B&M NL ruling

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
To everyone in this thread: does your opinion change based on whether or not the room in question enforces a betting line?

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't see why. The betting line isn't some magical line where betting out of turn is OK. Allowing someone's money to play on a later betting rounds is odorous and hardly a way to run a good game. If the raise was higher he may have been priced into staying on the turn. Just bad.

[GMontag]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To everyone in this thread: does your opinion change based on whether or not the room in question enforces a betting line?

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't see why. The betting line isn't some magical line where betting out of turn is OK. Allowing someone's money to play on a later betting rounds is odorous and hardly a way to run a good game. If the raise was higher he may have been priced into staying on the turn. Just bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, what I was referring to was that many posters are saying that the out-of-turn bettor should be able to take his money back across the line if the player in front of him bets.

Consider this scenario: 10 seat player first to act bets out $30. 1 seat player is unaware of the 10 seat player being in the hand or betting. He then bets out $40. At this point, he wouldn't be allowed to take his money back or to raise more. It'd be ruled a call and he'd get $10 change. I don't see why betting out of turn should be treated any differently.

[crashjr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To everyone in this thread: does your opinion change based on whether or not the room in question enforces a betting line?

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't see why. The betting line isn't some magical line where betting out of turn is OK. Allowing someone's money to play on a later betting rounds is odorous and hardly a way to run a good game. If the raise was higher he may have been priced into staying on the turn. Just bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, what I was referring to was that many posters are saying that the out-of-turn bettor should be able to take his money back across the line if the player in front of him bets.

Consider this scenario: 10 seat player first to act bets out $30. 1 seat player is unaware of the 10 seat player being in the hand or betting. He then bets out $40. At this point, he wouldn't be allowed to take his money back or to raise more. It'd be ruled a call and he'd get $10 change. I don't see why betting out of turn should be treated any differently.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't see why betting out of turn should be treated differently as betting in turn? A poker anarchist?

[GMontag]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To everyone in this thread: does your opinion change based on whether or not the room in question enforces a betting line?

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't see why. The betting line isn't some magical line where betting out of turn is OK. Allowing someone's money to play on a later betting rounds is odorous and hardly a way to run a good game. If the raise was higher he may have been priced into staying on the turn. Just bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, what I was referring to was that many posters are saying that the out-of-turn bettor should be able to take his money back across the line if the player in front of him bets.

Consider this scenario: 10 seat player first to act bets out $30. 1 seat player is unaware of the 10 seat player being in the hand or betting. He then bets out $40. At this point, he wouldn't be allowed to take his money back or to raise more. It'd be ruled a call and he'd get $10 change. I don't see why betting out of turn should be treated any differently.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't see why betting out of turn should be treated differently as betting in turn? A poker anarchist?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see why a person who mistakenly bets out of turn should have more options than a person who mistakenly bets in turn.

[TMTTR]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see why a person who mistakenly bets out of turn should have more options than a person who mistakenly bets in turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you mistakenly bet in turn??? When I bet into the nuts, I have certainly mistakenly bet in turn but I don't think that is what you meant...

EDIT:
Oh... just reread your post. As far as I am concerned, if the betting line is enforceable it should only be enforced if you are betting in turn. The rule should be the same with a bet out-of-turn whether there is a betting line or not.

[ReptileHouse]

The ruling is horrible. The $40 bet is out of turn. There is no action behind him complicating the sitution. His bet is returned and action procedes from the player whose turn is actually is acting. When that player then bets $30, the preflop raiser can now call/raise/fold. Once bet into, his out of turn action doesn't matter. If he makes a habit of it or it's obvious it was intentional, the floor may take additional action, but that's outside the scope of the play of the individual hand. A betting line has absolutely no relevence to any of this.

[bav]

ok... I'll be the one to quote Robert's Rules:

[ QUOTE ]
11. Deliberately acting out of turn will not be tolerated. A player who checks out of turn may not bet or raise on the next turn to act. An action or verbal declaration out of turn may be ruled binding if there is no bet, call, or raise by an intervening player acting after the infraction has been committed.

[/ QUOTE ]
Seems pretty straightforward. Soon as UTG put in a $30 bet, he freed the out-of-turn guy from having to do anything. Out-of-turn could now fold, call, or raise.

UTG was apparently trying to shoot an angle and make a bet smaller than the poor out of turn dude, force the out-of-turn guy to raise, then push when it came back around. Geee--wonder why they ruled against him? If I'd been the out-of-turn guy, my hand woulda been in the muck mighty fast if I didn't hold something monsterous, or somehow think UTG was shooting a double reverse 3rd level "I know the floor will rule against me so I'll pretend I really want this ruling" angle.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
Seems pretty straightforward. Soon as UTG put in a $30 bet, he freed the out-of-turn guy from having to do anything. Out-of-turn could now fold, call, or raise.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is the correct answer. I am not sure what sort of bizzaro poker room the OP plays in.

[steamboatin]

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seems pretty straightforward. Soon as UTG put in a $30 bet, he freed the out-of-turn guy from having to do anything. Out-of-turn could now fold, call, or raise.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



This is the correct answer. I am not sure what sort of bizzaro poker room the OP plays in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Randy doesn't need my backing because he has forgotten more about poker than I have ever known but I learned this one from the school of hard knocks. I wasn't in the hand so the knock was less severe.

I just started playing the small NL game. The fourth flush card shows up on the turn, guy checks out of turn, the fish bets, guy goes all in and the fish folds for like $30 in a four or five hundred dollar pot.

I thought at the time, the guy acting out of turn shold be only allowed to call, but after asking some people I trust, if the fish was dumb enough to bet into the obvious ploy, it is legit.

[bav]

[ QUOTE ]
...guy checks out of turn, the fish bets, guy goes all in and the fish folds for like $30 in a four or five hundred dollar pot.

I thought at the time, the guy acting out of turn shold be only allowed to call, but after asking some people I trust, if the fish was dumb enough to bet into the obvious ploy, it is legit.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not according to Robert's Rules. And I've definitely played in places that enforce that--it's not something you see happen very often, though, so I have no idea, really, what the majority of Vegas rooms would do.

I'm actually not all that keen on part of the rule that says you cannot raise if you check outta turn. If you are aggressive out of turn, and someone in front of you bets, you are freed to do anything at all; you can fold, call, or raise. Yet if you check out of turn, and someone in front of you bets, Robert's Rules state you cannot then raise. Seems unfair to free the guy first to act to place a wager with no fear of being raised.

So it doesn't bug me a lot however a room handles checking out of turn (long as they are consistent from ruling to ruling).