Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Poker Discussion > Brick and Mortar

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 12-01-2007, 11:31 AM
JohnnyGroomsTD JohnnyGroomsTD is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 141
Default Re: management argue

With all due respect to the card barns, I feel that they are wrong. I think the Hawaiin Gardens rule is better, but problematic as well.

The "double the bet rule" has merits, but takes away from some strategy aspects of the game.

If the bet must be at least double the prvious bet, does this apply from one betting street to the next? For example, 100-200 blinds,if a player raises to 600 pre flop, and gets reraised to 1200, does that mean the minimum post flop bet is 200, or 1200?

Also, by forcing players to double the previous bet, it changes the strategy, in that a plyer is prohibited from making a bet that comes closer to the "perfect bet" principle(a bet that gives the opponent incorrect calling odds, but small enough that the opponent will stil call).
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 12-01-2007, 11:36 AM
JohnnyGroomsTD JohnnyGroomsTD is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 141
Default Re: management argue

Also,
The fact that some decision makers felt that an all-in raise of 1300 could then be "rased" to 1400 was asinine to me. I have no idea how to justify that decision.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 12-01-2007, 02:35 PM
Small Fry Small Fry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 761
Default Re: management argue

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Copy of letter sent to Bob Ciaffone. His response is in blue:

Bob,


No limit game. Blinds are 100/200. UTG bets 800 (a 600 raise). Next player, UTG +1, goes all in for 900 total. If the 3rd player wants to raise, what would be his minimum bet and why?

Second part of this is there any specific rule covering this?
<font color="blue">[Bob Ciaffone] not exactly, but the "last previous bet or raise" is the $600 more from the UTG, so he must raise at least 600. The all-in bet is not considered a raise because it is only a $100 increase </font>

There seems to be a disagreement as to whether the total bet needs to be 1400 or 1500. Everyone agrees that the raise amount is 600. Some say that this gets you 600+600+200 = 1400 (or 800+600). I'm of the opinion that he needs to call the 900 and then can add the 600 raise on top. This makes his minimum bet 1500. If 1400 is correct how you can just ignore the extra 100 in the 900 bet? It needs to be acknowledged should anyone just want to call; meaning that a player cannot just call the 800, but need to call 900.
<font color="blue"> [Bob Ciaffone] He needs to increase the wager to him by at least $600 (so $1500 total minimum) </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

Cliff notes below.

Note that "not exactly" is bolded.

I think the raise should be to $1500 but it certainly isn't clear according to Bob's written rules or the rules used by the biggest cardrooms in the world (i.e. most of the Los Angeles county rooms, which were heavily influenced by Bob's input back in 1997).

Today I spoke with two floor at a Los Angeles card barn and they both said $1400 would be their ruling. I asked them if the allin raise was to $1300 what would be their ruling. They said it would still be $1400 since the $500 raise was "action only". I spoke to one of the floor at length and he agreed it is problematical and the rule should be clarified.

Had I spoken to most of the floor staff in LA I believe it would break about 2 to 1 in favor or $1400 (except at Hawaiian Gardens where they use double the total amount of bets and raises you are facing).

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

Cliff notes:

The written NL raising rule(s) need to be clarified so that $1500 would clearly be the right answer in the OP.

As an alternative I believe poker rule-makers should consider the HG "double the previous action" rule as being best of all.

~ Rick

PS As an aside some of the posters on this forum need to adopt a more courteous and respectful tone when they disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

the "not exactly" is in reference to the question about a specific rule governing this situation, not about what the bet amount should be.

But as Bob points out the player must increase the wager "to him" (his emphasis, not mine) so this clearly makes the bet 1500.

As numerous posters have already pointed out though, one may experience different results in different cardrooms.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 12-01-2007, 04:14 PM
Rick Nebiolo Rick Nebiolo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,634
Default Re: management argue

[ QUOTE ]
With all due respect to the card barns, I feel that they are wrong. I think the Hawaiin Gardens rule is better, but problematic as well.

The "double the bet rule" has merits, but takes away from some strategy aspects of the game.

If the bet must be at least double the prvious bet, does this apply from one betting street to the next? For example, 100-200 blinds,if a player raises to 600 pre flop, and gets reraised to 1200, does that mean the minimum post flop bet is 200, or 1200?

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps I'm using the wrong wording (and don't have a copy of HG's wording; they keep hard copies of their rules close to the vest).

By "double the bet" I mean you must raise at least double the amount of action you are facing. For example Player A lead bets for $20, Player B calls $20, Player C raises $60 more making it $80. The next minimum raise would have to make it $160 (i.e., doubling $80).

This has no impact on the minimum required lead bet (which remains the size of the big blind on all rounds).


[ QUOTE ]
Also, by forcing players to double the previous bet, it changes the strategy, in that a plyer is prohibited from making a bet that comes closer to the "perfect bet" principle(a bet that gives the opponent incorrect calling odds, but small enough that the opponent will stil call).

[/ QUOTE ]

As noted above HG is not forcing players to double the previous bet; rather they want a minimum raise to be double the previous action on that round.

~ Rick
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 12-01-2007, 04:18 PM
Rick Nebiolo Rick Nebiolo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,634
Default Re: management argue

[ QUOTE ]
Also,
The fact that some decision makers felt that an all-in raise of 1300 could then be "rased" to 1400 was asinine to me. I have no idea how to justify that decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

They in fact used the word "completed" (a limit concept I know) since the $500 raise to $1300 was less than a full raise and "action only". Had this been limit it would be treated as a full raise since it was more than half.

The floor I spoke with at length aggreed it would be problematic and seems to realize that the rules he has to work with don't work all that well for no limit.

~ Rick
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 12-01-2007, 04:24 PM
Rick Nebiolo Rick Nebiolo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,634
Default Re: management argue

[ QUOTE ]
the "not exactly" is in reference to the question about a specific rule governing this situation, not about what the bet amount should be.

But as Bob points out the player must increase the wager "to him" (his emphasis, not mine) so this clearly makes the bet 1500.

As numerous posters have already pointed out though, one may experience different results in different cardrooms.

[/ QUOTE ]

This points out why the no limit rules need to be improved and more clearly written.

Meanwhile I'd add that one is likely to experience different results within a cardroom.

If I get time I'll write up a reworded version of the OP including four possible answers and both scenarios (i.e., include the raise to $1300) and see what sort of answers I get around LA.

I'll post my draft here first so you guys can help me edit.

~ Rick
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 12-01-2007, 05:03 PM
JohnnyGroomsTD JohnnyGroomsTD is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 141
Default Re: management argue

Thanks Rick.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 12-01-2007, 06:23 PM
Small Fry Small Fry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 761
Default Re: management argue

[ QUOTE ]



Meanwhile I'd add that one is likely to experience different results within a cardroom.


[/ QUOTE ]

I was going to phrase my initial statement that way but didn't want to be to presumptuous. I can't come close to the experience or expertise that you, and others, have with live play. I mostly try to work from common sense, something that, far to often, seems to be in short supply too... [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

I look forward to your additional scenarios.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 12-01-2007, 09:06 PM
Rick Nebiolo Rick Nebiolo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,634
Default Re: management argue

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]



Meanwhile I'd add that one is likely to experience different results within a cardroom.


[/ QUOTE ]

I was going to phrase my initial statement that way but didn't want to be to presumptuous. I can't come close to the experience or expertise that you, and others, have with live play. I mostly try to work from common sense, something that, far to often, seems to be in short supply too... [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

I look forward to your additional scenarios.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's draft one of something that could be posted on the various NL forums and/or I (or we) could ask some floor we know in our local areas.

It contains the two primary problem scenarios with a caller thrown in and the amounts reduced ten times to those typically faced by mid level floor staff. I added the caller to strengthen the case for making a full raise when the all-in raise is close to the full raise. One option in both scenarious accounts for HG's "at least double the previous action" rule."

It might be a better question with a raise and reraise before the all-in raise. I think I've played in one place where the minimum raise must be greater than the total of all previous raises (but not the bet as in HG).


No Limit Holdem Minimum Allowed Raise

Note 1 In both scenarios assume everyone but Player D has plenty of chips.

Note 2 If player A folds or calls assume the minimum allowable raise reopens the betting for Players B and C.


First scenario:

Player A Bets $20. Player B raises $60 more to $80.
Player C calls $80. Player D goes all-in for $90.
Action now on Player E.

In your cardroom what is the minimum allowable raise for Player E?

a) Raise to $140 ($50 more than all-in player)
b) Raise to $150 ($60 more than all-in player)
c) Raise to $180 ($90 more than all-in player)
d) other

If your cardroom rules were rewritten what do you think the minimum allowable raise should be?

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

Second scenario:

Player A Bets $20. Player B raises $60 more to $80.
Player C calls $80. Player D goes all-in for $130.
Action now on Player E.

In your cardroom what is the minimum allowable raise for Player E?

a) Raise to $140 ($10 more than all-in player)
b) Raise to $190 ($60 more than all-in player)
c) Raise to $260 ($130 more than all-in player)
d) other

If your cardroom rules were rewritten what do you think the minimum allowable raise should be?


Comments, corrections appreciated. I might take version one out for a spin tonight.

~ Rick
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 12-02-2007, 03:59 AM
Small Fry Small Fry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 761
Default Re: management argue

Rick,

Looks good. Have a thought and I'm not sure how it effects the scenario.

What if you put a caller in after the all in player then have the next player do the min raise.

So to use the first scenario for example. Player E calls the all in and now action is to player F. What is his total wager amount assuming he raises the minimum?

Maybe this could be an additional new scenario? It would be very interesting if the two scenarios, one with the raiser directly following the all in and one with a caller between the all in and the raiser, resulted in different answers.

good luck
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.