I'm almost certain that isn't their rule. So that isn't really pertinent. There is no way they allow a player to raise himself just because someone went all in for an extra dollar.

Not 100% certain the way it's written but apparently "she" who can't believe the ruling is "another floor person", and "her" whom OP confronted is the original floor.

Therefore, I take this to mean two Bellagio floors, both women, disagreed about the correct ruling. That hardly sounds like a valid house rule.

So, MP would have to go AI for at least another $81 on top of the SB $81 for it to be a legal re-raise? That correct?

As several have indicated already, XXfrygatorXX and Steven Segal's Dad are confused by the fixed-limit (or spread-limit) rule. At $4/8, a $3 all-in bet will not reopen, and players who haven't already checked may complete to $8. A $4 all-in bet will reopen, and anyone may then raise to $12.


That's correct if it's an all-in first raise (not reraise).

But the general rule is, at least the amount of the previous bet or raise.

E.g.

A bets 50
B raises 75 more -> 125 to go
C calls 125
A reraises all in 80 more -> 205 to go

A has reraised more than the amount of the last raise (80 > 75). Despite A not making it 250 to go (twice 125), action is reopened and B may reraise at will.

==
Useless footnote: I think I read in a Ciaffone article in CP recently that this didn't use to be a standard rule, that many rooms would not reopen in this situation in bygone years. AFAIK what I wrote above is now the standard NL rule.

No, MP may not reraise. No one raised his bet. MP may call $16 more or fold.

ya, i am amazed this is not how it is. i always assumed this was the case when i first started playing in poker rooms. seems it would save the house and staff and people like OP a lot of pain.
there have been some discussions on here recently about rules/angles/irrititaing player behavior. not wanting more rules is one thing, but everyone should be able to refer to some kind of easily decipherable set of rules for each room that would clearly solve any dispute.
don't see how this is not in everyone's favor.
new players would feel protected and ditzy/bored/incompetent staff would get some help in spots like the one described.

(though it sounds so ****ing basic, it's scary this happened at all)

Or perhaps too much.

Every "floor made a horrible ruling, I'm boycotting the place" thread is the same movie with different actors.

OP: "Horrible ruling, am I correct?"
1/3 of respondants: "You're right, floor is wrong."
1/3 of respondants: "Those are the house rules, lobby to change the rules rather than blame the floor."
1/3 of respondants: "lol @ your play in the hand, you deserve to lose"

Optional OP "I'm going to write an angry letter and get someone fired" epilogue.

There is some logic behind the rule, it's to prevent some angle shooting.

Let's say Player A has $500 and he is first to act with a monster on the river in a $100 pot. Player B also has $500 and Player C only has $100. A wants to get as much as Player B's stack as he can. He knows Player B will call a reasonable bet but not an overbet.

Without this rule, he could bet $80-$90, Player B calls, then a high chance of Player C just shoving for $10-$20 more. If this re-opened the betting, he could then raise again or just shove, squeezing B for more money.

It sounds like a rare occurance, but without this rule a shark would be able to find a lot of opportunities to exploit the situation.

damn that sucks, next time make a bigger deal i guess. the guy who said to not release your hand is right. what a horrible dealer and request a floorman next time

It's Bellagio's rule, it isn't standard but it is their rule. You just have to deal with it. Making a big deal about it isn't going to change their rules and its just gonna make you seem like an *******.

Also, you have half your stack in and are getting 5 to 1, why not call there.

I don't see how the existence of a printed rule book that players can examine would have helped in OP's case. If he wasn't able to get the shift manager or a second floor to come chat with the not-so-bright floor screwing up this ruling, how is being able to dig a book out from under a counter and spend 5 minutes thumbing through it going to help? Are we going to pause the game and let someone read the whole rule book anytime they are unhappy?

I am (I think) still in favor of casinos making their rules available, but I do worry about RR's predictions that rule lawyers will make poker hard to play if they're allowed to convene a grand jury over every ruling. RRoP is pretty fuzzy in spots, and a very strict reading of some of the rules without an understanding of exactly how they are really applied would cause problems.

But I guess this isn't new... how is the presence of a rule book helpful or harmful to you guys in California? I get the impression it pretty much never comes up, but I could be wrong.

A strong floor doesn't tolerate angle-shooting, and can point to Rule #1 at all times.



Honest, respectful, common sense players (which are the vast, vast majority of them) understand and respect this.

When did the Bellagio start spreading 1/2NL?
I thought they only had 2/5NL and higher...

Within the past year.

This rule is also room dependent.

Mostly the post was aout the rule and the bellagio, not about the play, I am not sure about exact stack sizes or after flop odds, blah blah...but the fact that a "floorperson" and "dealer" don't know their own rules, that is the part that is crazy. I mean this wasn't some hole-in-wall card club with players dealing, ITS THE BELLAGIO, i was literally within arms reach of bobby's room.

I think i will send an email to the manager, maybe I can get a night or two at the B.

Thanks for all the positve comments.

TT: i will ask to see a rulebook for future discrepancies.

Preparation H does feel good.... on the hole. I hope you have some handy after that floor ruling...

Terrible ruling, but if you boycott every casino where a floor misrules against you, you'll run out of places to play sooner or later....

OP that should teach you a lesson not to play QT for 1/5 of effective stack next time vs multiple players LOL.

Cliff notes: In LA the "rule book" is not available everywhere and if it is doesn't even reflect the rules as practiced.

Details follow:

Commerce: Their rule book is available at the concierge desk so I keep one in my files for reference. I think it's the 1997 version but it's hard to tell; the printed books don't have a version and printing history. I know it doesn't reflect the actual rules (especially in NL) since significant rule changes not mentioned in the book are often just posted on a poster near the NL section or I suppose (based on experience in other clubs) in memos and floor logs.

Bike: For all the years I worked there (2001 -2005) the rulebook was out of print (or at least in short supply; I was one of the few to have one). New floor had to look in others books and also keep track of rule change memos, floor log changes and so on.

Hollywood Park: Should be similar to the Bike/Commerce (all three clubs were the major players in the 1997 rules update). Not generally available; I have a slightly updated 2000 version on my hard drive (from working on a joint rules project when I was at the Bike).

Hawaiian Gardens: I have a very old one; generally they keep their written rules as some sort of secret and not available. Often they go against the grain (for years to reopen action in NL they used "double the bet" rather than "double the raise"; then when getting back in line with other clubs improperly created a half or more limit style rule for no limit that was posted on the wall). This was eventually corrected to come into line with other clubs.

Hustler: Never seen a rule book but it appears they are similar to the others. Occasionally you will see a rule poster board that is very incomplete and somewhat inaccurate.

~ Rick

The rules regarding what size bet when all in does or does not reopen the action in limit and no limit are very clear (although some backwards clubs use inferior or limit style rules I wouldn't expect this at the Bellagio). They are important since an incorrect ruling greatly impacts the play and outcome of a hand.

This rule must be completely understood by DEALERS since even having to call the floor to correct a dealer often gives away your hand. That a floor was wrong on this is beyond unforgivable. It's simply not a judgment call or a "mistake". It's not understanding something that is important and central to your job.

Unfortunately these unforgivable errors for this rule are so common so you might run out of places to play. Over the years I've seen this sort of error in every LA area club. It's a sad and pathetic situation given the size of the NL market. Management needs to get on this but I'm not optimistic.

~ Rick

Definitely sounded like a terrible ruling, but this is a much better approach than never going back. Hope they comp you something.
Unfortunately, if you cross off every poker room where you are the victim of a bad floor decision, you'll run out of places to play, sooner or later.