Strange NL betting rule

[bec1972]

[ QUOTE ]
If hes calling 100 on the turn with FD... He's calling it on the flop... Either way same result [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
Can you come play in my home game? He didn't have a flush draw to call on the flop, he got it on the turn due to OPs inability to drive him out of the pot. Flush draw would not have called on the flop if OP could have bet $100.

My experience, and how we handle this in my home game, is if the raise is for more than half of the original bet, there can be reraises. So if original bet was $30, if shortstack goes all in for $15 or more on top of calling the $30 original bet than others can reraise NL, if shortstack can only reraise $14.99 or less ($0.99 is just for exactness)than there can be no reraises. It is a fair rule, you just need to know it. The beauty is when you are aware of all the stacks at the table and are able to use this rule against others trapping 3 - 4 cally wally's in the middle drawing very thin by betting an amount that if the shortstack wants to push, his raise is just a bit more than half of the original bet. It doesn't happen very often, but it is SUPER FUN when it does.

Sorry OP that it rolled out like that on you, but rules are rules, you just got to know them, which isn't easy if you play in multiple places.

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If hes calling 100 on the turn with FD... He's calling it on the flop... Either way same result [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
Can you come play in my home game? He didn't have a flush draw to call on the flop, he got it on the turn due to OPs inability to drive him out of the pot. Flush draw would not have called on the flop if OP could have bet $100.

My experience, and how we handle this in my home game, is if the raise is for more than half of the original bet, there can be reraises. So if original bet was $30, if shortstack goes all in for $15 or more on top of calling the $30 original bet than others can reraise NL, if shortstack can only reraise $14.99 or less ($0.99 is just for exactness)than there can be no reraises. It is a fair rule, you just need to know it. The beauty is when you are aware of all the stacks at the table and are able to use this rule against others trapping 3 - 4 cally wally's in the middle drawing very thin by betting an amount that if the shortstack wants to push, his raise is just a bit more than half of the original bet. It doesn't happen very often, but it is SUPER FUN when it does.

Sorry OP that it rolled out like that on you, but rules are rules, you just got to know them, which isn't easy if you play in multiple places.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me see if I understand your "rules." Before any action post flop player A bets $30. Player B only has $14.99 so he calls. Are you saying that players C, D, E, can only call player A's $30? Cuz if you are you have some retarded rules. If you aren't then please clarify?

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
If you aren't then please clarify?

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed- if bec1972 is saying that a short stack can effectively block raising, that's a very unusual rule (though maybe not as unusual as we thought).

Half-bet raise? Cool. Short stack blocking everyone ELSE from raising? Not cool.... even though they are giving themselves (the SS) a big disadvantage by doing so.

In a bit of a seque, I'm been somewhat of an advocate of the "1/2 raise = reopen the betting" concept.... but thinking more of bec1972's example, I'm not sure if I like the "raise so you can reraise yourself" idea. I'll have to think through that one some more.

[psandman]

[ QUOTE ]
Agreed- if bec1972 is saying that a short stack can effectively block raising, that's a very unusual rule (though maybe not as unusual as we thought).

[/ QUOTE ]

My experience is that while many home game people may be playing with this rule, it is generally because they misunderstand the rule not because they consciously want to use a non-standard rule. they will swear up and down that all the casinos do it this way.

[ QUOTE ]
In a bit of a seque, I'm been somewhat of an advocate of the "1/2 raise = reopen the betting" concept.... but thinking more of bec1972's example, I'm not sure if I like the "raise so you can reraise yourself" idea. I'll have to think through that one some more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Understanding the effect of other people's actions when sizing your bet makes lots of sense (this is true with 1/2 bet or full bet rules). Even with a full bet if you see a short stack who you think will push in response to your bet, and you want to be able to come back over when they do, you make sure that you bet the correct amount. If the short stack has $40, you bet $20 hoping the SS pushes and a few other players call so that you can come back over.

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
Understanding the effect of other people's actions when sizing your bet makes lots of sense (this is true with 1/2 bet or full bet rules). Even with a full bet if you see a short stack who you think will push in response to your bet, and you want to be able to come back over when they do, you make sure that you bet the correct amount. If the short stack has $40, you bet $20 hoping the SS pushes and a few other players call so that you can come back over.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know, for some reason the 1/2 bet rule struck me as a problem, even though it should basically be the same. That's what I want to think through a bit.

[pfapfap]

I'm not a fan of the 1/2 bet rule. You don't even have enough for a legal raise, let alone anything resembling a realistic raise for whatever the situation may be. Either you double the previous raise or betting is closed to the usual suspects.

[Lottery Larry]

just because? Or do you have more of a reason?

[bec1972]

[ QUOTE ]
Let me see if I understand your "rules." Before any action post flop player A bets $30. Player B only has $14.99 so he calls. Are you saying that players C, D, E, can only call player A's $30? Cuz if you are you have some retarded rules. If you aren't then please clarify?

[/ QUOTE ]

NO! (Clearly I didn't explain this well if this is what derived, I'll try to elaborate better) I am saying, before any action post flop player A bets $30. Player B has $44.99 (or less), if player B raises all in, if other players call the now $44.99 total when it get backs to player A he cannot reraise the raise when the action gets back to him.

IF, here is where it is different, before any action post flop player A bets $30. Player B only has $45 (or more, but less than $60), if player B raises all in, if other players call the now $45 total when it get backs to player A he CAN now reraise the raise when the action gets back to him.

In either case ANY player acting after player B's reraise (no matter how much player B had) and before it gets back to player A can reraise any amount, at which point it DOES reopen the raising ability to player A.

Whether you like what the rule can, in EXTREMELY RARE cases, allow in terms of pot and player manipulation, if the rule is in place and you have the opportunity to take advantage of it and do not, that is your perrogative. I am not an angle shooter, nor do I recommend that others angle shoot (i.e. deliberately acting out of turn, saying one thing and doing another, hiding cards behind chips etc.)

If you have ever **"had"** to play in a game stacked up with calling stations that end up giving EVERYONE the right odds to chase EVERYTHING possible, if you get the opportunity to pull this move off it is (in my best Cartman) . . . . SUPER SWEET! (so long as the draws don't get there)

And by **"had"** . . . 1) I live in an area that does not have card rooms readily available, 2) I do not enjoy, and will not, play cash games with my friends as some cannot afford to lose even at the lowest stakes that would keep the game legit and from a financial standpoint worthwhile, 3) I am unable to travel to areas that have great card rooms, so I "have" to play in the festival, church basement fund raising, and general charity fundraiser arenas. WHICH ARE LOADED with chasers, calling stations, people along for the ride, and players notorious for giving everyone else at the table horrible odds in relation to ANY made hand. (Don't argue this if you haven't played in this environment, because who wants to go all in for $200 on the flop when the pot has $60 in it, because 4 or more players will call a $75 - $100 bet?)

[bec1972]

Look at it from this example, (and this is PREDOMINANTLY the examples that I have used this to my advantage)

Where: Summer festival in their gambling tent, spreading everything from instants, the money wheel, Blackjack where the dealer takes ties, to poker.

What: $1/$2 no-limit. Buy in rules vary anywhere from min $60 - max $100 upto min $100 - max $300 depending on the festival. With a ridiculous rake that is ALWAYS 10% and can go as high as $50 per hand, again depending on which venue.

Who: 9 players and you, where skill levels of the other 9 really question whether the words "skill" and "level" should be in the same sentence. 7 of the 9 will call almost anything to the turn to see if they can hit either their 4 or 7 for third pair, lookout if they have a gutshot, and four to a 9 high flush OR open ended at the bottom end are (notice sarcasm) VIRTUAL LOCKS!

When: After you have played for quite a while, you notice that the game has digressed to a glorified crap shoot.

You are playing $700+ and are in early position. You are dealt Q [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], and raise to $20 preflop (because $15 - $25 preflop was getting action, but $30 or more was not) and get called by 5 players, making the preflop pot atleast $125. One of the callers is the player immediately to your left and he, of all the players in this pot, is the shortstack and he has $60 left after calling the $25 preflop.

The flop comes A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]7 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

I will often bet $40, praying that the shortstack has an Ace or a hand that he will push either out of desperation, pride or the money in the pot begging him/her. His/her raise of $20 allows me to repop if and when 1, 2, 3, or all 4 of the remaining players just call the shorstack's reraise all in to $20 more on top of the $40 I originally bet. I then raise a large amount (depending on what I think the is needed) hoping that the callers of $60 bail when faced with a reraise that would cost them anything upto $615 more.

Nothing shady has occured here. Poor play, in this case, tight/passive and loose/passive play has been exploited. No rule has been broken. No immoral angle has been shot. If the rule is in place and you don't like the above situation, you probably don't like to check raise and would like to illiminate players ability to check raise you in a tight aggressive game as well! Believe it or not there are players (stereotypically, they are mostly older) that do not like check-raises and actually ban them in their house rules.

If my original post was unclear, I apologize. I was implying what "Zetack" read into my posts, and hope that this and my last post cleared up any ambiguity. For those that do not like the 1.5 raise rule in NL cash play, I would implore you to think about it with an open mind. It presents you with opportunities that less skilled players do not think of, and therefore initially are unable to implement on you (until they learn it from experience). If you know someone is capable of making this move/play you are that much ahead of the competition, or atleast you are able to see into their mind as to "why" they are betting that amount.

Hope I atleast clarified what others misread due to my poor word choices earlier. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
Hope I atleast clarified what others misread due to my poor word choices earlier. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

If by "clarified" you mean attempted to make a confusing post even more so then yes, you've "clarified" it. But no matter, you play in your tents with your wacked out rules and let the big boys play real poker.