I'm not involved in this hand but the ruling was so bad it bothered me.

Seat 8 bets $11 on the flop.
Seat 1 fell asleep covering his cards.
Seat 3 raises out of turn to $25.

Seat 1 wakes up and dealer says Seat 3 acted out of turn pushes his raise back.
Seat 1 makes it all in for $17.

What options are available to Seat 3?

I'll be shocked if anybody guesses the actual ruling from the floor.

Should be the action change gives S3 all options, call, fold, raise.

Possible weird bad floor ruling...

A forced call because it wasn't big enough to be a raise over the $17.

Seat 3 should still have all of his options open to him - including raising - since seat 1's all-in raise changed the action to him. If seat 1 had only called seat 8's bet then seat 3 is held to his raise to $25 since the $11 action to him was unchanged by seat 1.

At least that's how it is in most rooms. I suspect your scenario ended differently though.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

Seat 1s hand is dead for hiding his cards, but money crossed the line so it stays in the pot, and 3 is held to a raise because there was no change in action.

I like the way you think OCD.

We already know what the standard ruling would be in well run rooms.

There are a couple things that could happen that are bad but not "so bad" like making seat 3 call the $17 and action back on seat 8.

So my "so bad" guess: Seat 3 is forced to raise another $14 on top of the $17.

This would be standard today. In the past I've seen these two rules:

1) Action out of turn forfeits the right to initiate any action on that round. In other words, he can only check, call, or fold.

2) Forced to put in the initial out-of-turn bet, if it's a legal bet - which it would be here.

As to killing the hand of the guy that fell asleep, that would be absurd. Except for cards off the table, it takes an extreme case to kill a hand - and rightly so.

The idea behind the alternate rules, which generally do not apply any longer, was to attempt to teach people to act in turn. It never worked and just created unnecessary drama. Glad they're gone.

We were promised a weird ruling, so all this talk of standard rulings is borrrrring.

Let your freak flag fly!

The dealer expressing in his own unique way that he's had all he can take and he's not taking anymore, pulls out a gun and kills the out of turn actor.

Problem solved.

Or maybe that was too creative?

That sounds more like a dealer ruling vs a floor ruling

Update--

The ruling was Seat 3 was forced to make it $34.

Double update--

After posting this I went back to play again last night. The floor who made the ruling sought me out and said he goofed. He misheard the story from the dealer and got confused. I have to give him credit for that.

If Floor was going to make him min-raise, it should be $28 not $34.

I was going to say (before I read the actual ruling) that the Floor may have considered the all-in bet to $17 not a change in the action because it isn't a raise (because the original bettor isn't allowed to raise).

My guess was going to be that the Floor made it a raise to $31 because the initial raise was $14 over the $11 bet, considering the OOT action binding.

As punishment for falling asleep, the player is forced to fold, or go allin. That way, he doesn't hold up the game any longer.

My ruling would be seat 1 is all in for $17 and seat 3 has all his options including raising of at least $28.

Yes, this would have been the correct ruling. I guess the human element extends to floors who also make mistakes. I actually think highly of this guy now given how he handled it the next time he saw me.

Sounds like a standard ruling in Sydney. Here they have an out of turn rule where money from out of turn bets must remain if the person whose turn to act makes a bet / raise, but it's a forced check if the person whose turn to act checks. So if player A checks, player C bets $500 out of turn, player B then bets $5000, player C either forfeits their $500 or calls the $5000 - the $500 must remain.

Kill seat 1 for falling asleep and slowing the game.

Oh, and his hand should be dead, as well

I like the way you think SIMM.

Killing his hand is going too far.

Well, if you kill a player when action is on him, I would assume his hand would be dead by default.

No way you should punish or limit the actions of a player who only acted out of turn because someone else was asleep and hiding his cards.

Let's put the 'asleep' behind us, both literally and figuratively. You could also set aside the 'hiding' of the cards as well .. pay attention. It's the Flop and you don't know who's in the hand? It really shouldn't matter what street it is either.

OWTH .. Action changed from 11 to 17, therefore typically an OOT Player gets a reprieve by pulling back their chips and has all options. Certainly there are room specific rules in play.

A min-raise is now 28 and the opening bettor can only call if it remains 17 or anything else below 22 via other all-ins. This would be a fun one for the Floor since there's a difference between the min-raise bet sizing and the 'threshold' to reopen the action to a previous Player(s).

I can see where $31 might come into play, but not really sure where $34 came into play .. other than 2x 17 is 34.

How much table chatter was there when the Dealer was explaining the action to the Floor? Did the Floor even look at the table to see where the chips were laying during the discussion? GL

Sydney… was the sleeping players name 6bet?