Quote:
Originally Posted by psandman
...I just can't reconcile the explanation that the rule is designed to prevent a player from gauging his opponents action and then altering his bet, with the fact that we allow a player to do exactly that as long as he does not do it in the betting area. [Well, this distinction in some form has always been part of the game, more formerly than now.]
I am certain others will disagree with me...... [Actually, I think you're both right; see below.]
but one thing I am certain your explanation of the rule leads to the situation where every hitch or hesitation is accused of being a string bet .... such as last weeks episode with a player who was quite upset that I don;t know what a string bet was because I allowed a player to drop a second chip that wasn;t dropped simulataneously with the first one....
Actually, I do agree with you that the string bet rule evolved mostly to define the end of an action (Betting), but I believe that eliminating a particular type of angle was also part of it.
Obviously, under whatever rule, if you do something which makes your bet "final", and then try to add more, then it's a string under that rule. Otherwise, we'd have chaos, regardless of the bettor's intent.
In the olden days, as I remember, there were always some things you could do, and some which you couldn't. All sorts of table talk and funny betting motions were pretty normal, and people tried various ways to to get reactions much more than is common today. It was clearly understood that table talk was not action (except for binding words like "Call" and "Raise" in turn). Likewise, people tended to dribble out bets or make pump-fakes or multiple betting motions (in PL and NL); sometimes they were observing reactions, and this was actually pretty normal and ok. (Announcing a raise, without specifying an amount, came under the "continuous action" rule, which is pretty much gone today, and has been mostly replaced by a variety of different house rules on when a physical bet is binding and/or final.) But 40 years ago, most people knew enough (usually) to simply wait until the raiser had finished dropping his chips in the betting area, AND had stopped moving.
But it was
always important to know whose action it was,
which required knowing (defining clearly) when someone else's action was complete and final. And then any further attempt to increase the bet was indeed a string,
regardless of intent. (As in the fictional westerns, "I'll see your $5000 [long pause to observe]........... and I'll raise you $30,000 more!". This was always a string, and not allowed in serious games.)
The game moves faster today (!), and no one has this kind of patience anymore, and the modern rules reflect this.
But the kind of reaction you describe above, of any slight hitch or bobble being possibly called as a string bet, is just silly.