call re-raise?
 

Live 20/40 LHE. Never seen this situation before, what's the correct ruling?

River:
Player A bets $30 and is all-in.
Player B calls the $30.
Player C completes to $40.

B & C still have money behind.

Can Player B re-raise to $60 or must he only call/fold? I think he can raise, because he is call-re-raising C and not A.

Re: call re-raise?
 

He can't raise. He had the option to complete to $40 on his turn, but he elected not to.

Re: call re-raise?
 

You cant complete a bet that is more than half of a bet. Proper action would be:
A: all-in 30
B: call 30
C: raise to 70

now B can raise, call or fold

Re: call re-raise?
 

[ QUOTE ]
You cant complete a bet that is more than half of a bet. Proper action would be:
A: all-in 30
B: call 30
C: raise to 70

now B can raise, call or fold

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe this is right. C can make it 70. Calling the 30 and raising 40 more. If the bet is half or more of a full bet it can be called and raised a full bet. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Re: call re-raise?
 

[ QUOTE ]
You cant complete a bet that is more than half of a bet. Proper action would be:
A: all-in 30
B: call 30
C: raise to 70

now B can raise, call or fold

[/ QUOTE ]

Above is true in most places but some clubs/casinos (San Manuel Casino near San Bernadino California comes to mind) use the inferior rule where any bet less than a full bet is "action only". This was also the way it was at places like the Commerce until 1997.

~ Rick

Re: call re-raise?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You cant complete a bet that is more than half of a bet. Proper action would be:
A: all-in 30
B: call 30
C: raise to 70

now B can raise, call or fold

[/ QUOTE ]

Above is true in most places but some clubs/casinos (San Manuel Casino near San Bernadino California comes to mind) use the inferior rule where any bet less than a full bet is "action only". This was also the way it was at places like the Commerce until 1997.

~ Rick

[/ QUOTE ]

This is something I see a lot; an out of the way poker room opens and then becomes the room that time forgot. A good example would be the Tunica rooms and their definition of what constitutes heads up.

Re: call re-raise?
 

What do the Tunica rooms consider heads-up? I played there last year and was involved in the following:

I'm OTB; SB and UTG are in after the turn. SB bets river, UTG raises, I re-raise. SB then folds, UTG pops it again and I five bet. UTG then asks dealer if there's any limit since the pot's now HU. Dealer says "I don't think so, but I need to ask the floor a question." Calls floor who rules that since SB was in the hand at the river- even tho he's now folded- that betting is now capped. UTG and I had to be HU alone at the river for the unlimited rule to be in effect.

Re: call re-raise?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Live 20/40 LHE. Never seen this situation before, what's the correct ruling?

River:
Player A bets $30 and is all-in.
Player B calls the $30.
Player C completes to $40.

B & C still have money behind.

Can Player B re-raise to $60 or must he only call/fold? I think he can raise, because he is call-re-raising C and not A.

[/ QUOTE ]

In San Jose, he should be able to raise to $80.
In San Jose, wagers less than a full bet do not change your options. Player C made the first complete bet. Player B can, in effect, check-raise him.

Guess San Jose is a backwater that doesn't understand poker.

Re: call re-raise?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Live 20/40 LHE. Never seen this situation before, what's the correct ruling?

River:
Player A bets $30 and is all-in.
Player B calls the $30.
Player C completes to $40.

B & C still have money behind.

Can Player B re-raise to $60 or must he only call/fold? I think he can raise, because he is call-re-raising C and not A.

[/ QUOTE ]

In San Jose, he should be able to raise to $80.
In San Jose, wagers less than a full bet do not change your options. Player C made the first complete bet. Player B can, in effect, check-raise him.

Guess San Jose is a backwater that doesn't understand poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

If they aren't using the "half-bet or more is a complete bet" rule (in limit of course) then you are right. But why would a major poker venue such as San Jose do it in such a way?

~ Rick

Re: call re-raise?
 

OK, to clarify, this is Bay101. Not really a backwater casino.

But it sounds like the "completion" rule is different in various casinos. At Bay101, if someone makes a partial bet and is all-in, a player not yet to act can complete it to a full bet, which in this case was completing the bet to $40.

It doesn't matter how large the incomplete bet was.

In any case, I don't think this is the crux of the issue, I'm trying to figure out if Player B can basically re-raise Player C. Whether it was a completion raise or a full raise as in another casino, is probably not important. But correct me if I'm wrong.

Re: call re-raise?
 

[ QUOTE ]
What do the Tunica rooms consider heads-up? I played there last year and was involved in the following:

I'm OTB; SB and UTG are in after the turn. SB bets river, UTG raises, I re-raise. SB then folds, UTG pops it again and I five bet. UTG then asks dealer if there's any limit since the pot's now HU. Dealer says "I don't think so, but I need to ask the floor a question." Calls floor who rules that since SB was in the hand at the river- even tho he's now folded- that betting is now capped. UTG and I had to be HU alone at the river for the unlimited rule to be in effect.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is what they do in Tunica. That used to be standard until about 98 or 99. THey used the standard rule when they opened, but since they are away from the rest of the world there wasn't anyone to tell them the world had passed them by and now you can have unlimited raising if it becomes heads up before the cap is reached.

Re: call re-raise?
 

[ QUOTE ]
What do the Tunica rooms consider heads-up? I played there last year and was involved in the following:

I'm OTB; SB and UTG are in after the turn. SB bets river, UTG raises, I re-raise. SB then folds, UTG pops it again and I five bet. UTG then asks dealer if there's any limit since the pot's now HU. Dealer says "I don't think so, but I need to ask the floor a question." Calls floor who rules that since SB was in the hand at the river- even tho he's now folded- that betting is now capped. UTG and I had to be HU alone at the river for the unlimited rule to be in effect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lot's of places use (or have regressed to) the inferior rule where any round that starts with three players is going to have a cap, even if one player puts in no or limited action.

The best rule was championed by Bob Ciaffone (in old Card Player columns) and introduced in the bigger LA Card clubs in 1997 (Las Vegas venues may have had this rule earlier).

Bob's rule is that if three (or more) players are active when the capping raise is made (i.e., usually three raises in LA and four raises in many other places), then the betting round is capped and cannot be uncapped. If the action becomes heads up before the capping raise is made then there is no cap on that round. This liberates the betting from unnecessary restrictions while providing perfect protection.

Here's an example with a three raise cap. A checks, B bets, C raises, A calls two bets, B reraises, C reraises, A now folds. Now B wants to raise but can't, when the third raise (the capping raise) went in three players were active. This protects A since he could reasonably believe his third raise capped the pot. Had the third player dropped out before the capping raise went in then the betting is uncapped.

Despite the fact it's been this way in LA's big clubs for ten years about 30% of the dealers and 10% of the floor will screw this up. Correcting them mid-hand impacts your action and gives away your hand. IMO this is an unforgivable mistake by a dealer.

~ Rick

Re: call re-raise?
 

[ QUOTE ]
In any case, I don't think this is the crux of the issue, I'm trying to figure out if Player B can basically re-raise Player C. Whether it was a completion raise or a full raise as in another casino, is probably not important. But correct me if I'm wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not wrong given Player B made an "action only" call of an incomplete bet. But it's important to point out how wrong calling a substantial bet "action only" in the hope that the better rule (i.e., an allin bet or raise half or more counts as a full bet in limit) becomes more widespread.

~ Rick

wrong, wrong, wrong
 

$30 is half or more of the full bet, so it counts as a full bet. There is no complete to $40, there is only raise to $70, which counts as two bets (towards the cap, if applicable). Reraising this bet should be self-explanatory, it counts as a three-bet.

Anything else is just another KITN.

Al

Re: wrong, wrong, wrong
 

[ QUOTE ]
$30 is half or more of the full bet, so it counts as a full bet. There is no complete to $40, there is only raise to $70, which counts as two bets (towards the cap, if applicable). Reraising this bet should be self-explanatory, it counts as a three-bet.

Anything else is just another KITN.

Al

[/ QUOTE ]

This made me think of another variation of the rule.

In OP the side pot that is being created by B and C, Is there a cap or no? it is heads up for that pot because A is all in.

Re: wrong, wrong, wrong
 

well this thread got sidetracked. can you guys assume he said:

[ QUOTE ]
Live 20/40 LHE. Never seen this situation before, what's the correct ruling?

River:
Player A bets $15 and is all-in.
Player B calls the $15.
Player C completes to $40.

B & C still have money behind.

Can Player B re-raise to $80 or must he only call/fold? I think he can raise, because he is call-re-raising C and not A.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: wrong, wrong, wrong
 

$15 is less than half and therefore does not count as a bet. Completing to $40 makes it one bet, and therefore B can only call/fold and cannot call/reraise.

Re: wrong, wrong, wrong
 

Typically a round that started multi-way is capped even if it becomes heads up. Usually this does not apply to the river, where betting will usually become unlimited if heads up regardless of the prior action. Your room may have different rules but these are pretty common.

Re: wrong, wrong, wrong
 

[ QUOTE ]
$15 is less than half and therefore does not count as a bet. Completing to $40 makes it one bet, and therefore B can only call/fold and cannot call/reraise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would B not be able to raise if C makes a complete bet? Isn't he basically check-raising C if the original $15 is not a complete bet?

Re: wrong, wrong, wrong
 

[ QUOTE ]
$30 is half or more of the full bet, so it counts as a full bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except in San Jose, where it only counts as random poo flung into the pot for fun.

Re: wrong, wrong, wrong
 

[ QUOTE ]
$30 is half or more of the full bet, so it counts as a full bet. There is no complete to $40, there is only raise to $70, which counts as two bets (towards the cap, if applicable). Reraising this bet should be self-explanatory, it counts as a three-bet. Anything else is just another KITN. Al

[/ QUOTE ]

It's so cute when people get all "this is the way it IS!" and are totally wrong. I would think we've had enough conversations about this sort of thing by now that you'd realize there are cities outside of Vegas, Al. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

As was explained, in the cardrooms in this region, anything less than a full bet/raise counts as a check/call. Players after can only complete to the full bet, and only if they would normally have the option to bet/raise.

So to go back to the OP... basically, here's what he's asking:

Player A checked and is all-in. Player B checked. Player C bet. Can Player B raise?

The answer should be obvious.

At least, that's how it's done in these here parts. Your mileage may vary.

Re: wrong, wrong, wrong
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
$30 is half or more of the full bet, so it counts as a full bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except in San Jose, where it only counts as random poo flung into the pot for fun.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but you have to match the poo or get off, er, out of the pot.

Re: wrong, wrong, wrong
 

[ QUOTE ]
well this thread got sidetracked. can you guys assume he said:

[ QUOTE ]
Live 20/40 LHE. Never seen this situation before, what's the correct ruling?

River:
Player A bets $15 and is all-in.
Player B calls the $15.
Player C completes to $40.

B & C still have money behind.

Can Player B re-raise to $80 or must he only call/fold? I think he can raise, because he is call-re-raising C and not A.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

In the big LA card clubs Players C "complete" is the first real bet. Thus Player B can checkraise just as if he never made a bet in the first place.

It may be different elsewhere.

~ Rick