I've played in many games where a player, usually a drunk with a big stack, will put out a bet before the dealer even deals the cards and say "I'm betting $X blind!" For example he may be the button, but definitely not first to act after the cards are dealt. In every case I've seen that done, the dealer allowed the bet, and used the OOT bet binding rule about whether action changes or not.

Recently I played where the dealer saw the chips before he dealt, and asked "what's this?" The player said it's a blind bet. Dealer pushed chips back, saying that betting OOT was against the rules, and you can't do it deliberately whenever you want. Other players said "but it's a blind bet" as if the fact that the player hadn't seen his cards yet put the bet into a special category.

What do you think about blind bets? Are they OOT action that is allowed anytime, or something to be stopped? Floor was called and made a decision.

I would say that it should be treated just like any other bet or raise OOT. If action doesn't change, it's binding. If action changes, it's not binding. A player who does this frequently will be given warnings not to keep doing it or be kicked out.

I have consistently disallowed oot blind bets and hear the same cap from players. My answer is always the same. You can bet blind ..... just do it in turn. Floor has always backed me. I have seen multiple players get kicked out over this.

Never have I seen a floor rule that it's legal to make oot bets if they are blind (I am aware that some rooms allow a sleeper bet but I have never actually seen that nonsense.)

I don't think oot action before the hand is dealt should be considered binding. If you think it should where would your cut off be? If a player says I'm easing blind for a whole orbit would you make that binding?

Would you make it binding if a player put out a call before the hand (often they do this thinking it is their blind)?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Two different issues

1) Are deliberate OOT bets binding-they should be treated the same as any OOT bet
2) Are blind OOT bets allowed-no, deliberate OOT action should be penalized.

Technically speaking, the bet should be allowed and treated the same as any OOT action, and then the player should be penalized.

That player should be kicked out of the card room if he keeps disturbing the game on purpose

Slippery slope? Not really, but it's not really strictly enforced either in my area. I have seen more Dealers say something before any cards have been dealt than if the bet comes out once they start to pitch. Certainly if the Floor gets involved this is easily enforceable.

This real issue is that most player don't know that if they open the player can pull back their bet. But these are the same players that don't know that if a player says "If you go all-in I will call" or "If it checks around I'm all-in" aren't a binding statement either.

The Dealer needs to determine the level of enforcement ... If the table is disturbed or uncomfortable then they need to step in and enforce the rule. If the table is having fun with it and the room hasn't made a big deal about it, then it's good for the game. GL

Why?

5/10 game. CO puts out $200 "blind".

Cards dealt, folded to Lojack who puts out $10.

CO can take his $200 back? Why?

Has the action changed?

Consider action on the Turn. Player A bets $10. Player B hasn't acted yet when Player C puts out $200. Player B now calls the $10. Can Player C take his $200 back?

Back to pre-Flop, isn't the BB Player A, Lojack Player B and BlindBettor Player C?

I do agree that if the Lojack raises to $20 that BlindBettor can take his $200 back.

Opening and limping are different actions

Yes .. I was using the open=raise PF premise.

There are plenty of players still out there that think those chips are trapped out there regardless of what happens in front of them. I don't mind if the player themselves thinks that as that would mean the chips stay in play regardless. GL

You which players always claim this is good for the game. The players to the right of the OOT bettor. You why they think its good for the game? because it benefits them over all the other players......

This puts me in a quandary. I usually play tournaments. When a player acts out of turn, and I can tell that the in turn player doesn't know the rules, I don't know how to inform the player of the house rules without influencing action. The best I can usually do is to ask the dealer to clarify the options, but that can be seen as influencing action when it is not my turn to act

Blind bets must be made in turn.

I can't believe there are places/dealers out there allowing ppl to make blind bets oot and have the action stand as if they were first to act. Ridiculous.
This.

Rules are rules .. and if a Floor is ever needed then those rules should be enforced fairly and consistently. But there is also customer service, and if a game is dragging in the mud and a spewtard/gambler/whale sits down and want to spice things up and no one at the table objects then ... it's good for the game. If someone speaks up or the Dealer senses that it's going too far or the room has instructed the Dealer to put the hammer down on this activity then it needs to be nipped in the bud.

I've seen games that were going to break and then someone decides to straddle/double straddle or blind bet .. or go all-in blind and then the game goes another 2 hours without a blink. Good for the players and good for the room .. and hopefully good for the staff.

They're are some tournaments that will force a player to forfeit chips put in the betting area OOT or incorrectly. It's definitely best NOT to speak up unless action is on you or the Dealer is incorrectly applying the rule. Yes, you will be letting the other players in on the information when you ask but you shouldn't just interject the information no more than the Dealer should, until requested. GL

To me, blind bets = straddle.

If the room permits only 1 straddle, I expect UTG+1 to be allowed to 'blind bet' without it being a big deal.

For other blind bettors, I expect they'll just make the blind bet in turn if told to do so.

With a player objecting enough to bring a floor, then the strict room rules should be followed.

My opinion on blind bets is they should be allowed in cash games, and I normally see it ruled that way.

If the action changes (a player raises in front of blind bettor, calling does not qualify), blind bet is no longer binding

Also blind bets are not treated as a straddle, they don't get to act a 2nd time if called.

Why do you feel this way? Just act whenever you want? The whole table can do it? 9 ppl randomly throwing chips in OOT and we have to decide who's action stands?

My opinion is that I can't respect your opinion on this issue if you simply refer to them as blind bets without acknowledging that they are oot bets.

Of course even if you acknowledged that, I would think you were wrong but at least I would think to myself that you understood the issue.

Blind bets implies they are announced in timely manner, preferably before all cards are dealt.

If just out of turn it should generally still stand with the same provisions but now open to penalty on grounds of bad etiquette. It should still stand because other players at the table benefit the most from this interpretation, even if they find it annoying.

Edit: so to clarify, blind bets if properly announced should not be thought of as being out of turn, they are an additional action like straddling or posting that does not affect the other players in the hand negatively

Of course an OOT blind bet does affect some of the other players negatively. It hurts anyone who would have normally acted after the OOT bettor.

Blind bet implies only that you are betting without seeing the cards(either yours or board cards). It does not imply you act before cards are dealt. It is possible to bet blind without betting OOT.


The idea that OOT action does not negatively imact other players is absurd.

All the players in between the blinds and the OOT actor get an advantage. This disadvantages the players who are not in that position.

Straddles are not inherently allowed in a poker game. They are allowed by operation of specific rules permitting straddles. I have never seen a rulebook that allows OOT blind bets but you put forth the position that this is just part of poker. I am aware of the fact that there are rooms that specifically allow this they call them sleeper bets. Absent such a rule your OOT blind bet is OOT action. (I have never actually played in a room that allows sleeper bets, but I have heard of them .... I think it is fair to say its a very nonstandard rule andd far from common.)

Wrong. -10^309

Definitely affects others and at least for some negatively. Also it is not the same as a straddle or posting since it is never live. Finally it is not an ettiquette issue; it is a rule violation.

As long as you don't see why it is not a straddle and that it is a rule violation, your opinion has at most limited value.

Why do you hate money?

Love the discussion. Full respect for all viewpoints. I do play devil's advocate quite often in my posts just for the sake of the discussion so I hope I don't come off too much as a wild card .. although it may not appear so, I do have my limits as well. And I fully admit that I would rather stretch a rule in the flow of the game/table if they want to walk through that door. I would not think less of a Dealer who steps in and properly enforces a rule.

No, we cant have players acting whenever they want. I tend to agree that blind bets occur before or during the deal when action is technically not on anyone. A player's OOT action stands unless action in front of them changes. Although slowing the hand down for sure, this rule still is 'the' rule ... even if 6 people have acted OOT in front of the pending action.

Total agreement. I tell folks all the time that when discussing an issue you should attempt to know just as much about 'the other side' as you do about your side or any discussion will be tainted.

Any action, OOT or otherwise, changes the hand. EP players may choose not to open in order to trap or force the blind bet to stay in play and see what happens behind. For that reason LP players have less accurate information when action reaches them. Although not live as a true Mississippi Straddle would be, a blind bet essentially moves the Button until action passes by it.

A blind bet is a OOT action and should not be allowed unless the whole table and 'room' (Dealer) agree to allow it. A player who actually acts OOT or attempts to verbalize his intentions of betting blind once he's been told that it's not allowed should be handled by the Floor just like any other player who violates rules ... warning ... 'other' action as per normal room procedures. GL

FWIW--- I've seen this used as an angle-shot on more than one occasion.

OOP player (who I don't know well-but certainly have seen play more than once)... will push a big bet forward OOP knowing full-well that "that action stands".

I think there can certainly be situations where you want to "send a message" or have some level of pot control, or slow-down a fold-shove decision..

Combine this angle shot with the (apparently) slightly intoxicated player who seems to be playing just a bit too well than an intoxicated play should be playing....

Doesn't happen often--- but way more than I'd have thought. I wish I'd see Floor give warning, penalties a bit more than just rely on "action stands".... as the perfect solution to the problem.

I'm not talking about the most common, over-anxious, well-meaning OOP player, or the occasional OOP raise from 9 seat from someone who can't see the 1 seat... Most of the time we have to assume "mostly good intentions".... but, not always.

I am not completely certain, but I believe everybody at the table should benefit except for the blind bettor, and maybe the blinds if the table is otherwise passive and they could have realized their flop equity cheaply a large percentage of the time.

Just because the OOP players benefit does not mean everybody else is impacted negatively. Most of their EV gained comes directly from the OOT bettor. It kind of sucks that the IP players have to deal with the OOP players being able to limp and have action remain open to them when it gets back around to them, but overall they should benefit far more from money being put in blind.

While it's technically against the rules, as a player I'd be a bit upset if a floor made someone stop making blind bets even OOT, as it benefits me regardless of my position, unless perhaps if the bet is very small. It's perfectly okay to accommodate whales that want to bend or even break the rules, IMO.