Worst Rule In Poker

[David Sklansky]

I speak of the one where a player who puts in too little money, because he is unaware of the correct amount, can't take it back, but can fold if he leaves the short amount in.

[George Rice]

Many places allow the player to take all the money back and fold if there was a raise and he was unaware (I'm speaking limit poker). This isn't good either.

I think the problem is with fast moving games where the dealer isn't doing a good job of announcing the action, or controlling the game.

[TheWorstPlayer]

is that a rule? I thought the rule was that since he moved to call, he had to call unless he was unaware of the action, in which case he could fold (and leave no money in).

[willie24]

why? because it gives an incentive to raise subtly and without announcing? have you actually seen people shoot that angle?

I prefer the rule variation where the entire bet can be taken back...because the mistake is always obviously honest. there is nothing to gain by "calling for less" and then folding.

[leaponthis]

[ QUOTE ]
speak of the one where a player who puts in too little money, because he is unaware of the correct amount, can't take it back, but can fold if he leaves the short amount in

[/ QUOTE ]

That is not the interpretation of the rule as applied at the Bellagio. At least not at the mid limits. As long as there is no action behind the player, he is allowed to take his less than correct amount back if he was not aware of a raise. Some floor people ask the raiser if he wants the money to stay in and decide according to the raisers request. Gee, since they can't seem to get this right all of the time, maybe it is the worse rule in poker. Oh well..

leaponthis

[BluffTHIS!]

leaponthis,

Are you ever going to get real frisky and venture outside of David's forum? Or are you scared there's lions in the streets with their names in red?

[leaponthis]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you ever going to get real frisky and venture outside of David's forum? Or are you scared there's lions in the streets with their names in red?

[/ QUOTE ]

Alas, I am a marked man. I have recived a lifetime Ban (honestly) from posting on the real important 2 + 2 forums. Consequently, I am relegated to this potpouri of poopoo (spelled correctly I might add) forum. One headed by none other than the unrivaled, indescribeable, insurmountable, unsurpassed mogul of indisputable factological importitude David "Einstein" (as Doyle dubbed him) Sklansky.

And I kinda like it. Of course when Matty and Mason and Dids and Dynasty find out I'm posting here they may also ban David from posting. But if I get wind, phew, of it before they ban him I would purposely attack important posters like Alan Gohering or Jesus Ferguson or Herminee Geingold or someone so they would punish me and not my beloved David.

Hey, I've heard of skeletons in the closet but that lions thing is new to me. I like it.

leaponthis

[BluffTHIS!]

Wild asses in the wilderness are the prey of lions; likewise the poor are pastures for the rich.
--Sir. 13:19

The sluggard says, "There is a lion in the road! There is a lion in the streets!"
--Prov. 26:13

[leaponthis]

Sklansky refers to me as an oaf. Now couple that with sluggard and you have a "lazy idiot". O.K. fair enough.

leaponthis

[happyhappyhappy]

Why do you think this is the worst rule David?