blonde poker forum

This time at Grosvenor Riverside in Salford.

10 man self dealt tournament, pre flop player in seat 1 limps but acts out of turn before seat 10 (the dealer), seat 10 now decides to raise. Seat 1 is made to either call the raise or complete the limp but then muck their hand.

The correct ruling is obviously that seat 1 is allowed to change their action as the action has changed before them (by seat 10 raising), so they could choose to fold and not add any more chips to the pot.

Player in seat 1 did protest but were overruled by the tournament director.

not a lot you can say about that. ridic.

I'm starting to wonder if cardroom staff receive any training at all

ruling isnt so bad and seat one should pay more attention. I think this may be correct as per grosvenor rules actually and player in seat one should be penalised for not paying attention- by making his call stand and giving him the option to call the raise it seems fair enough to me.

Now if he had said raise and put a raise out there and seat 10 had raised before him all 3 options would still be available.

If I was TD and seat one said call and put in the limp I would rule he had to call the raise as well as he has acted out of turn and a verbal declaration has been made. As it isnt clear if your man just pushed the limp out or said call I wouldnt be so harsh.

A couple of years ago in blackpool Ali malu and big barry got into chat on the river when the flush arrived. Barry had river the nut flush and told ali whatever you bet I am going to call so Ali moved allin and Barry was forced to call as he had verbally declared he would call any bet. Ali had the nuts and Barry was out.

Simple answer- pay attention and act when it is your turn.

I totally disagree, the player was in seat one which has the worst visability of any seat for following the action, a verbal warning should be suitable and the situation is in no way an angle shoot. I agree players should be committed to their actions unless the action has changed before them. Your example is a clear Angle Shoot and should be treated completely different.

BTW I was not involved in the hand for avoidance of doubt.

Why is it an angle shoot may I ask? I don't have any problems when in seat 1 in cash or tournaments. Don't see why anybody else would? And that is with dealers. So how can your man in seat 1 have any complaints when he can see what seat 10 is doing as he is sitting directly to his right (self dealt comp so nobody in between them)

No excuse and there shouldn't be any complaints. Complete the limp then fold or call/raise the bet. my 2c

The incident in Blackpool could be considered an Angle Shoot as Barry was trying to prevent Ali from making a river bet that he knew he couldn't really call and didn't want to be bluffed off the hand.

In my example it appeared to be an honest mistake (the player actually asked the table who was still in the hand and only one player was indicated, the dealer had a pile of mucked cards in front of him and was slightly slumped leaning forward onto the table (which is how he had been all night)). No player would have been disadvantaged if the player in seat one was allowed to fold.

Allowing the player to fold in this spot is according to the the TDA rules.

grosvenor dont use TDA rules. If you want to play by TDA rules try an EPT, irish open or that sort of comp and not a small rebuy comp. A copy of the grosvenor rules is available in the card room and u will find this ruling adheres to them.

Fair enough, I am not trying to attack your opinion I just think it is a bad ruling and I know it spoiled the night of the player involved despite them cashing in the event.

so this adheres to grosvenor rules and giving the player all options adheres to tda rules so why would you like the ruling to be the following?


that imo would be the worst possible way to rule here

I see. I think i was talking at cross purposes as I assumed you meant there was angle shooting in your example

Sorry bud :)

I typed that I would rule when I should've type I could rule. It is an exapmle of how harsh some rulings may seem but are within the rules of the game. This is one aspect of the game many players dont realise when they absue dealers, shout their mouths off, throw cards etc. If ever they are in a "grey" area on a ruling which way do you think it will go?

I am not saying your friend did this but making the guy leave the limp out their isn't really as bad a decision as you are making out. It is within the rules of the Grosvenor casino chain and is perfectly acceptable. If everyone at the table disagreed with the ruling why was the TD even called? Somebody must have asked for a ruling so the TD has to make the correct ruling as per his rulebook (which he did in this circumstance). Once the ruling has been made whether you agree with it or not you have to accept it. I have had many bad rulings made against me over the years but you have to accept when the TD makes a ruling as that is what they are there for.

lol, not sure who my friend is who's been throwing cards.

I've never seen this rule in a grosvenor but that's because I've never seen this situation in one. if that's their rule then fair enough, bad rule though imo.

it is a players own responsibilty to know what the action is when it comes to you. If you act out of turn you will be penalised and in this case it was the penalty of having to leave the limp in if he didn't want to call the raise. It is the correct ruling not a bad one.

Why wasn't the player paying more attention (and please don't say because the dealer was leaning forward or is fat or whatever)? I wouldn't ask Pete Linton why the player wasn't watching more closely because you would probably get his stock answer ;)

I like your Barry/Ali story though, not much to do with the op imo but interesting nonetheless, another grosvenot rule that all verbals of all kinds go I believe.

had one against Matt Dale in Cardiff. blind on blind he tells me that if I min raise he'll go all in and I min raised to see what he'd do not thinking the verbal went. another player at the table called for a ruling and Matt was made to go AI.

yep, as I said above now I know it's a grosvenot rule I agree, correct ruling but bad rule. the bad rule bit obv only an opinion.

if you're going to penalise someone (and I don't like penalising them here for a genuine one off mistake) the penalty should be after the pot, it should not be in the form of making someone put chips in the pot

Although not directly related I think examples like these are ample reason for poker players to remain silent/very quiet at all times while playing poker. You can't commit yourself to anything then

Yeah thats my thinking and Ariston I believe she made an honest mistake, they happen, I just don't think the punishment fits the crime and is not good customer service from the casino.

Was the dealer in the game playing as well as dealing ?

If so it would be understandable that the player in seat one might act out of turn, and do Grosvenor rules take into consideration the fact that there may be a player/dealer in the game.

Yes the dealer was playing.

who was running the comp?  i used to play at riverside everynight very rarley go now if i can possibly avoid it.

the rulieing sound right to me if i have read it right,  even in a cash game if you call out of turn and *put* the chips into the pot that call should stand also in a comp if you call the ante and *put* the chips in then that call stands no matter what happends before you, you can still pass but whatever the blind to call was you have to call that bet   that has allways been my understanding of the rule.

if i read it right the player in seat 1, called the ante, before seat 10 acted he decied to raise seat 1 had to call the ante, and had the option to call or pass  not to raise he carnt raise he has allready tried to act and decided to call so now he carnt raise either put the blind and pass, or make up the raise,

stu

imo even if its a £3 rebuy a or a £1000 f/o its up to the player to know where the action is and what is going on never rely on a dealer for info esp in a self deal game 90% might be able to deal the cards but dont know hardly any rules just think they do  even more so at salford lol

There's nothing wrong with that ruling. He has acted out of turn and has been penalised correctly for doing so. He can either call the raise or give up the chips that were put into the pot out of turn. I suspect in the future the player is far less likely to act without checking to see whose turn it is. Especially with only two players in the hand.

I understand where you are coming from, and that players are sometimes returned their chips when they've acted out of turn but that's what happens when you call rulings. You get a decision and that's the end of it.

I don't see what is so severe about having to leave a limp in the pot and I do not see how this could have spoiled someone's evening. Its one limp, get over it. Being penalised after the hand by say missing a full round of the table would actually be harsher as it would result in a missed big and small blind.

It probably did the player in question a favour because they will pay more attention next time.