heyn
User
Platinum Boarder
| Posts: 239 |   |
Karma: 14
|
One all-in too many - 2007/04/02 04:28
Hi,
I came across an odd situation in svn 331.
I had one short-stacked opponent left, I raised so he would almost have to go all-in to call. He went all-in. I couldn't call or fold, we just showed cards. I won (lucky), but he got the amount of his "small raise" back, so we had to play another round.
This isn't how this should work, is it? I think I would be allowed to call his raise, and even if I'm mistaken about the rules and his raise was too small to be called, it should not be possible for him to make it at all, I think.
Regards,
heyn
#################### Game: 2 | Hand: 39 ####################
CASH: Human Player (Dealer): 26334$, Player 2: 7865$
BLINDS: Player 2 (400$), Human Player (800$)
PREFLOP
Player 2 calls 800$.
Human Player sets 7134$.
Player 2 is all in with 7865$.
Human Player shows [Kh,10s]
Player 2 shows [Qh,Kd]
FLOP [board cards 6c,10c,4h]
TURN [board cards 6c,10c,4h,2c]
RIVER [board cards 6c,10c,4h,2c,Ad]
Human Player has [ Kh,10s] - Pair, Tens
Player 2 has [ Qh,Kd] - Highest Card, Ace
Human Player wins 14268$!!!
#################### Game: 2 | Hand: 40 ####################
CASH: Human Player: 34268$, Player 2 (Dealer): 0$
BLINDS: Human Player (400$), Player 2 (731$)
PREFLOP
Human Player calls 800$.
Human Player shows [6d,Ac]
Player 2 shows [6c,Qd]
FLOP [board cards 9c,8h,7c]
TURN [board cards 9c,8h,7c,2c]
RIVER [board cards 9c,8h,7c,2c,2d]
Human Player has [ 6d,Ac] - Pair, Deuces
Player 2 has [ 6c,Qd] - Pair, Deuces
Human Player wins 1531$!!!
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
thpani
User
Expert Boarder
| Posts: 20 | |
Karma: 0
|
Re:One all-in too many - 2007/04/02 05:34
The full bet rule used in pot-limit (and no-limit) games states that an incomplete bet or raise is considered just a call (with putting some additional money in). According to that, the betting round was over when Player 2 placed his incomplete raise.
So, the thing is not that his raise was too small to be called but rather his raise was too small to be considered a raise. It's a strange rule (and I don't see an obvious reason for placing incomplete raises  , I think it's just there because raises are kind of related to bets and incomplete bets make sense) but that's the way it works.
Post edited by: thpani, at: 2007/04/02 05:36
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
heyn
User
Platinum Boarder
| Posts: 239 | |
Karma: 14
|
Re:One all-in too many - 2007/04/02 06:40
Hi thpani,
Thanks for the reply. If this is indeed how it should be done, then this bug can be closed.
But if his "all-in" preflop was, in fact, a call in disguise, I still feel I should have been allowed to raise after the flop (or even later), forcing him to throw in the rest of his chips (or fold). Now our cards were just thrown open, and after that the five community cards, without giving me any options.
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
thpani
User
Expert Boarder
| Posts: 20 | |
Karma: 0
|
Re:One all-in too many - 2007/04/02 17:34
heyn,
You actually ran into two rules: The first was the full bet mentioned above. The second (don't know if it has a name) states that no more betting is possible if all except one player are all-in. I think it depends on house rules whether you have to open (usually before the remaining community cards are dealt).
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
heyn
User
Platinum Boarder
| Posts: 239 | |
Karma: 14
|
Re:One all-in too many - 2007/04/02 18:38
Wikipedia says
For example, a player opens the betting round for $20, and the next player has a total stake of $25. He may raise to $25, declaring himself all in, but this does not constitute a "real" raise, in the following sense: if a third player now calls the $25, and the first player's turn to act comes up, he may now call the additional $5, but he does not have the right to re-raise further. The all-in player's pseudo-raise was really just a call with some extra money, and the third player's call was just a call, so the initial opener's bet was simply called by both remaining players, closing the betting round (even though he must still equalize the money by putting in the additional $5).
I didn't get the chance to "equalize the money" by calling (not preflop, when the "fake all-in" happened, and not later, see the log). Surely, a player should not be able to shield himself from losing all his money by going all-in, should he? (Oh, the irony  )
My opponent was guaranteed to just get the $5 back.
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
thpani
User
Expert Boarder
| Posts: 20 | |
Karma: 0
|
Re:One all-in too many - 2007/04/02 22:57
yep, now I got it... After his incomplete raise, you should still have the option to call/fold.
(But if you then had called, no more betting rounds would've taken place but the cards would've been opened immediately, right?)
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
