Rules check (1 Viewer)

joker80

Flush
Joined
Apr 1, 2015
Messages
1,442
Reaction score
1,554
Location
Canada
I am pretty sure I am always correct here, but an issue came up last night out our weekly 1/2 game. There is an early position raise to 15 dollars and 4 players to the flop, 63$ pot. I called in the HJ with :tc::8c: . The flop was:8s::6c::5c:. The early position raiser leads into the pot for 65$ , one fold, MP goes all in for 104$ . I am 300 ish deep so decide on a call and evaluate turn rather than a jam (probably wrong play in hindsight). Early position wants to go all in (also 200 or so behind) and I said he can't because it was not a full raise. Discussion/ check phones/ small argument insues , he says he should be able to go all in because it is a cash game. Is this ever allowed in any cardrooms, anywhere? I say it s his house and he can make the rules, but this is not the rule anywhere and if he is allowed to jam I should be allowed to take my bet back and fold. People check rules and it is decided that he can not re raise

Of course :ac: is the turn, early position is on tilt and jams and I scoop a massive pot.

Early position is host and now says his house rules will be a re raise will always be allowed from now on. Claims does not think this is the rule everywhere. I say what if MP only had 66$ , could you still rejam then, he says yes.

Does anyone have a link to cash game rules for a high profile casino like the Wynn or Bellagio? He claims he will follow the rule if it is there

Early position had :9h::9d:, MP had :ad::ks:
 
My understanding was it doesn’t re-open action, but according to RRoP, subsequent players are able to raise IF they haven’t acted yet. It needs to be a minimum of the next legal raise. 130 in this case. You have the option of raising there because you had yet to act, but the opener for $65 doesn’t have the ability to do that.

Sec 14- items 2-3

2- The minimum bet size is the amount of the minimum bring-in, unless the player is going all-in. The mini- mum bring-in is the size of the big blind unless the structure of the game is preset by the house to some other amount (such as double the big blind). The minimum bet remains the same amount on all betting rounds.
If the big blind does not have sufficient chips to post the required amount, a player who enters the pot on the initial betting round is still required to enter for at least the minimum bet (unless going all-in for a lesser sum) and a preflop raiser must at least double the size of the big blind. At all other times, when someone goes all-in for less than the minimum bet, a player has the option of just calling the all-in amount. If a player goes all-in for an amount that is less than the minimum bet, a player who wishes to raise must raise at least the amount of the minimum bet. For example, if the minimum bet is $100, and a player goes all-in on the flop for $20, a player may fold, call $20, or raise to at least a total of $100

3- All raises must be equal to or greater than the size of the previous bet or raise on that betting round, except for an all-in wager. Example: Player A bets 100 and player B raises to 2 Player C wishing to raise must raise at least 100 more, making the total bet at least 3 A player who has already acted and is not facing a fullsize wager may not subsequently raise an all-in bet that is less than the minimum bet or less than the full size of the last bet or raise.
 
Action is not reopened to someone who's already acted unless facing a full-size wager. But someone who's not acted can still reraise.

If OP had re-raised to at at least $169 (MP's all-in for $104 plus the min-raise amount of $65) instead of just calling MP, then EP could then shove, since OP's raise reopened action.
 
Last edited:
Not that it means anything one way or another but for a NL game in our home games, since the all-in was larger than the $65 bet, the original bettor would be allowed to raise again...
 
This is new to me. So what you guys are saying here, is raising all in for less than the minimum bet doesn’t re-open action and can only be called?

If EP still had a decision (ie action) I would consider that open to me.
 
When you say early position wants to go all in, I assume you mean the early position bet of $65 (yes/no)? If so, you are correct. Not a full raise and you did not change the action. He already acted.

However, I have stopped playing at some games because the "house rules" only matter when they are in their favor. Hopefully not the case here and he will honor the rules.

I had a situation so bad one time that a guy said, "I call" "and I want to raise." He then moved all in. I protested, in the big blind with 66 saying he called. The house (his friend and neighbor) ruled against me. I folded because it was a couple hundred into a small pot. 6 on the flop and 6 on the turn. $700 hand by the time all was said and done.
 
This is new to me. So what you guys are saying here, is raising all in for less than the minimum bet doesn’t re-open action and can only be called?

If EP still had a decision (ie action) I would consider that open to me.

Raising all-in for less than a minimum bet doesn't re-open action, but doesn't close action to anyone who hasn't acted.

  1. EP was the initial opener post-flop for $65, so he's acted. Min raise amount is $65.
  2. MP raised all-in short for $104, so he's acted (and can no longer act anyway because he's all-in). Min raise amount should still be $65.
  3. OP hadn't acted yet so he could fold, or call $104, or re-raise to $169+ I believe ($104 + the $65 min raise amount). OP elected to call.
  4. If no other players left to act, EP cannot re-raise again since he already acted and he's not facing a full-size raise. He can call $104 or fold.
 
Last edited:
Raising all-in for less than a minimum bet doesn't re-open action, but doesn't close action to anyone who hasn't acted.

  1. EP was the initial opener post-flop for $65. Min raise amount is $65.
  2. MP raised all-in short for $104, so he's acted (and can no longer act anyway because he's all-in). Min raise amount should still be $65.
  3. OP hadn't acted yet so he could fold, or call $104, or re-raise to $169 I believe ($104 + the $65 min raise amount). OP elected to call.
  4. If no other players left to act, EP cannot re-raise again since he already acted and he's not facing a full-size raise.
This ^^^^ exactly!!
 
WSOP, Rule #96. I know you said cash, but this is specific to all WSOP NLHE and pot limit games. I use WSOP rules to remove the, "well I played at a casino that ruled....blah, blah, blah" excuse. This rule is pretty consistent across cash and tourney.

"96. In no-limit and pot-limit, all raises must be equal to or greater than the size of the previous bet or raise on that betting round. An all-in wager of less than a full raise does not reopen the betting to a Participant who has already acted."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...CAQQAQ&sqi=2&usg=AOvVaw2iPRHxL719JnZQUgfUGiPg
 
Raising all-in for less than a minimum bet doesn't re-open action, but doesn't close action to anyone who hasn't acted.

  1. EP was the initial opener post-flop for $65, so he's acted. Min raise amount is $65.
  2. MP raised all-in short for $104, so he's acted (and can no longer act anyway because he's all-in). Min raise amount should still be $65.
  3. OP hadn't acted yet so he could fold, or call $104, or re-raise to $169+ I believe ($104 + the $65 min raise amount). OP elected to call.
  4. If no other players left to act, EP cannot re-raise again since he already acted and he's not facing a full-size raise. He can call $104 or fold.
Interesting. I never would have thought that. I need to re read the rules
 
Interesting, @Samuel, so in your home game this would be allowed:

Yes* but I think I should probably qualify my answer by saying that my "yes, in our home games" reply was based off of an off the top of my head first gut answer - I can't remember if/when that situation has ever come up in our games. I do know that for our NL games our raises aren't limited or dependent on an initial bet or raise - i.e. if someone bets X, another player is allowed to raise an amount less than X if he/she wants, as long as the raise is more than the BB (and the initial bet also being BB or more). *Hmm, now that I think about it, if an all-in raises a previously made bet or raise less than the amount of a BB, then it wouldn't be considered a raise in our games. I probably should also point out that with the exception of one guy who occasionally plays at real casinos and WSOP, we are really really amateur and would defer to those with real experience/knowledge. :)
 
Interesting. Sounds like a spread-limit/no-limit hybrid, with the spread being BB to All-In. Whatever works for your group if you're all in agreement (which doesn't seem to be the case for the OP)! :)
 
Raising all-in for less than a minimum bet doesn't re-open action, but doesn't close action to anyone who hasn't acted.

  1. EP was the initial opener post-flop for $65, so he's acted. Min raise amount is $65.
  2. MP raised all-in short for $104, so he's acted (and can no longer act anyway because he's all-in). Min raise amount should still be $65.
  3. OP hadn't acted yet so he could fold, or call $104, or re-raise to $169+ I believe ($104 + the $65 min raise amount). OP elected to call.
  4. If no other players left to act, EP cannot re-raise again since he already acted and he's not facing a full-size raise. He can call $104 or fold.
This. :tup:
 
5vbgvv.jpg
 
Interesting. Sounds like a spread-limit/no-limit hybrid, with the spread being BB to All-In. Whatever works for your group if you're all in agreement (which doesn't seem to be the case for the OP)! :)
We may be singing a few wrong lyrics but at least we're in the same key... :D
 
Of course :ac: is the turn, early position is on tilt and jams and I scoop a massive pot.

Early position had :9h::9d:, MP had :ad::ks:

Does he think if he went all in for whatever amount more it would change anything and you fold? I don’t know their tendencies but I might have just shipped it since if a club comes off it might scare off mr aggressive early position or he might just have AK and fold and you isolate one player and free dead money in the pot.

In any case I’ve hosted in the past and never understood this rule or maybe we never did it right since people would say players after couldn’t raise like yourself. Which looks incorrect per the rules. I say the original raiser can jam if he wants but again I never understood the purpose or reason for that rule.
 
Ok, first, OP, thanks for bringing this topic up (and sorry for my thread drifting) and thanks for all the discussion/replies from everyone - I'm slowly learning (I think) here.

I think my confusion is that I wasn't considering the first $65 after the flop in the OP, a raise - I thought it was simply a "bet". But if I'm reading (and applying) MrWitti's linked article correctly, that post flop $65 is actually a Raise of $63 ($65 - $2 BB = $63). Because I didn't realize it was a Raise, I didn't think the "minimum raise rules" would apply (i.e. I though since it was just a "bet", it would have been ok for the next guy to say 'I'll see your $65 and raise you another $20'). ??
 
...it would have been ok for the next guy to say 'I'll see your $65 and raise you another $20'). ??
A bit of symantics here. You get 1 move. To me, I'll see your $65 is the same as I call your$65.

Not positive I understand your scenario:

But no, and putting that aside, the next guy would need to raise 63+63= 126 to be a full raise. Anything less is not a full raise and does not opem the action for anybody that has already acted.
 
Good discussion, thanks

I always had this half raise rule in mind which seems to be wrong. Found this online, maybe helps to add to this discussion

http://neilwebber.com/notes/2013/07...tood-poker-rule-nlhe-incomplete-raise-all-in/
Yeah, there are two half-raise rules I think, one related to Limit and one related to correcting an illegal action in No Limit. Not as clear on the Limit part, but for the illegal action it's when someone makes a bet/raise that does not meet the minimum bet amount (the BB).

If someone bets 300, and someone else tries to raise to 400, that's not allowed (unless the 400 is an all-in) and would only count as a call of 300 because it's less than half the min-raise. If the raise was to 450, that's still an allowed amount, but then the raiser would be forced to raise to 600 because the 450 is at least half the min-raise amount.

Edit: The 50% rule for limit games is basically a relaxed version of the full-wager rule for no limit. In limit, an all-in raise of at least 50% of the min-raise does reopen action for someone who previously acted.

Ok, first, OP, thanks for bringing this topic up (and sorry for my thread drifting) and thanks for all the discussion/replies from everyone - I'm slowly learning (I think) here.

I think my confusion is that I wasn't considering the first $65 after the flop in the OP, a raise - I thought it was simply a "bet". But if I'm reading (and applying) MrWitti's linked article correctly, that post flop $65 is actually a Raise of $63 ($65 - $2 BB = $63). Because I didn't realize it was a Raise, I didn't think the "minimum raise rules" would apply (i.e. I though since it was just a "bet", it would have been ok for the next guy to say 'I'll see your $65 and raise you another $20'). ??
EP's first bet post-flop of $65 is a bet. The BB is the minimum bet amount. Preflop, SB and BB are posted, but post-flop, the first bet just has to be at least the BB. As long as it's $2 or higher, it's a bet not a raise if it's the first non-call/fold action in that round of betting.

The situation in the OP is that no one raised enough to constitute a full minimum raise of $65 to EP's opening bet of $65, so when the action came back to EP, he should only be able to call or fold and not reraise.
 
Last edited:
Raising all-in for less than a minimum bet doesn't re-open action, but doesn't close action to anyone who hasn't acted.

  1. EP was the initial opener post-flop for $65, so he's acted. Min raise amount is $65.
  2. MP raised all-in short for $104, so he's acted (and can no longer act anyway because he's all-in). Min raise amount should still be $65.
  3. OP hadn't acted yet so he could fold, or call $104, or re-raise to $169+ I believe ($104 + the $65 min raise amount). OP elected to call.
  4. If no other players left to act, EP cannot re-raise again since he already acted and he's not facing a full-size raise. He can call $104 or fold.
For those who are unfamiliar, the bolded is considered "action only". That term is used to describe a change in action that is not large enough to constitute a full raise.
 
Does anyone have a link to cash game rules for a high profile casino like the Wynn or Bellagio? He claims he will follow the rule if it is there
Meta: The host should shut this down. Robert's Rules does not specify that a flush beats a straight, and while there are rulesets that specify what beats what, is he going to reject those rankings until you show him proof from a high-profile casino? It's a basic rule of the game.

That mentality is how a golden retriever ends up playing in district-sanctioned basketball games.
 
Shouldnt be this complicated, really. Host was wrong. You were right. But house rules going forward I suppose, so better make clear on that. Can you fold and take back if someone goes over the top, etc, etc; see how house rules become silly if we don't follow universal set rules in place...
 

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