two players who think they have the nuts who keep raising each other with 20-40 big blinds behind, is it legit for someone so say lets just get it all in to quicken the game or whatever?

A friend swears they have seen it done at a casino where someone had 10 big blinds or so left behind.

I've heard of it happening, but never played in such a game

They are playing limit, they are heads up. Eitehr one of them can ask and the other can agree or decline.

Some people mistakenly confuse this by saying that when it gets heads up they can go all-in. But there is a difference between two players agreeing to do this and one player unilaterally pushing all-in.


One thing that is certain ... the players should make sure there is no misunderstanding before proceeding.

In some locations, players are allowed to agree to get it all in, as you describe above.

As this is a home question, I'd certainly allow it.

RROP doesn't specifically mention allowing such a verbal shortcut; only reminding us several times that the betting cap is gone, and raises are unlimited.

thanks

ive heard that in some places the dealer must ask for the floor's approval before players can go all-in. the idea is that the procedure will take so long that it's faster for the players to go all-in bet by bet.

at a home game, i wouldn't allow it. There will be a lot of opportunity for angle shoots, misunderstandings, and premature showdowns. Player A can say "**** it I'm all in." Player B can say "OK." Player A thinking B called shows the nut straight flush. Player B, turns pale, mucks his ace high flush face up and without putting any more chips in the middle. Player A will say "HEY! you called the all-in right?" Player will can say "what? NO!!" let the drama begin...

From what I remember, it's called "playing overs"... or, it's a variation of that. Two people can agree to raise the stakes, between themselves. From what little I've heard, it's usually to double or triple the betting, rather than NL, when in a limit game... but that's fine as well.

I've heard some games/cardrooms have "overs" buttons, that go to interested players. When those players are the only ones left in a hand, even if there are more than two, the stakes are raised to some pre-determined betting structure.


Besides... would you rather wait the fool out, one raise at a time? (that being, the fool who's in second place)


It's no different than any other verbal angleshot- clamp down on it as the host, with dire consequences for angleshooters, and it will be no different than anything else.

This is different than overs buttons. With overs buttons the players have agreed ahead of time that if they get down to only players with the button that the higher stakes will apply.

What the Op is talking about is a situation where two players agree to put it all in during the shand simply as a shortcut to the raises...reraise routine.

In the case of the overs games a player who has taken the overs button can't decide in the middle of a hand that he no longer wants to play for the higher stakes.

In this case either player is free to decline the proposal when it is mad ein the middle of the hand.

after the fifth reraise ( i was in the hand) someone not in the hand started saying for us to just get it in, i declined (with the nuts) it doesnt seem right to play a fixed limit game but switch to no limit when you know your ahead.
A few months ago the same situation happened, same game, different people, where I felt a newb got taken advantage of by agreeing to call an all in to make it easier and/or quicker. We play a 4-8 limit game but i'll mention the "overs buttton" at our next game. thanks

well, I did say it was a variation...

I wasn't sure if they lumped that under "overs" or not. I was familiar with the ad-hoc nature of the agreement when buttons aren't involved.

But this is not what you are doing. If you were switching to no limit at that point you could have simply said "all-in" and your opponent is put in the position where he must either call your all-in or fold.

When you are in this situation you can ask him if he just wants to get it all in and he does not have to call your all-in or fold. he can simply say no and then call raise or fold to your regular limit bet.

This is a huge difference.

i'm not a fan of this. i use unlimited when heads up, and had this exact situation come up in a game a while back. it got 6 or 7 bet on the river, and player A says "well, im all in". player B thought about it for a bit, and silently mucked her cards (before anyone could explain tha she could just call another single bet).

since then, i have informed the players in my game that you can offer to go all in, but you cannot announce such