Rio Floor Decision
 

You guys know all this stuff cold, so I'm curious to the opinion.

WSOP event. UTG limps seat 1, SB raises clearly not seeing the limp, I 3-bet from the BB also not seeing the limp. Before UTG acts, SB announces call. UTG then says the action is on him and shoves. Floor ruled that the SB had to put in the amount of my 3-bet and then decide if he wanted to fold or call UTG's allin. Standard???

Re: Rio Floor Decision
 

Whoa. Action out of turn is not binding, I thought. Seems wrong.

Re: Rio Floor Decision
 

oops i forgot to put in OP, but the main point of contention was that the SB put his chips into the pot for the amount of the call of my 3-bet before UTG said anything. (there is no betting line at the rio btw)

Re: Rio Floor Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
Standard???

[/ QUOTE ]

A bizarre floor decision from a Harrah's-owned room? Made by someone who doesn't understand poker?

Yes, quite standard.

Re: Rio Floor Decision
 

Very bad floor decision.

TDA rules state:
[ QUOTE ]
Action out of turn may be binding and will be binding if the action to that player has not changed. A check, call, or fold is not considered action changing.

[/ QUOTE ]
If UTG had called, SB was bound. Because UTG raised, SB is free to fold without putting in anything more.

You really might THINK the floor people at the WSOP would have read through the TDA rules, at least. There just aren't that many of them.

Re: Rio Floor Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
WSOP event. UTG limps seat 1, SB raises clearly not seeing the limp, I 3-bet from the BB also not seeing the limp. Before UTG acts, SB announces call. UTG then says the action is on him and shoves. Floor ruled that the SB had to put in the amount of my 3-bet and then decide if he wanted to fold or call UTG's allin. Standard???


[/ QUOTE ] The SB verbaly commited to calling. It is the players responsibility to keep track of action in front of him. IMO the floor was correct. He has to call the 3 bet the decide what do from there. Once chips enter the pot in tourney play they can't be removed. He said "call" therefore he must call the 3 bet.

Re: Rio Floor Decision
 

So they don't play by TDA rules in Tunica?

Re: Rio Floor Decision
 

I don't agree with this "chips can't be removed from the pot because it's a tournament" idea. It makes it sound like everything's totally different because it's a tourney, which is baloney. The concept that should apply here is that action out of turn may be binding. Forcing the sb to call a three-bet before utg goes all-in creates a situation which would normally be impossible, and should not be ok just because it's a tourney. Obviously neither blind saw the bet, which sounds to me like the dealer was asleep. The action should be corrected without fabricating an impossible situation.

Al

Re: Rio Floor Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with this "chips can't be removed from the pot because it's a tournament" idea. It makes it sound like everything's totally different because it's a tourney, which is baloney.

[/ QUOTE ] Everything is different because it's a tourney. There are rules in place in tourneys that dont exist in cash games.

Re: Rio Floor Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
Everything is different because it's a tourney. There are rules in place in tourneys that dont exist in cash games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Binary thinking is fun!

Lots of things are different in tourneys. However, bets out of turn are not binding if action changes. Simple as that, cash or tourney, says so right there in the rule book. Just like a royal flush beats a pair of sevens in both cash games and tourneys.