I will piggy back with a question. Flop action...

Player A bets 25

Player B raises to 48 all in

Player c asks: if I call can A raise?

I thought he answer was obvious but the dealer gave a different answer.

In NL, usually no.
In Limit, usually yes.

If it's No Limit then the answer is no. If it's Spread Limit the answer is yes (spread limit follows limit rules, which uses the 50% rule).

I think there are a few people who have the opinion that the dealer should not answer that question.

This is a good point. Answering that question could be considered violating OPTAH. Since the answer could influence the players action, it might be wiser to abstain from answering until the player has acted.

A player should always be able to ask "what are the rules". It's hugely important to game play, and if a player is aware enough to ask the question then you aren't putting ideas into his head. I think you must answer it. Or at least provide to the player the rule and let the player do the math himself, but that's getting a bit silly.

On the other hand, it would be violating OPTAH if the dealer or another player were to volunteer "that all-in doesn't reopen the betting" without anyone having asked. That puts ideas into people's heads and could easily be seen as suggesting to someone how to play. Sorta like saying "hey, wife, the opener can't shove behind you so if you have any sorta draw you need to call given the pot odds you're getting".

I happen to agree with you, but it doesn't surprise me anymore if I hear that someone else thinks differently.

Yes!! Let's play "Gotcha" instead of poker.

Until all the clubs standardize their rules ( think aerial bacon ) or have rulebooks available to learn their idiosyncratic variations, dealers should answer factual questions about the rules.

Okay, so I took a comment by Psand and considered the possible consequences out loud. I offered what I thought MIGHT be the way to handle it.

Does it mean it's the right choice? Maybe not but could the follow up be a discussion instead of a lynch mob?

well the guy who posted the question indicated the dealer gave a non-obvious answer so i was thinking it might be along those lines.

no and no. The re-raise must be at least a 50% raise over the original raise, or a re-re-raise is not allowed.

I am of the opinion that the question must be answered as a rule question. I thought there were some threads around where some casinos use slightly different rules for when the betting is reopened by an all in bet, such as a half-bet rule. I think it normally applies to limit games, but has been used in NL somewhere I guess.

If the answer is "here are the rules, find it" the game is going to grind to a halt, and there will still be some potential interpretation issues.

Edit:
You're kidding, right? Or perhaps not referencing the OP questions.

I can't imagine a more wrong answer to the original post.

The only way the player would not be able to raise is if the house had a bad rule in place.

example:
1-2
A raise to 6 (10K behind)
B raise to 1,000 (10K behind)
C raise all in to 1,001

and you would say A cannot raise?

For NL 100% is the standard but there are apparently some places that use the 50% rule.

For Limit 50% is standard.

And the only issue is whether the betting is reopened reraises by players who haven;t acted yet or haven't acted on the last legal bet or raise are not shut out by an all-in (unless the all-in also is the cap in a limit game)

You are right, the answer is no but the reason you supply is wrong.

Not in No Limit, it must be a full raise to re open betting.

If a player were to ask a dealer about a rule, he is not asking for advice. Of course the dealer's answer could influence the player's action. But the dealer's answer merely allows the player to make an informed decision.

If the player were to ask to see the room's set of rules so that he could decide what to do, would you not allow this to occur until after he decides what to do?