i bet 260; he says, "make it 400"

[Lester_M]

I believe the answer to your question is exactly:
It depends on the house.

I'm assuming by the way you stated the question, that the Bellagio refers to the same as TDA rule #10 which states:
50% If a player puts in a raise of 50% or more of the previous bet, he will be required to make a full raise. The raise will be exactly the minimum raise allowed.

I would assume the "put in" part of the rule would apply to verbal declarations also.
This means that if the bet was $400 and I said "make it $401," I would not be allowed to raise, however if I said "make it $650," then I would be committed to the pot for $800, unless, of course I was all-in.

I have seen a few houses that do not follow the above rule, and close the player out unless the player puts in all of the chips required for a full raise, or state the proper action. (i.e. facing a bet of $200, and putting in $395 would be considered a call, and $195 would be returned to calling player.) I do not agree with this concept.

Did they make him raise to $520? That's how I would call it.

[Quadstriker]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm assuming by the way you stated the question, that the Bellagio refers to the same as TDA rule #10 which states:
50% If a player puts in a raise of 50% or more of the previous bet, he will be required to make a full raise. The raise will be exactly the minimum raise allowed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have seen this ruling made in cash games. Specifically: Bet 75. "Make it 100." Ruled as a call.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
I have seen a few houses that do not follow the above rule, and close the player out unless the player puts in all of the chips required for a full raise, or state the proper action. (i.e. facing a bet of $200, and putting in $395 would be considered a call, and $195 would be returned to calling player.) I do not agree with this concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

One place that does it this way is Hawaiian Gardens. I'm on the fence as to whether it's a good idea or not. They also use the rule that the minimum raise is twice the total bets you are facing i.e. A bets 100, B raises to 200, C must raise to 400 (rather than 300). This I like.

~ Rick

[prayformojo]

[ QUOTE ]
In a multiway pot I would rule both of these to be a rasie to $540. In a head up rule both of these as a raise to $400. A few month ago I started a thread about this subject, generally the rule that you must raise the size of the previous bet does not apply in heads up pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't see this thread, and have never heard this stipulation before (no surprise, given that I've played very little NL in B&M). If heads up and this happens, is the original bettor allowed to re-raise? If so what is the minimum re-raise -- the amount of the original bet or the amount of the short raise?

[punkass]

I've seen it been ruled that the original better gets the option of whether he wants the bet to be 400 or the minimum raise amount.

[Gandor]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In a multiway pot I would rule both of these to be a rasie to $540. In a head up rule both of these as a raise to $400. A few month ago I started a thread about this subject, generally the rule that you must raise the size of the previous bet does not apply in heads up pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't see this thread, and have never heard this stipulation before (no surprise, given that I've played very little NL in B&M). If heads up and this happens, is the original bettor allowed to re-raise? If so what is the minimum re-raise -- the amount of the original bet or the amount of the short raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would you want to reraise the minimum here? If your hand is strong enough to reraise, get some real money in there.

[mikech]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In a multiway pot I would rule both of these to be a rasie to $540. In a head up rule both of these as a raise to $400. A few month ago I started a thread about this subject, generally the rule that you must raise the size of the previous bet does not apply in heads up pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't see this thread, and have never heard this stipulation before (no surprise, given that I've played very little NL in B&M). If heads up and this happens, is the original bettor allowed to re-raise? If so what is the minimum re-raise -- the amount of the original bet or the amount of the short raise?

[/ QUOTE ]
good question. randy?

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In a multiway pot I would rule both of these to be a rasie to $540. In a head up rule both of these as a raise to $400. A few month ago I started a thread about this subject, generally the rule that you must raise the size of the previous bet does not apply in heads up pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't see this thread, and have never heard this stipulation before (no surprise, given that I've played very little NL in B&M). If heads up and this happens, is the original bettor allowed to re-raise? If so what is the minimum re-raise -- the amount of the original bet or the amount of the short raise?

[/ QUOTE ]
good question. randy?

[/ QUOTE ]

If it is heads up there is no min raise amount. Someome bets, if you want to raise $1 so they can bet again you are welcome to (but I would quetion if it is wise if someon bets $100 to make it $101 so they can bet again).

edit to add: There might be a movement away from this as it is not in Robert's Rules, but it has been in every set of NL rules I have seen used in a casino.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
A few month ago I started a thread about this subject, generally the rule that you must raise the size of the previous bet does not apply in heads up pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's a link to yror thread on heads up pots posted in early July. Somehow I missed it (perhaps you need better titles [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]) and in skimming this and the linked thread I'm confused and uncertain. I've got to leave for the day soon but will try to get back before Monday. Meanwhile, I'm hoping easy access to your old thread will help the discussion here.

~ Rick