blonde poker forum

I saw these 3 rulings all occur last night. Opinions on each please.

1/ Action is on the turn HU.  Player 1 bets 1100. Player 2 puts 2 x 1000 chips in the middle and says nothing.

is this a call or a raise?




2/  blinds are 200/400  player opens to 1600, 1 call and short stack pushes allin for 2900

Is this an under raise or is the betting reopened?




3/ Guy playing his 1st ever tourny makes it 6000 utg. Matey round the back shoves in for more, noob not realising its a raise turns his hand over.

Is his hand dead? does he have the option to call the raise? should he serve a penalty (not the 1st time he had exposed his cards at the wrong time)

1. It should be deemed a call.

2. Betting is reopened.

3. He is allowed to call.

+1

1... It should be only a call,,, however some card rooms will class this as a raise as it is over 50% of a raise... I remember this happening to me at Manchester G,,, which to be honest is stupid seeing as I only had 3 visible chips at the time (2 1000 chips and a 5000 chip,,, the bet being 1200 when i threw the chips in without saying anything they forced me to raise LOL)... your best of signalling your intentions by saying CALL...

2... Obviously reopened... 400 with 1200 with 1300

3... Should be allowed to call

It's a call. There's a new rule out that clarifies this scenario. The basic idea is if someone puts 2 chips out and removal of one of them makes less than the bet it's a call. Or something. Look up new TDA rules if you actually want to see this one.


400->1600 is a raise of 1200. 1600->2900 is a raise of 1300 and is thus a valid raise Betting is reopened.


He may still call. If he's already had a warning about this then yes he should recieve some sort of penalty.

How long ago did the rule change? what would you rule with the old ruling?

Does the fact that he had plenty of 500 and 100 chips make a difference?

Does the fact he intended to raise make a difference?

What would you rule if he had put a 1000 chip and 2 500 chips in the middle?

Depends on how many 500 chips he had... If he had more than 2 500 chips and said nothing and put them accross the line it would be classed as a raise...

Rule was only just introduced recently, but it's always been that way really. This was just to clarify it.

33.  Multiple Chips
Unless a raise has been declared, placing multiple chips in the pot that add to less than double the bet one is facing will be deemed a call if removal of any one chip leaves less than the bet the player could have called.

So the 1x1000 2x500 example is a call, because removal of the 1000 chip only leaves behind 1000 which is less than the bet the player is facing.

The amount of chips in his stack is obviously irrelevent.

The fact he intended to raise is relevent, but only if he said raise beforehand. If you're going to make non-verbal bets (like i do pretty much 100% of the time unless i don't ahev change) then be sure to know the rules.

All this said however, I think most places would treat 1x1000 2x500 as a raise as this rule is quite new.

for me hand 1 is a raise for this reason

thought the rule was 1 oversize chip

the new Multiple Chips rule is a sort of extension to the Oversized Chip rule. In the first hand for example, 1000 might be the highest denom chip in play. So it's not possible for the player to call with only 1 chip, he needs to use 2. He's not got any 100/500s left so needs to use a 2nd 1000.

1 is a call

2 is an under raise at luton, rightly or wrongly if someone makes it 1600 then a min raise would need to be 3200.

3 he can call but can only call or fold for the remaining streets if any further action.

Rulings given

1/  Ruled as a call, but if 3 chips had gone in the pot they said it would of been a raise, another floor ruled later that he would of made it a raise to 2200

2/ Ruled during the hand at the time as an under-raise, later on floor ruled that action was live

3/ Hand was killed as it had been exposed while facing action, no penalty was given

Please name the venue so that it can be avoided

+2

+3

+10000


This is such a retarded rule, was the same in Ireland.

Not as retarded as the Vic's 'you can under-raise in a heads up pot rule'

That double the last raise thing tilts me so hard. It's just so illogical.

If you're facing a bet of 1100 and you put in 2x1000 without comment the consensus is a call, correct? How about if it's 200/400 - > Raise to 800 - > Raise to 1200 - Your 2x1000 chips could go as a raise in this spot, so is it? Does that extra 100 make all the difference from it being a call or a raise despite you doing the same action both times?

It'd be a call because removal of one of the chips makes 1000 which is less than the 1200 bet you're facing.

I had a similar one a while back that I posted on here. Blinds were 25/50. There was a raise to 100. Then a raise to 150. Then I decided to raise to 200 and threw in 2x100. General consensus was that this is just a call.

I think the general idea is that if there's ever any ambiguity then your bet will just be taken as a call and a request for change. If it's ever not clear then make sure you announce that you're raising.

If you throw in enough chips for a valid raise, then its a raise (whether you say anything or not).  The ambiguity only comes into play when someone throws in chips that don't make a valid raise and says nothing.

In your case, it was just standard homophobia when they ignored your triple minraise.

Nope. Read the rule.

Eg, blinds are 200/400. Someone raises to 1200.

I throw in 2x1000 because I don't have change. That's enough to be a valid raise, but it's actually a call.

Hmm dont think they have thought this through then.  I don't see why a player should be obliged to say anything at the table.  (Although I concede that this may be unavoidable if he has one large chip left)

IMO the multiple chips/nothing said issue is straightforward - if the chips are a valid raise then they are a raise, if not its a call.

You could argue the same thing for an oversized chip though. Eg, 200/400 and I throw in 1x1000. It's certainly enough to be a raise, but we assume that without any verbal it's only a call. The other strat is to make it so without verbal whatever we put in is our bet. But we don't do it this way. We assume it's a call. Makes sense to apply this thinking to multiple chips too.

I don't take issue with this, actually. I think if you're going to just call then you needn't state your intent. If you're intending to make a raise, though, it ought to be declared.

If someone throws in 2 x 1000 is there anything wrong in the dealer confirming the action in the case of 200/400 raise to 1200 if there is or can be a doubt?

No. In fact that's probably the sensible thing to do. If someone were to object though then I imagine you'd have to rule it as a call.

i dont like the dealer asking as the player can judge reactions of other players then decide what he wanted to do

So your saying if he throws in 4 x 500 chips its a call as 3 chips is less than 1650

but if he puts in 20 x 100 chips you would make it a raise

not a good rule in my opinion

it is up to a player to protect himself during a hand if he puts in multiple chips and more than 50% on top of the bet then it should be a minraise imo

Using the same 200/400 -> 1200 example...

Putting 4x500 would be a raise. If removal of one chip results in less than the amount to call then it's a call. Removing a chip results in 1500 which is more than the call amount.

It does get a bit daft when you consider the case of putting in 1x1000 and 2x500. To me this is clearly a raise though according to the rule it's only a call as removal of the 1000 chip leaves less than 1200. Maybe the rule should read "removal of one of the lowest denom chips"?

This was all obvious and ridiculous until this last point.....

So if for example, as I often do in a cash game... Someone has bet £30, I can't be bothered to say raise and throw in a £100 chip and a £5 chip to make it (quite clearly and obviously) £105 to go. Removal of the £5 chip makes it a call therefore it's a call, well don't bloody remove my £5 chip then! What's the score with that?

The rule wouldn't get invoked though because £105 is more than double £30.

please change ur avatar, it tilts the life out of me, i wince everytime

The Vic no longer permits under raises when heads up in cash games.