Tournament game. Blinds 300/600. UTG goes all in for 800. Is the min raise for UTG+1 going to 1200, 1400 or something else ?

1400, assuming this is preflop action. The min raise increment is 600 (double the last bet or full raise; in this case the big blind) which means a full raise must be 1200. Utg's 800 all in is not considered a full raise, so the min raise increment remains at 600. But you apply that increment to the total action of the previous player, which is 800. So you have action of 800 + min raise increment of 600 = 1400.

Yes .. Pre-Flop min raise is to 1400

If on Flop/Turn/River .. min raise is to 1600

A min raise must be the amount of the last legal raise added to the current bet facing the 'action' Player. If there's been no previous 'legal' bet then the min bet is the amount of the Big Blind.

I'm pretty sure that if a Player goes all-in for less than the BB as the 'opening' bet (Flop/Turn/River) then all 'calling' Players must put in a BB, not the 'less than' amount. So, Flop - Player A goes all in for 200, Player B must 'call' 600 (or raise to 800 min) and Player C then has 1200 as a min raise amount if Player B only calls.

These spots do need to be sorted out at times, but they are rarely messed up. GL

I dont believe that is correct. On flop, turn and river if a player goes all in for less than the minimum betting increment, other players can call that amount. You may be thinking about the preflop situation where the big blind is all in for less than the big blind amount. In that situation, the next player must at least put out the big blind amount to enter the pot.

Assuming you mean pre-flop.

In California it's 1200. Pretty much everywhere else it's 1400. I don't know why they do it differently, but they will argue to their last breath that 1200 is the only thing that makes sense.

Getting players who cross the stream like that is my nightmare. 'This is how it's always done and the only way it makes sense!'

Maybe where you play. But this is Chinatown, Jake.

I literally spent an extra 3 months in dealer school trying to wrap my head around California's limit rules but I haven't heard anything in the last decade about them changing their no limit tournament rules.

All I know is I've run into this discussion many times online and in person with both sides loudly arguing that they're right. This is with people who have been dealers, floors, and TDs for many years and always seem to agree on everything else. It always turns out that the people who say 1200 are from California. They consider the raise to 800 incomplete or invalid so it does not count when calculating the minraise.

Isn't that true in limit?* Something about "completing the raise".




*I haven't played limit in a very long time.

In limit, if someone raises all in for less than half, then the next raise "completes" up to the normal raise amount.

If the raise is half or more, it counts as a full raise, and the next raise is a full increment above the last (all in) raise.

So in 20-40 limit:

Bet 20, raise all in 25, next raise is to 40 (and is only the 2nd bet for purposes of the cap)
but
Bet 20, raise all in 30, next raise is to 50 (and is the 3rd bet)

I think you’re correct. Otherwise, the last player to act on the flop would have an unfair advantage because he’d be the only one allowed to call for less than the min bet.

Blinds 600/1200, player A all-in for 1000 on the flop with player B and C left to act. Feels wrong to make B put in 1200 to call because C doesn’t have to if B folds.

Player A bets 1200, player B goes all in for 1000, folds around, Player A takes back 200. How is that any different?

Ok, then if nothing has changed, the latest I've heard is that California uses TDA rules for their tournaments which means it would be 1400 to min-raise.

If the raise happens to be an all-in, California reevaulates the Bets for the all-in. Going by your second example, we'll start with a bet of $20, all-in for $30, we'll add in a player that calls the $30, and then the next player goes all-in for $40. Assuming a $20 betting round, the $40 all-in is considered 2 Bets in California and 3 Bets anywhere else. If there's no additional raising when it gets back to the player that originally called the $30 all-in, that player does not have the option to raise in California. The reason being is he called 2 Bets ($20+$10) and now he's facing two Bets; in poker, you cannot raise unless you're facing an *additional* Bet. The player still has to act on the additional $10 he's facing, but it's not considered an additional Bet in California.

It's backasswards, but that's the way it is.