|
|
|
|
#2
08-28-2007, 07:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: illegal raise
Correct - the all-in raise must be at least 50% of the amount required to raise to re-open the betting. So in your example, if someone bets 40 and the next guy goes all-in for $60 instead of $55, the betting is re-opened. Someone can now raise an additional $40 to make it $100 total in a 20-40 game, etc.
Jeff 
|
|
#3
08-28-2007, 07:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: illegal raise
The third and subsequent players can call the $55 or raise. If everyone calls or folds, betting is not re-opened for the original bettor.
|
|
#5
08-28-2007, 11:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: illegal raise
[ QUOTE ]
Correct - the all-in raise must be at least 50% of the amount required to raise to re-open the betting. So in your example, if someone bets 40 and the next guy goes all-in for $60 instead of $55, the betting is re-opened. Someone can now raise an additional $40 to make it $100 total in a 20-40 game, etc. Jeff [/ QUOTE ] Is this in Robert's rules? I have never read this... I thought that the all-in had to be at least a normal raise (which in this case would be $40 more -- $80 total). Not saying this is wrong... just curious -- and maybe could it differ depending on where you are playing? Also, in the OP's situation, player 3 hasn't acted, so he can still raise. Let's assume they are the only players in the hand... If it goes P1 bet $40, P2 all-in for $55, then P3 can still raise P1's action if he wishes. However, if it goes P1 bet $40, P2 call $40, then P3 all-in for $55, P1 and P2 can only call the $15 more because the betting wasn't reopened. That is my understanding anyway..
|
|
#6
08-28-2007, 01:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: illegal raise
[ QUOTE ]
Correct - the all-in raise must be at least 50% of the amount required to raise to re-open the betting. [/ QUOTE ] wouldnt this only be if it were heads up?
|
|
#7
08-28-2007, 03:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: illegal raise
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Correct - the all-in raise must be at least 50% of the amount required to raise to re-open the betting. [/ QUOTE ] wouldnt this only be if it were heads up? [/ QUOTE ] If it's heads up and someone's all in, why would it matter how to re-open the betting?
|
|
#8
08-28-2007, 02:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: illegal raise
[ QUOTE ]
Correct - the all-in raise must be at least 50% of the amount required to raise to re-open the betting. So in your example, if someone bets 40 and the next guy goes all-in for $60 instead of $55, the betting is re-opened. Someone can now raise an additional $40 to make it $100 total in a 20-40 game, etc. Jeff [/ QUOTE ] maybe room dependent but foxwoods you have to double the initial bet otherwise its not a raise and betting is not reopened now after reading the responses im assuming you are talking about limit. please include that in the OP. my reference was to NL, but dont know about limit
|
|
#9
08-28-2007, 02:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: illegal raise
[ QUOTE ]
...maybe room dependent but foxwoods you have to double the initial bet otherwise its not a raise and betting is not reopened [/ QUOTE ] This is true for NL holdem. For limit holdem, a raise is usually half or more the bet for the round.
|
|
#10
08-28-2007, 02:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: illegal raise
The rules for how much of an all-in bet "re-opens the betting" varies NL vs Limit, and from room to room. In San Jose Limit games, if the bet is $16, going all-in for $30 does not re-open the betting, and any allowed "raise" would be to $32 (raising the initial $16 bet by $16).
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
