As above, on the turn there was a bet, a player cuts out 8 chips, puts them in front of him on the felt but not across the betting line, then says "I want to raise"

Player behind who had already put out his calling chips has the floor called, ruling is no raise just a call.

Tourney rules are clear this is forward motion, same for cash games? If so why have a betting line?

Whenever I'm in a new room and there's a line on the table, I always ask if it's an enforced betting line or just a courtesy.

If your casino is forward motion, the line is a courtesy line for the dealers. So someone puts their bet behind the line the dealer can say “please push your bets forward” until they are past the line. But if they make a forward motion with chips (usually going beyond their chip stack) they can’t reach back and add more chips or it’s a string bet. If someone complains then they are only allowed to use whatever chips they had brought forward.

As didace hints at, there are essentially two kinds of lines (plus a third, no line):
1. A hard betting line
2. A soft "courtesy" line
3. No line

Most rooms these days are 2 or 3. Forward motion past your chips or cards is what indicates a bet has been made.

Some rooms still use a hard betting line, where no bet counts unless it crosses the line (or is verbalized). These are waning in popularity overall, in general, in our informal view.

As Didace says, if you're in a new room you should always ask whether the line is a hard line which is enforced, at a minimum to protect yourself from other players trying to angle you if their rule is unusual.

Why have a courtesy line? It helps make sure players put their chips out far enough so that it is both clear to the other players that a bet has been made, and puts it in reach of the dealer.

Even if there is a hard enforced betting line rule (ie. cards that come across are always a fold, any chips that come across must be bet), that doesn't preclude other ways to perform actions. Your post makes it sound like this player has made forward motion with the $8 and released it. Should be held to a call if that is the case.

Thanks for the feedback, good to know.

Order matters here. If the player cut out the chips and put them in front of him before saying “I want to raise” then it’s a call (unless the rule in the room is a hard betting line, in which case the $8 cut out does not constitute a bet and the verbal would apply.” If he says “I want to raise” then cuts out the chips, it is a raise and the dealer should tell him to add another $8 to his bet.

OP was very clear. The chips were cut out, placed in front of player behind the betting line. THEN player announces raise. The order was VERY clear in OP.

This is why no one else is asking about or mentioning the order. The only real point is if this is a betting line (apparently is not) or a decorative felt item that helps the convenience of the dealer.

For multiple reasons this thread and OP demonstrate why betting lines are a good idea gone wrong. In theory they should make things clear but in reality, since not everyone fully understands them and some people attempt to abuse the confusion.

I get that and yes the OP was clear in that regard. I just wanted to clarify that the “I want to raise” part of it isn’t necessarily irrelevant in case OP (or anyone else unfamiliar with such situations) should encounter a situation where someone announces the raise and then puts out calling chips. From the discussion in this thread, a new player unfamiliar with the rules might conclude that the player saying he wants to raise is irrelevant. In this particular case, it is, but that is not true in general.

Well I believe for tournaments TDA has halted the announc raise, put in call and then add raising chips. Ofc cash games will remain very room dependent

That is correct. No two-motion raises in TDA. If you try to do it, you're bound to a minimum raise.

Another reason the TDA rules are terrible.

Counterpoint: the TDA rules are good.

Jane, you ignorant slut!

My guess is that the TDA rules are there to prevent angleshooting using a betting line.

In this case the guy waited until there was a call and then decided to raise. Now in all likelihood it wasn't an angle. But you never know.

The other thing the betting line is used for in card rooms that make it the definition of a bet, is an angle where a player moves their chips up to the line like he is betting and then after other players do things like raise he can then pull the chips back and muck his cards.

TDA actually has nothing at all to say about betting lines. It is purely a room rules situation. (Well, I mean, all rules are room rules at the end. But in this case there is nothing in TDA about betting lines or what makes a chip movement a bet at all, they seem to purposefully leave it undefined.)

rob was talking about the TDA rule against announcing raise, then putting out exact calling chips, then putting out a raise amount in a separate motion.

I am with albedoa on this - it was a good change. The method of putting out calling chips first is confusing at best, a vestige of olden days before there were streamlined rules, it causes problems when people don't put out the exact calling amount first (even if it's just by a trivial amount), and generally speaking the exception to the "one motion" rule adds nothing of value. They were right to do away with it for the sake of simplicity and clarity.

(And as an aside, rob you also provided no evidence for why it was worse, other than your assertion. Glass houses and all.)

My evidence for why (I think) the TDA rules are bad is that they disallow some people from raising the amount they desire.

I don't think the two part raise is confusing at all, and holding it to a minimum raise certainly doesn't make it any less confusing.

This guy gets it.

So do string raise rules. Are they bad too?

There is a reason we require bets and raises to be made in unconfusing and straightforward ways, and specifically say you bear the responsibility if you do it in a non-standard way. (Incidentally this is a lot easier in limit games where there are only two bet size options and no large denom chips to worry about.)

In general, I do agree with you about allowing people to bet what they want to bet. That should be the goal. And against me, in the games I play, I am never looking to turboact after someone else so if they can make the case and get their bet to match what they intended I am fine with it, but often there are other players involved who maybe don't see it the same way.

It is IMO most definitely more confusing to allow the three step raising process:
1. Announce raise
2. Put out calling chips
3. Put out additional raising chips

for these reasons:
A. If someone doesn't hear you say raise, the initial chips look exactly like a silent call, which happens all the ****ing time, and can incite people at act behind you thinking you have called
B. It is the only time you are allowed to make you bet in two motions without a verbalized amount first
C. There is no practical reason you need to do it, allowing it has no real practical value; you can just as easily put out the full amount in one motion, or verbalize first

On the other hand, I guess this is also true if you verbalize an amount that someone doesn't hear, and then you start putting your chips out in pieces, they might also misunderstand the bet and act before you're done, which also does happen. So maybe not quite as straightforward as I originally though. Though I still think eliminating this bet method is a net positive for sure.

Holding someone to a min raise is exactly what you do any other time someone announces raise and puts out less than the minimum raise amount, so I don't think it's at all confusing, though I do agree it is doing something that was not the raisers intent most likely.

How!?!?! They can still bet any amount they want that is legal they just have to do it w/o making a string bet/raise.

And as (slightly) noted by Dinesh, the call amount must be EXACT and that is often where it gets confused. Current bet is $24 so they put out a green and say raise... what is the ruling?

If a player doesn't have the chips to make the call EXACT, what should they do? Get change from the the dealer/rack? dealer/pot? another player? Just ignore this part of the rule?

Per rules, if the chip was first it is a call. If at the same time, it is a raise but by rule a min raise. But if they say raise first and push out 4 red and 4 white/blue, they can raise whatever they want. B

Reality is many think that as long as the call is put out (like by a $25 chip), they can raise whatever. But if so we need to decide is the extra $1 going to be part of the raise OR only the chips that now follow the green are the raise?

How long do they have? I have seen people clearly delaying and looking at other players trying to get a read to help size their raise. This is perfectly legal but also likely often used as an angle.

Does the raise now have to come out in a single motion? Not per RROP rules, can be as many motions as needed so long as they are continuous. Which is just another judgement call and opportunity to try an angle.

The multi motion raise seldom adds value, is an opportunity to angel, is often confusing (esp. to players not familiar or from rooms that disallow it) and can be abused easily.

It doesn't limit a player's raise but it does force them to conform to a normal raise method/process.

It disallows those people who have already said raise and put in the calling amount; particularly those people who are used to the other rules, which worked fine for the history of poker until just a few years ago. There have to be judgement calls made no matter what the rules are, and I never saw the old rule cause any problems.

That said, I don't play as much NL as do some other posters here, and this is really just a matter of opinion and very off topic to this thread.

I don't mind the, "I'm gonna raise" declaration, then putting calling chips out.

Of course, such things are subjective. Also, I play in home games, and deal bar-poker, so we can afford to be a little more loose with the rules. If we have angleshooters in those small communities, they're pretty quickly found and 86ed.

I can see what dinesh and others have written for real money, casino poker.