Please clarify incomplete raise rule in NLH MTT using TDA rules
Join Date: May 2023
Posts: 2
Hi,
I'm new to this community and I have a question regarding the incomplete raise rule as per TDA
Blinds - 1000/2000
UTG (40K) limps in for 2000
MP( 45K) raises to 5500
Cutoff(7.9K) shoves all in for 7900
everyone else folded
My question is whether the UTG who initially limped in as the option to Reraise? or he can only call the all in or fold?
also whether the MP player has the option to reraise when the UTG decided to call the all-in bet?
Thanks in advance.
the second coming of the second coming
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 68,689
UTG should be able to reraise since there was a full raise after their limp. If the rule is that a less than minimum reraise doesn't open the action, then MP would not be able to reraise unless UTG put in a limp-raise.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,076
UTG can raise as Nath pointed out because MP raised.
MP's original raise was 3500 more than the limp. For MP to be able to re-raise the cutoff's all in bet would have to be 9000 or more (which is at least 3500 more than MP's 5500 bet).
In LHE the rule is that if an all in is greater than or equal to half of a raise then it is reopened for a raise.
Join Date: May 2023
Posts: 2
Thank guys. I was really confused by the following TDA rule and hence this question
47: Re-Opening the Bet.
A: In no-limit and pot limit, an all-in wager (or cumulative multiple short all-ins) totaling less than a full bet or raise will not reopen betting for players who have already acted and are not facing at least a full bet or raise when the action returns to them. If multiple short all-ins re-open the betting, the minimum raise is always the last full valid bet or raise of the round.
Any thoughts?
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,032
The TDA rule listed just above sums it well.
It means that if UTG elects to raise, the minimum he can raise to would be 11400 (7900 + 3500).
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 1,120
Reading rule 47, the key phrase is “…and are not facing at least a full bet or raise when action returns to them.” ITG in your example is facing MP’s full raise. It should be obvious that UTG can raise - just pretend cutoff did not go all in; would UTG be able to raise in that case? Obviously he could so the short all in is irrelevant.
The same rule also explains why MP cannot raise (assuming UTG calls or folds). MP is not facing a full bet or raise. Min raise amount for cutoff would be 9000. MP is only facing a bet of 7900, so by rule 47 action is not reopened to MP. MP can only call or fold, not raise. Again, since it’s not a full raise by cutoff, we can reach the right answer by pretending cutoff folded. Would MP be able to raise if cutoff hand folded? Of course not.