| Author |
Message |
< General ~ When a player goes all-in; yet does not complete the raise?? |
| RJontilt |
 Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 11:16 am |
 |
|
|
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 5
|
LAst night, in an unraised pot, when the small blind when all-in with 1.2 BB, the TD made the rest of the players post 2 BB to call. He reason was that to call you must complete the bet.
Wow, that can not be right!
I thought that in that situation a call is only required. If someone had already acted then they can not raise, if someone in the hand still had not made action on the current beting round, then they still have an option to raise.
Here are the only rules that I see on the AHL web site.
Betting Procedures
1. A bet must be at least the amount of the big blind.
2. A raise must be at least the amount of the previous bet.
Split Pots, Side Pots and going All-in
8. If a player does not have enough to cover his/her blind, a side pot is created before cards are dealt and: . In a blind only game, the side pot will equal the amount of the all-in times the number of callers.
I have an issue with this:
1.This will create an unfair situation for the Big Blind .
2.Every time someone is short stack there would be a potential for Donkey plays for the like pot.
So, what is the right rule and why AHL do it? |
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
| sgx2000 |
| Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 12:45 pm |
|
|
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 61
Location: dallas, tx
|
this isn't an official answer from the league or anything but this is how it works:
pre-flop you must complete the bet, so if the small blind doesn't complete it with their all-in move which would be 2x the big blind then all remaining players must complete it. this only applies to pre-flop betting, not post-flop.
this hasn't always been enforced because not everyone knew this rule but in the past month or so it should've been since all the TD's were made aware of it |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| RJontilt |
| Posted: Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:28 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 5
|
Common sense should prevail here.
1. If a person is going all-in that person should not be able to bet more chips than what they started the hand with and/or they should be able to influence the table by pressuring someone to fold, rather than being put into a vise by other player in the hand.
2. Pre-flop is the the only time when the non-complete bet must be at least the Big blind. In no-limit the rest of the streets need not to be influenced by a non-complete bet except as noted below.
3. In no-limit 50% threshold only is an issue when deciding if a player can re-raise again. IF the blinds were 100-200 and I raised to 1200 and get two callers and then the last to act goes all-in for less than 1700 then I can not reopened the beting ( or I can't reraise).
4. The concept of making other players complete the partial raise to the next equvilent blind level, if the the all-in amount of over 50%, is correct in limit poker -- not no-limit.
My sugestion is for AHL get rid of this way of thinking, Why force more action? With all the people ariving late and being let in late, the blinds levels are already cut short to accomodate the Venue/AHL (so the second session starts on time). Man this and other rules like it are causing AHL to be a Donkey fest. I think this is just another way to get the tourament over with quickly. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Shamrock |
| Posted: Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:46 pm |
|
|
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 162
Location: Plano
|
Gentlemen,
I won't comment on whether this is an AHL rule or not, But I will comment that it is not a good ruling based on TDA rules which govern all real poker tournaments. TDA Rules state the following:
31. Raises
A raise must be at least the size of the largest previous bet or raise of the current betting round. If a player puts in a raise of 50% or more of the previous bet but less than the minimum raise, he or she must make a full raise. The raise will be exactly the minimum raise allowed (see exception for multiple same-denomination chips Rule 33). In no-limit and pot limit, an all-in wager of less than a full raise does not reopen the betting to a player who has already acted.
The 50% rule that everyone has been mentioning here doesn't apply at all in no-limit or pot limit games. It's only application is for "limit" games and indicates whether someone wanting to "raise" is allowed to make a full raise (if the previous all in action was a 50% or more bet), or if his most aggressive action is limited to completing the bet and making the previous players action a full raise.
In the situation described by RJontilt, the TD ruling (if adhereing to TDA rules is incorrect.) BB was 1,000. SB was in for 500 and went all in for a total of 1,200. The BB has the option to fold, call the 200 or make any raise (legal raise) he wants to. If the BB folds or calls the 200, anyone else in the hand has the option to call 200 or fold. Period.
The mentioning in Rule 31 of "if a player puts in a raise of 50% or more of the previous bet but less than the minimum raise, he or she must make a full raise. The raise will be exactly the minimum raise allowed (see exception for multiple same-denomination chips Rule 33)" is only applied in the scenario where a player drags chips past a "betting Line" and has at least 50% more than the last bet, If he does that, he's committed to making a minimum raise. If you do that in a Casino that honors a "betting" or "Commitment Line" like Choctaw, however many chips you've brought past that line will remain in the pot,
I mean, seriously, think about the situation explained. What action transpired to cause anyone to have to put in 800 more than the highest bet?
Nothing. It makes no sense, and is not how the rule works.
Personally I feel one of the roles of this league should be to educate its players, so that when they do play in a casino they'll understand the rules. Adhering strictly to the TDA rules, and having Tournament Directors who understand those rules would go a long way in educating the players. |
_________________
"Lord, let me break even today. I really need the money" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| ckrex |
| Posted: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:59 pm |
|
|
AHL Admin
Joined: 26 Sep 2006
Posts: 1712
Location: Dallas, Tx.
|
I stand corrected after looking this up Shamrock is correct!
Thank you Shamrock |
_________________
Adam Thompson
Founder/AHL Poker Inc.
AHLPoker.com
Create your own AHL Signature |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Shamrock |
| Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:36 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 162
Location: Plano
|
| ANy time Adam.. That's why the forum is here. |
_________________
"Lord, let me break even today. I really need the money" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| RJontilt |
| Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:15 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 5
|
ckrex wrote: I stand corrected after looking this up Shamrock is correct!
Thank you Shamrock
Ok, can somebody please make sure the TDs understands this rule and if it is not already in the AHL tournamnent rules please make it so!
Thanks all |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| RJontilt |
| Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:43 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 5
|
Shamrock --about this rule : Quote: The 50% rule that everyone has been mentioning here doesn't apply at all in no-limit or pot limit games. It's only application is for "limit" games and indicates whether someone wanting to "raise" is allowed to make a full raise (if the previous all in action was a 50% or more bet), or if his most aggressive action is limited to completing the bet and making the previous players action a full raise.
You are probably aware that at Choctaw and Winstar that, in a no-limt cash game it is common practice to allow the action to be reopened when an all-in bet is at least 50% more the original bettor's previous bet/raise.
so not to confuse tournament with cash games with our situaiton here goes:
Since we agree above, The issue now is does AHL allow reopening the betting with 50% of the last bet or only a legal bet. Consider the following:
In order to raise the amount of chips that you wish to raise by must be at least as large as the last raise in the same round. If you are playing in a no limit Texas Holdem tournament with 5-10 blinds that means if you are the first to enter the pot in order to raise you must put in 20 chips. Since the big blind is 10 and you wish to raise then you must put in at least 20 (The 10 big blind is considered the raise that you must match).
If someone has already raised before you then your raise must be at least as large as his/her raise. This is not to be confused with the need to match the last bet with your raise. For example, if the blinds are 5-10 and player A sends in a bet of 50 chips, he is raising by 40 (calling the 10 chips in the big blind + raising 40 chips = 50 total chips bet). If player B wishes to raise he/she must raise by at least 40 chips (a total bet of 90 chips). Many players and even dealers make the mistake of thinking that player B must raise by 50 chips(total bet of 100 chips) thinking that player B's raise must double the last bet. This is incorrect as the player need only match the raise (40 chips in our example).
Now let us consider when a player has gone all in with a partial raise. Other players may not reraise on a player’s all in raise unless it is a full raise. This is complicated so let’s use an example.
Suppose we have players A, B, and C in a Texas Holdem tournament where the blinds are 5-10. Player A opens with a raise to 50 total chips (he matches the 10 chip blind and raises by 40 chips). Player B reraises all in for a total of 70 chips (he calls the bet of 50 chips and raises 20 more). Player C cold calls the 70 chips. Player A can not reraise since Player B did not put in a legal raise. Player B raised by only 20 chips when he needed to match a raise of 40 total chips.
Now let us consider an example of when player A could reraise. Again we have players A, B, and C with the blinds at 5-10. Player A raises to a total of 40 chips (he matches the blind of 10 chips and raises by 30). Player B pushes all in with 70 chips (calls the 40 chip bet by Player A and raises by 30 chips). Player C then cold calls. Player A can reraise as much as he wants because Player B has sent in a legal raise. Player B has matched the original raise amount of 30 chips.
Of course, we see why and how it is done but does the TD see it that way and what is AHL rule on the matter. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Shamrock |
| Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:27 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 162
Location: Plano
|
| RJ your example is strictly for cash games not tournaments and has no application to AHL whatsoever. |
_________________
"Lord, let me break even today. I really need the money" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| RJontilt |
| Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 8:29 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 5
|
This forum is turing into a big waste of time.
HOw does anyone ever make a change when dealling with obvious knuckelheads.
Adam and AHL can just keep on doing nothing .. that is my final.
Can't please everyone; so I guess I will just please myself.[/b] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ckrex |
| Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:13 pm |
|
|
|
AHL Admin
Joined: 26 Sep 2006
Posts: 1712
Location: Dallas, Tx.
|
Ok here is the most common rule in a No Limit game,
Full Bet Rule:
"The full bet rule states that if the amount of an all-in bet is less than the minimum bet, or if the amount of an all-in raise is less than the full amount of the previous raise, it does not constitute a "real" raise, and therefore does not reopen the betting action."
I will have this added to the rules withing the next few days and also update the hosts as well.
I apologize for the delay however, please remember that we have 15,000 members and 50 nights per week of poker as well as our Colorado division to maintain.
Thank you Shamrock for your help,
Adam |
_________________
Adam Thompson
Founder/AHL Poker Inc.
AHLPoker.com
Create your own AHL Signature |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Shamrock |
| Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 12:19 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 162
Location: Plano
|
Glad to help.
I didn't even know there was a Colorado division. |
_________________
"Lord, let me break even today. I really need the money" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| ckrex |
| Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 5:11 pm |
|
|
|
AHL Admin
Joined: 26 Sep 2006
Posts: 1712
Location: Dallas, Tx.
|
| Only had it going a few months now but it is getting there |
_________________
Adam Thompson
Founder/AHL Poker Inc.
AHLPoker.com
Create your own AHL Signature |
|
| Back to top |
|
| 00007012 |
| Posted: Wed May 05, 2010 4:23 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 14
|
Why is this subject still being discussed??? I thought the matter was settled in the forum POKER RAMBLINGS "New rumor rules in effect?".
AHL should adopt the official poker rules as used in the WSOP. Not some watered down version.
Then the "education" of the TD's and AHL members can begin. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Shamrock |
| Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2013 7:28 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 162
Location: Plano
|
While I used to play AHL Poker quite a bit, i only play a few times a month now. I was surprised to see this rule improperly enforced tonight.
Blinds are 2,000 / 4,000. There are several callers when it gets to the big blind. The big blind goes all in for 2,000 more. The correct ruling would be that the initial limpers have the choice to either call the 2,000 additional bet or fold. They are not required to put in a full raise to 8,000. Nor can they now raise. They have had their chance to raise, chose to limp, and the all in for 2,000 more does not reopen the betting.
The limpers were told they must put 4,000 more in the pot or fold. This is absolutely incorrect, and certainly not a TDA rule. You never have to "call" a bet, for more than the bet.
I love most of the AHL TD's (especially tonights). They do a great job, but knowing the correct rules...so anyone going to play at a casino, are well prepared should be essential. |
_________________
"Lord, let me break even today. I really need the money" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Shamrock |
| Posted: Mon Dec 02, 2013 2:40 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 162
Location: Plano
|
It happened again, just last Friday.
I'm not sure why they refuse to play by the correct rule, but it appears to be consistently applied. Makes absolutely no sense. |
_________________
"Lord, let me break even today. I really need the money" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
