I learned recently that our room has the "no action out of turn is binding" rule, but that nobody ever challenges us to go that far, so we follow the standard modern convention in practice.

Your question is too vague. What does "brings out" mean? What does "at the same time" mean?

When in doubt, most reasonable games go with intent. Did it look like he was originally going with the amount of the stack and then as an afterthought "reraised" himself? If so, string bet.

Absolutely disagree with this, on both levels. I don't think this is the way it goes most places, and I think it would be wrong to do it this way. If you did, you'd then be rewarding the good actors who shoot this angle.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

I agree it's wrong to do it this way, for the reason you mentioned. But in my experience, this is how it works in most games I play. Maybe you and I are biased because you play higher level games and I play lower level games. Sometimes the same casino makes different rulings based on the stakes or importance of the game involved.

a raise can be all in... I don't see a problem with tanking after saying raise then going all in.

Quote:
6. At non-tournament play, a player who says "raise" is allowed to continue putting chips into the pot with more than one move; the wager is assumed complete when the player's hands come to rest outside the pot area. (This rule is used because no-limit play may require a large number of chips be put into the pot.) In tournament play, the TDA rules require that the player either use a verbal statement giving the amount of the raise or put the chips into the pot in a single motion, to avoid making a string-bet.

02-07-2012 12:15 AM

Couldnt disagree more with this. Played in, worked in alot of rooms none of which used this rule in cash games.

Opens the door for HUGE angle shots.

Imagine....I say Raise... take out a min raise....look around...take out more... look around..take out enough to get a read until you think your opponents might fold, Or maybe how big a raise they might call when holding the nuts.

Terrible idea!


I read RR section on betting and raising and it does not say this.

You have to look at the section on no limit instead of the section on limit. That is the traditional rule, what happened is around 2003 there was a poker boom and NL started being spread by people with no experience in NL, so they started playing by limit rules.

You will often see Tom Dwan put amount of the call chips into a pot and then state all in. It is normally as the chips are going in. I guess the defining moment is when is the bet complete. Release of chips or hand coming to a rest after bets. I always thought it release of chips or, if there is one, whatever crosses the betting line (none come back and none can be added unless it's less than a legal raise).

As ever it's open to definition but this one clearly seems not to be an angle just that the player hadn't considered his remaining stack. Shouldn't intent dictate this an all in as it seems part of the same move despite the realisation being late.

Please don't look to TV for examples on how to act at the table. That is poker themed entertainment. David Letterman doesn't deliver monologues or have a full band backing him when he has a normal everyday dinner conversation.

If you must look to TV for a model of betting mechanics, look to Howard Lederer. The few times I saw him on PAD, he was an ideal player in this regard. Cards in front of chips with a cap, hands out of the way, clear with intent before putting chips into the pot, friendly and non-argumentative with those he feels are his intellectual inferiors.

Perfect.

You don't know that.

How do you pfap hasn't had dinner with Dave?

I was wondering how long it'd take for someone to suggest either of those things. Thanks.

While we're on the topic of string bets, how do people feel about this:

A player has a few chips in his hand, of two different denominations. He's attempting to make a bet, but is also trying not to drop the wrong chips, so they sort of roll off slowly one at a time, tho' without a real pause of motion. It could also be the actions of someone sorta thinking how much he wants to bet, as he bets it. Or it could be someone explicitly trying to get a read.

You know the kind of motions I mean?

Anyway, how do you rule this? Assume the player never pulled back his hand or had a significant pause during the action. It was just slow and deliberate.

(I have a feeling I know what psand will say, but I'm curious anyway, and for others' take.)

In the case of a guy who puts his hand out front and does this ... I look for a back and forth motion. That is if the hand goes out and he drops chips slowly thats fine until he brings his hand back.

But this is more tricky with the guy who is rolling or throwing chips forward in which case it is more likely to be string bet.

Did I get it right?