1/2NL game: Player in late position states "if it get's folded to me I am raising." Action does not change and several player's fold to him.

He now wants to muck.

What is your ruling?

I think verbal bets are only binding when used in the form of speech where you claim to do an action, not claiming to Do an action given a set of conditions. I think these parts of speech are called, can't remember, linguists out there?

Conditional statements are not binding in most rooms. However he shouldn't be saying such things in a multi-way pot.

I rule he can muck. Unless house rules say otherwise.

Doesn't sound like it got folded to him, so he doesn't have to raise.

To me this is the same as when somebody bets out of turn and then wants to check when it is checked to them. I am all for making the raise/bet stand

So, his statement scared the players into folding?

One thought: His statement was almost the equivalent to saying "raise" out of turn. Therefore, if the action doesn't change by the time it gets around to him, he's raising.

Another thought: His statement wasn't QUITE the same and conditional statements should almost never be ruled binding.

I don't much care how the floor rules on this one. It's a raise at Mandalay Bay or Monte Carlo in Vegas where they have no sense of humor about these things, and the dealers often even warn new players "don't do this, or else". Many other rooms will probably just go with conditional statements not being binding. Dunno how many folks will go with my original thought. Not sure what I would do, myself.

The TDA's thoughts on this: A rule that says there is no rule. The TD may, or may not, rule it binding. Boy... sure glad we cleared that up with a rule.

Not confusing at all.

Notice OP didn't say it folded to him..... He said "Action does not change and several player's [sic] fold to him."

This suggests to me that not every player folded to him ...... some called (but did not change the action by raising). Why else would OP word it this way instead of just saying "It folded to him"?

No.

Saying "Raise" out of turn can scare people out of calling.

As per usual in B&M, the OP doesn't make anything clear.

If you believe I am not being clear I apologize. I worded the question with the intent of not leading towards my opinion. In this instance no one called in between and it was folded to this player who was drinking and being difficult. My own mind is that this is NOT the same as if you do this then, since in that case action changes by the person he or she is trying to influence while in this case he is influencing what people think is going to happen. IMO, this is liken to someone stating raise out of turn and action not changing. I worded this not to state someone called in between but to also include the times when someone does as well.

So, nobody opened the pot and he folded anyway, right?

Again, the purpose of the rule is to keep out of turn statement from affecting the action, ie having someone saying "Raise" out of turn scaring people out of calling.

How does this case fit that purpose?

Hmm this isn't scaring people out of calling? They all folded. How doesn't this become an action out of turn issue? Angus, I am on here enough to more then enough to respect your opinions and ideas, what I don't see however is what you would rule here.

If I am going to fold, I don't care what he says/does.

If I am going to call, what is there to scare me? He hasn't threatened to raise if I call.

this

I go with the latter.
"If you do X, then I will raise" = Conditional statement. Doesn't matter if action changes or not. Not an action, not binding (traditionally and in most rooms) (and players should understand that it's not binding), and simply table talk (though it shouldn't be said multiway)...
I think a lot of the confusion comes from internet players who are unused to the (apparent) ambiguities inherent in live cash poker, and unaware of the normal conventions on these things. For former internet-only players, I would submit that a conditional statement like this in live poker is about as binding as similar statements made in the chat box online.....