management argue

[todd1007]

the action to the player in question is 900 to go
... a raise of 700.

the correct min raise would be to 1600 (700 + 700 + 200)

the initial raiser's action is void because the raise of the all in player is greater.

[Twistofsin]

[ QUOTE ]
the action to the player in question is 900 to go
... a raise of 700.

the correct min raise would be to 1600 (700 + 700 + 200)

the initial raiser's action is void because the raise of the all in player is greater.

[/ QUOTE ]

The all in player didn't raise. He went all in for less then a full raise, so his action is treated as a call. This closes the action if no one else raises behind him and players who have already acted can only call the all in or fold.

[todd1007]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the action to the player in question is 900 to go
... a raise of 700.

the correct min raise would be to 1600 (700 + 700 + 200)

the initial raiser's action is void because the raise of the all in player is greater.

[/ QUOTE ]

The all in player didn't raise. He went all in for less then a full raise, so his action is treated as a call. This closes the action if no one else raises behind him and players who have already acted can only call the all in or fold.

[/ QUOTE ]


NO NO NO NO

the question is not what action did the all in player take? (in limit this would be considered a call and the only action the the next proceeding player could take would be to complete the bet, but this is NL, completely different),

the question is... what is the action to the player in question (the player who wants to min raise)?

THE ACTION TO THIS PLAYER IS....

a raise of 700 to 900. so,

900 to call

700 to raise

yes i know that much of the software online would consider the minraises to be 1400

[TMTTR]

[ QUOTE ]
the correct min raise would be to 1600 (700 + 700 + 200)


[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. Bold and screaming -- and you are really bad at this. When was there ever a 700 raise to set that as the amount of the min-raise?

[JohnnyGroomsTD]

In the Hawaiian Gardens double the bet rule, which bet are you doubling? The bey, the raise, or the total calling amount?

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
In the Hawaiian Gardens double the bet rule, which bet are you doubling? The bey, the raise, or the total calling amount?

[/ QUOTE ]

The total calling amount. So the minimum progression (when players are raising and cover all bets) is 1-2-4-8-16.

In the case of the opening post of the thread (repeated for clarity):

"Blinds are 100-200. UTG raises to 800, a raise of 600 units. next player goes all in for 900, one hundred more. The next player wants to raise the minimum. WHAT IS THE MINIMUM AMOUNT THAT THE PLAYER CAN RAISE?"

At Hawaiian Gardens it would be to make it $1800.

~ Rick

[todd1007]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the correct min raise would be to 1600 (700 + 700 + 200)


[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. Bold and screaming -- and you are really bad at this. When was there ever a 700 raise to set that as the amount of the min-raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

moron.... it's not, when was there a raise to 700?, it's, what is the action to the player in question? (a raise of 700) please somehow try to manage to get your mind out of the limit gutter

[n.s.]

I just can't see how it could not be 1500.

Suppose it goes like this:
A bets $500, B raises to $1000, C goes all-in for $1499 total, D calls $1499.

A now has the option to raise $1? (And in doing so, re-open the betting for D?) Having this weird loophole the minimum betting requirements can't be right.

[TMTTR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the correct min raise would be to 1600 (700 + 700 + 200)


[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. Bold and screaming -- and you are really bad at this. When was there ever a 700 raise to set that as the amount of the min-raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

moron.... it's not, when was there a raise to 700?, it's, what is the action to the player in question? (a raise of 700) please somehow try to manage to get your mind out of the limit gutter

[/ QUOTE ]

Well this moron is telling you (also a moron, possibly?) that you are absolutely wrong. The question is indeed "When was there a raise to 700?" The answer (i.e., "never") makes your answer incorrect.

It is 200 (BB) +600 (Raise) +100 (additional all-in) to the next raiser. The raise is determined by the size of the previous bet or raise in the round NOT by the total action of all previous bets or raises in the round. If the middle player did not go all-in, but made a min-raise of an additional 600, the next min-raise would still be 600 (and a very silly bet).

The question turns on whether the next raise -- which is clearly 600 minimum -- is on top of the current bet-to-call(1500) or do we ignore the all-in (1400). 1600 is not in the conversation.

[todd1007]

i have explained this to you three time. you are wrong