If the dealer knows (and acknowledges) action is on, you can't really be skipped. That's my point.

If the dealer points to UTG preflop to indicate action is on him that means BU/SB can't just say "call" and BB check to see a flop 3way with everyone in front of them out because they didn't protect their action.

Skipping a player happens the way DumbosTrunk described it in his first post with the dealer not being aware action was on him. Players can't just randomly decide it's their turn and utilize the player(s) behind them to create significant action.

The only problem is, the dealer and player did not stop the OOT action until after it checked to button. No one in seat 9. We were 8-handed. Action started in seat 7 and proceeded clockwise.

I also knew action was still on me in my previous example but dealer also failed to hold up the action as in this example. Only wrinkle is dealer in previous example claimed he “felt” like I checked (he was probably just CYA and screwing me over
because I’ve called him out for his mistakes before).

This one is simple. Since substantial action has occurred, you cannot simply reverse the action. Action is now back to UTG and he has the option to do whatever he wants.

With the Dealer looking at 8 (and 9 open) it is conceivable that action, especially checks, could occur in 1-2 (and maybe 3) before the Dealer might peripherally catch it .. and then either 4 went with the flow or it's on 4 before Dealer/Player speak up.

I can see a Floor ruling for 8 in this spot, but I lean more towards forcing 8 to check.

As discussed, consistency is a talking point. Do we say that 8 should be able to speak up quicker than 9 due to their field of vision? By rule we don't, but in reality I'd suggest that a Player in Seat 8 should be able to stop the bus quicker than Seat 9. But is that enough to go with Rule #1 or the actual rule? GL

When the dealer knows it's on 8 and everyone acts preemptively people are checking out of turn, when the dealer thinks 8 has checked or claims so everyone is acting in turn.

They aren't the same thing so there is no "consistency" needed.

Good Luck!

Not from 8's perspective .. In both cases 8 feels 'skipped' and there's been SA based on 8's claim.

The consistency comes when the Floor tells 8 that SA has occurred and they must, by rule, now decide how 8 can (or can not) proceed.

What is not consistent, as noted above, is the information provided by the Dealer to the Floor which may result in 8's options not being the same 'each time'. While 8 may deem this as inconsistent, the Rule offers the Floor discretion on a case by case basis.

Where the Rule may be flawed in it's 'suggestion' is that it states that the SA is binding and yet the action 'backs up' to the skipped Player. I'm not sure the word 'including' should be used. I suppose if the SA is all passive/checks that we might offer SP the option to bet, but I would suggest that that option is not available if any of the SA includes a bet. You can't say a bet is binding and then let a Player change the action 'in front'. I assume that if SP bets that normal SA applies and the actions, other than folds, are now off the hook as they normally would be. (I'm probably chasing my tail here, but I didn't look at the addendum today either.)

In the case of the 'misunderstood' arbitrary checking motion as interpreted by the Dealer/Players then SP should also get 'warned' about such actions being taken the wrong way.

Does the Floor offer leeway because in one case two people (Dealer/Player) didn't stop (or have time to stop) the SA from occurring? Perhaps and that's why the Floor has discretion case by case. GL

Well, that's a significantly shorter and better way of saying precisely what I tried to say

If the dealer skips a player it's their responsibility to speak up and protect their action. If people randomly try to act out of turn, the dealer should stop that and remind everyone whose turn it is.

If action is on seat 8 with seat 9 empty, I think in most circumstances the dealer is doing one of two things. If he's looking at seat 8, that should be a clear sign to seat 1 (and everyone behind them) that action is on seat 8. In case the dealer is looking somewhere other than at seat 8, I think in most situations the dealer notices if seat 1 checks. That should at least cover most scenerios.

From earlier in the thread, the relevant rule stated

“To retain the right to act, a player must stop the action by calling “time” (or an equivalent word). Failure to stop the action before three or more players have acted behind you may cause you to lose the right to act“

Now the question is, what do we think stopping the action means? Shouldn’t a dealer looking at a certain player waiting for them to act be considered “stopped action”? Of course stopping action could be the player stopping action. It can also be the dealer paying attention and indicating where the action is with their eyes/attentiveness. Or it can be the dealer announcing “time” or saying “action here”. It’s not a one size fits all thing.

dealer knows exactly where the action is, the other angle shooters don't change that.


as to your other post of looking down at chips

why not simply announce the bet size before reaching for chips

You might want to fix that 'look at chips tell' (LOL). It is a very reliable tell if you watch a Player while a card comes to view on the Board and they 'immediately' look down at their chip stack.

A very less reliable one is the grabbing of the chips .. LOTS of old timers and very passive Players will grab a barrel when a card comes off or they see you looking at them. Typically it's a false tell of them wanting you to slow down/check, but in some cases it's just them not being able to wait to get the chips into the middle. I try to not put a lot of stock into it since it simple can be part of a Player's routine with a live hand. GL

I know that tell too but I only looked at my chips once it was on me and I was about to bet, not right after the flop came out.

I honestly don't know how else to bet without looking at your chips in order to pick them up.

Say “Bet” or “I’m gonna bet” or something first.

if there is a bet in front of you do you look down at your chips to call or do you say call and then get chips.

might feel akward at 1st but announce your action then get chips over the long haul will stop all confusion

simple:

call or
I raise ; then you can think how much
when 1st to act announce bet size then look down for chips
or if PLO pot or bet size

soon it will become 2nd nature and you won't even think about it