Can I Say This?

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
An out of turn action is binding when the action DOESN'T change from that point till it gets to the person who acted out of turn. For example, if we have players ABC&D in a hand. Flop comes down and A is UTG. C says "I bet $50", if it is checked around to C, he MUST bet $50...but if A or B bets or folds (I think folding qualifies as changing action) he is not bound to make the raise, and may choose to bet, raise, call, or fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

This may be YOUR rule, but I don't think it's THE rule (as in Robert's or any other widely accepted set). The rules as I understand them say that action out of term isn't binding unless it's an attempt to angle shoot. If it is, then it's forced, but otherwise it's just free info he's given off.

If I'm wrong and what you posted is in Robert's, please link it, I'd hate to make the wrong ruling.

Cody

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
An out of turn action is binding when the action DOESN'T change from that point till it gets to the person who acted out of turn. For example, if we have players ABC&D in a hand. Flop comes down and A is UTG. C says "I bet $50", if it is checked around to C, he MUST bet $50...but if A or B bets or folds (I think folding qualifies as changing action) he is not bound to make the raise, and may choose to bet, raise, call, or fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

This may be YOUR rule, but I don't think it's THE rule (as in Robert's or any other widely accepted set). The rules as I understand them say that action out of term isn't binding unless it's an attempt to angle shoot. If it is, then it's forced, but otherwise it's just free info he's given off.

If I'm wrong and what you posted is in Robert's, please link it, I'd hate to make the wrong ruling.

Cody

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't really matter if it's in RR or not. What people should be asking themselves, for their home games, is:

1) What is this rule application, in my game, supposed to protect against?

2) How likely is that protection to come up, be useful, whatever?

3) How likely is that rule to cause other problems, drive away players, etc?

I think people spend too much time worrying about what the rule IS and not enough time thinking about what the rule is FOR.... and if a rule gains more than it subtracts.

Answer those things correctly, for your group, and the source of the rule matters little.

[PhatPots]

I have to agree with most of the other posters. That his action should be binding. A lot of players will act out of turn to angleshoot. When he says all-in, he scares you and allows himself to take a free card if he wants.


I think your comments are basically trying to get him to change his actions which is what you accomplish. You could have just checked and let him go all-in.

This should be binding, especially if he has done it a few times.