I'm a regular at the Beau Rivage in Biloxi.

They have a rule which I'm starting to hate the more I think about it. If action is on Player A and Player B says, "Whatever you bet, I'm going to call," this is binding. Similarly, if Player B bets and says, "I'll call any raise," or "I'll fold to any raise," according to the Beau's rules, he is obligated to take whatever action he stated. Also, if A asks B, "What are you gonna do if an ace flops?", B might say (even jokingly), "I'll go all in," to which he'd be bound.

This rubs me the wrong way. The only reason behind it that I've heard is it helps prevent angle-shooting, but I think it actually does the opposite. If Player B has a mediocre hand on the river and wants Player A to check, he can say something like, "I'll call whatever you bet." Now, if Player B actually has nothing, the option of bluffing is taken away from him since Player A legally has to call. There are a number of different scenarios and directions you can take this, but you get the point (I hope).

BTW, If the player adds a qualifying phrase like "I'll probably fold/call" then it's not binding.

This isn't a huge issue for me personally, as my general policy is to just shut the hell up during a hand, but I don't like that it can be used against me or others, as stated above. It's also unfair that this can end up costing new players unfamiliar with the rule. They might say something to discourage a bet and end up being forced to call someone's all in.

In all fairness, this rule generally isn't enforced. If the table is cool with it the dealer will usually let these comments slide. But if a player who knows the rule wants to be an ass and force someone to call/fold, they can call the floor and get the ruling they want.

I also just disagree with it out of principle. In a heads-up pot, I think players should pretty much be able to say whatever the hell they want. It's all part of the "psychological warfare" of the game.

Two questions:
- Is this a standard rule in Vegas (never been there)/elsewhere?
- Does anyone support the rule and, if so, why?

Cliffs: Beau Rivage in Biloxi has asinine rule that if a player says, "I'm going to do ______" they are legally bound to do so. Do we all hate this rule or is it just me?

facepalm.jpg

Yea I know that this can obviously backfire if player B is trying to induce a check and player A has a monster. Now A can happily move all in and force B to call. But still, if B has nothing then this comment works.

Also, he could just say something like "If you bet 1/2 pot or less, I'll call." Now he wouldn't be forced to call a BIG bet. In this situation, I guess player A has an interesting decision to make. If he has a monster, does he bet half pot to get a guaranteed call or bet more to make it look like a bluff and get a bigger call? And if he has nothing... well you get the point.

That actually adds an interesting dymanic to the situation but it's beside the point.

sounds like lazy management and dealers. instead of dealing with problem players they just make up new rules.

very bad ruling, just another case of big corporations hiring people to be management because they have a degree. For some reason they feel that having a collage degree but no experience make them more capable of running a game they know nothing about then a person that has all the experience but no degree.

If action didn't change which is impossible the the verbal statement can be binding, not always that is up to management, but the action did change so it isn't.

Is this a standard rule in Vegas or is the Beau on their own with this one?

just always say probably... problem probably solved

Generally it's not binding.

But generally people don't say this sort of thing in the first place.

The management of this room is not lazy. I hope they make an appearance in this thread.

So RR what do you think of the rule?

I was gonna say I like it but the OP brings up a good point.

If it is binding then it is also acting out of turn. Another rule says a change in action means an out of turn call can change his mind. This is a rule conflict, and a contrived one at that. Which rule takes precedence, the standard universal one, or the made-up one?

Something you need to keep in mind is there are no "Standard Universal Rules".

There is RRoP, the LV Hilton poker room book , the TDA, and an infinite number of rule books based on all of the above as well as "made up rules".

The complexity of the situation, the number of independent poker rooms and the lack of a concensus means we wil probably nevr have universal rules.

One of the most respected tournament directors around, Jack MCCelland, who helmed the WSOP for 15 years, has his own rule book. It is not TDA and it is not RRoP. He is the TD for the Bellagio now.

Don't all of those rulebooks say that an out of turn call can change their mind if the action changes before them?

I don't like it because I don't think you can commit to calling a bet of unknown size.

hm yeah, it can get problematic if people start saying if <...> I'll call. I'm not sure what I think about the rule. it seems like a pretty bad rule considering it goes against other rules, but I would be happy to watch some douchebag being forced to call a super deep shove after talking some ****. my point was that taking a bluff away from your opponent by committing yourself to a call is in no way abusive/angleshooting. it's just ******ed.

Has anyone asked the mgmt why they have the rule? Is it johnny grooms rule? I'm just guessing but fwiw I'll guess that they were having such a problem with people blathering these conditional statements that they said wt*, we'll just make them binding to hopefully cut down on the careless chatter.

In gneral I don't think TDs like to be in the biz of remembering conditional statements let alone enforcing them. why don't they just give people a warning a possible penalty for this arther than trying to make it part of the game? oh well, again they're problably just trying to take care of a problem they want to nip in the bud.

Somebody remembers the LV Hiltons' Poker Room book, that's impressive! ... in many ways that's still my favorite rule book, I still have a copy, cost about 1.50 in 1989. It's out of print now isn't it?

I would say yes...guy did say check and call whatever he bets. Sure enough he checked and some guy bet huge he called guy was bluffing.

Also on the HSP with Farha vs Gold I'm sure if Farha bet Gold would be held to call whatever he bet. He kept saying I call, I call, I call, I call...etc.