Couple quick questions a buddy asked me about today....

[psandman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nit from before in the BB has 600 behind and "jokingly" says "allin" as he tosses his cards to the dealer.

Dealer takes the cards looks at the player and pushes 3 bucks to my buddy.

Friend had the BB covered but could he have called the floor over and made the allin binding? Would've the BBs hand been dead if hit the muck?


[/ QUOTE ]

This should not be ruled as all-in, but given that it is Foxwoods you never know what kind of ruling you might get.

[ QUOTE ]
He gets called on a string raise: Action was on him in the BB and he there is a 20.00 bet to him and he stacking his chips well behind his cards and cuts off 50. Puts a stack of 20 with a stack of 30 next to it and then says raise and puts out the 20 then the 30.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not a string raise, but it's Foxwoods, so dela with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the case of the string raise, I'm somewhat suspicious that maybe nobody heard him say "raise" in which case his action would constitute a string raise in most rooms.

Many times when there is a dispute its not really a dispute about what the rule is, its a dispute about what actually happened -- Did the player say raise, were the chips behind or in front, di the player release chips etc....

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
Many times when there is a dispute its not really a dispute about what the rule is, its a dispute about what actually happened -- Did the player say raise, were the chips behind or in front, di the player release chips etc....

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very true. That is most likely the case here as I can't imagine anyone ruling what was described in the OP a string raise. This is also why I am reluctant to give what specific rulings would be over the net because a lot of situations you can tell the story in different ways to get different rulings.

[tom10167]

IWTSTH can only be called by a player who called a river bet, or was in the hand at showdown. This is a rule at Foxwoods, I'd say about 60% of the floor enforce it 80% of the time.

Those numbers are probably quite accurate.

[BigBuffet]

[ QUOTE ]
Not sure why but players like to put out the calls seperate from the raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably so the players behind can clearly visualize the raise. He either really wants a call or a fold, and unless he raises this way every time, it could be a tell.

[DayTripping]

[ QUOTE ]

On the second fake allin I think I call the floor immediately.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now who is the nit?

[AngusThermopyle]

[ QUOTE ]
If it wasn't a string raise to begin with? He said raise, put out the call then went back for the additional chips.



[/ QUOTE ]
Opponent thought it was a string raise.
So did the dealer.
So did the Floor.
Apparently, nobody at the table stood up for your friend and said they heard him say "raise".
It was a string raise.
Maybe your friend said it a bit softly to irk the opponent who he didn't like.

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]

If they're $5 chips, why on earth would somebody make two trips to move ten chips?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because that's how they do it on TV, duh.

The fact that they don't actually do it with only ten chips on TV is no more relevant than the fact that Gus Hansen's raises with 63o aren't in a cash game.

As for the all-in declaration in the OP I've read here that such declarations can be binding and should certainly be avoided. But I would think the "good of the game" clause makes this a slam-dunk non-push-without-cards. The way to deal with IWTSTH abuse is to deny abusive requests, not to make some other flaky ruling later on to cost the abuser money. The floor should warn the "all-in" guy that this isn't a +EV joke, like yelling, "Hi, Jack!" in the airport.

And finally, I've found some Foxwoods floors to be good but nothing surprises me, like Forrest Gump's box of chocolates.