Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Casino & Cardroom Poker Discussions of the activities, rules and etiquette of Live Casino and Cardroom Poker Venues.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-22-2021, 08:47 PM   #26
Fore
old hand
 
Fore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,897
Re: Weird One chip rule ruling

Answer you are correct I meant hero was BB. But your are incorrect to claim this is a raise. If hero simply puts out two green and in no way moves around touches the BB red already 5here you can not pull back one of the green to make the call as that would be only $30 of the $35. Since you did not move the red there it is not considered as part of this action

Also I made a betting progress error should be taise to 15 then reraise to 35. In this case would need to raise to 55. Total chips are enough but since you are silent AND did not manipulate the red, this is a call.

Last edited by Fore; 07-22-2021 at 08:53 PM. Reason: Add
Fore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2021, 12:31 PM   #27
answer20
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
answer20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Corner of Walk/Don't Walk
Posts: 8,456
Re: Weird One chip rule ruling

I beg to differ .. maybe .. There is conflict in the TDA ruleset. More of a chicken-egg scenario.

45: Multiple Chip Betting
A: If facing a bet, unless raise or all-in is declared first, a multiple-chip bet (including a bet of your last chips) is a call if every chip is needed to make the call; i.e. removal of just one of the smallest chips leaves less than the call amount.

This is really cutting an edge here IMO .. They really needed to say 'every new chip is needed ..' Which the word 'new' does show up in some of the Addendum examples. But then we see this below (with some redacting to pin point my point and eliminate single silent conditions)

From Rule 46 .. This section C was added in 2019 ..
C: If new chip(s) are added silently and the bet is unclear to the house, the call and raise rules 41-45 apply as follows: 1) If prior chips don’t cover the call AND are left alone multiple new chips are subject to the 50% raise standard (Rule 43). See Illustration Addendum.

I realize we aren't in the intent business, so we are excusing the Player from 'not' pulling back the red while putting out the two green in an effort to just call? This is not a 'make change' effort by the Player without 10 or 20 denomination chips in play.

Back to the intent business .. I believe the current intent of the rules is to 'prove' a Call before we 'consider' a Raise. And I (now) accept that with the word 'new' shown in the examples .. but TDA still crossed themselves up by keeping/adding all the 50% Rule language in there.

ALL of this comes back to my long time stance on (new) multi-chip bets. We first look at the total of all the chips out there before we apply any of the these underling rules. I think it's crazy that we include prior chips in the 'math' of a 'final' bet total and yet we ignore them when applying Call/Raise standards. Make the Players responsible for their actions, not some 4-7 deep rules flow chart.

Why bother trying to explain to a new Player that 'prior chips' aren't part of your latest action unless you touch them?

Golf is cleaning up some of it's anal issues, poker can too. GL
answer20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2021, 07:42 PM   #28
Fore
old hand
 
Fore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,897
Re: Weird One chip rule ruling

I agree it appears TDA needs to improve wording and clarity.

I play almost exclusively cash. And where I play the rules seem to be derived from RRoP. Since these rule sets largely overlap it is not alway# easy to KNOW their origination.

I have always seen it ruled that only the chips handled are considered. Chip or chips already out there are not counted for determining intent. Also I have never seen the 50% rule applied unless player stated raise but stated or put out too little.

I am not saying I like it this way. Nor am I saying it can’t be improved. Only stating what I have seen as the it was ruled.
Fore is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive