn't mean anything. Most of the table thought I was wrong. Almost all the other supervisors I asked agreed its a raise.

Interesting I will think it was a call as the player intention was leaning toward a call but with a warning that he need to indicate clearly it a call

 

[Mr Winberg]

In a homegame setting I/we always give the benefit of a doubt. For e.g., if someone silently raises with a single chip, we stop and ask their intention, then inform them of the rule. If it happens several times I might enforce the call just so they'll learn, but usually people learn pretty fast.

So in the OP, I'd just ask the intention, allow the player to adjust, and then move on after explaining the rule.

"But what if they'll one play in a casino? They need to learn the rules!!"
They do learn the rules, even without me being a stickler.

"But what if people start angling?"
I'm pretty sure I'd pick up on it and adapt accordingly. For now, I'm going with the friendly home game approach. Until it stops working. It's been working excellently for years and years, though.

Here is a awkward one along these lines. I had to make the ruling, and it was not a popular one. Lol

Player in tournament facing a 525 bet on the flop. digs through his chips, pulls out a 1k chip and a 25 chip. Then tosses both chips out and says "I'll take change" at the same time.

Is this a call or raise?

If going with the friendly home game approach, it's definitely a call.

If being a stickler, I still lean towards a call. He set himself up to collect an even 500 in change, I see no way how his words can be interpreted any other way. But perhaps I should leave this one to those who speak English natively.

My 0.02

 

[MuckingPro]

Is the restraddle to $20 a live straddle or a blind raise? In the casino in Sydney we arent allowed real straddles just blind raises that are called straddles. The reason I ask, is if its technically a blind raise then wouldn't the minimum raise required to be the difference between the $10 and $20? i.e min of $10 so $30+ constitutes a raise. Am I missing something?

Straddles and re-straddles act as additional blinds and the player has option. Casinos in Canada don't allow straddles either. We were playing a home game with straddles.

 

[glynn]

That's contradictory. If the player puts too many chips in the pot then he is not calling. That's what the rule is for.
Obviously he is trying to call. But made a mistake. and going by the rules it has to be a raise.

Oh. I was just assuming nothing was said.

The wording is non-contradictory even without the verbalization. If a player is facing an opening bet of $50 and silently moves $70 forward, that's a call.

 

[CrazyEddie]

That specific rule from RR is not about deciding what the player's intention was nor about trying to determine whether to rule the action as a call vs. raise. That rule presumes that the player's established intention was to raise or bet (without considering how that might have been established), and then states that if the raise or bet was to less than the minimum, then the player is obligated to raise or bet the minimum.