Title: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: jbsc7769 on June 10, 2005, 11:52:43 PM I was just reading RED-DOGS Gutshot report. Great read, thank you.
It got me thinking about a ruling that I was involved in that I really was unsure about. I am curious to how you guys think it was delat with / should have been dealt with. I was sitting in seat 6, I think BB was about Seat 9. I see seat 1 fold, seat 2 fold, seat 3 fold, then I take my first look at my cards (having been watching the players until now). I find a decent hand I think it was AJ suited if memory serves me, I look back up and see Seat 5 folds. I then think for a few seconds and raise, roughly three times BB. (If memory serves me this was about 1500 chips). At this point, the dealer intervenes and said I have acted out of turn. I am somewhat suprised as I saw Seat 5 muck his cards. It appears he also acted out turn and Seat 4 has not acted. I shrug, apologise and go to take my chips back. At this point I am told my bet must stand. Seat 4 goes all in for about another 7000 chips or so and I decide to fold, losing my initial raise in the process. What do you think? I was in the wrong by acting out turn, no doubt, but no comment was made after Seat 5 folded out of turn. FYI, it was at the Bellagio. I have spoken to others who say that is not the ruling at all casinos!! Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: Karabiner on June 11, 2005, 12:07:56 AM I have been in a similar position to that.
It is a natural instinct to act after the guy to your right has acted. In American football it's called "illegal motion", and the original guy who acts out of turn is penalised. It should be the same in poker games. I sympathise, but I am not sure what the ruling is. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: snoopy1239 on June 11, 2005, 12:21:58 AM I don't think much else could be done.
I do this all the time, only to realise that some guy a few seats away hasn't played his hand yet. It's like a domino effect. However, in the end, it's our own fault as we shouldn't make the assumtion that its our turn. My gripe would be when you're sitting in 1st or last seat when it's difficult to see. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: jbsc7769 on June 11, 2005, 12:29:11 AM Its funny what you say about seating positions actually Snoopy, where i was, i could not see the other player as I was on the end of the "straight" part of the table, he was on the other end. Not that I think it would have made a great deal of difference to me as I probably would have followed the players lead but, good point
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: snoopy1239 on June 11, 2005, 12:36:12 AM I normally have problems if the dealer's a little chunky. Can't see the last two players. If I'm not 100 % sure if its my go tho I make sure I ask him incase I get a situation like yours. Could be really expensive late on in the comp.
Even so, it's another cloud over another ruling. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: sig75 on June 11, 2005, 12:41:11 AM I would've ruled the same.
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: BlueWolf on June 11, 2005, 03:56:24 AM yep from the information given seems like the correct ruling to me too, it is a players responsability to act in turn and you sasid you thought about your raise so you should have noticed it wasnt your turn really. But hey we all make mistakes even you players maybe some players should remeber this when crucifying dealers lol
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: AdamM on June 11, 2005, 10:20:36 AM surely your bet only stands if the player to your right checks. once he's bet the 7000 you should be able to call, raise or fold. he's had info about your intentions and if he wants your 1500 he can check raise you to get it.
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: Karabiner on June 11, 2005, 12:05:58 PM I believe the standard ruling these days is that a "bet out of turn" stands, to avoid angle-shooters using it as a deterrent.
Quite right too imo. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: patman on June 11, 2005, 12:07:17 PM Hi guys,
first post. We have a fairly decent house game(most of the guys also play casino NLH or PlH) and recently it seemed as if calling out of turn was rife..due to not paying attention. I agree you were unfortunate and probably unlucky but equally i`ve seen calling out of turn adversly affect the person who hadnt called by someone raising a fair bit and thus forcing a decision on the guy who hadnt acted. To be fair your call needs to stand or it ends up being a good tool for someone a bit cheeky and using out of turn calling as a weapon. Its frustrating but it forces you to pay attention at all times....although having a fat dealer is just plain indecent ;D Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 11, 2005, 12:15:21 PM Welcome to blonde patman, nice post.
Here's an article on home games you may find interesting, it was contributed by blondeite & regular poster AdamM. http://www.blondepoker.com/BeginnersTips12.htm This may be more useful, "Rules for Home Games", also by Adam, who has run a sucessful home game for some tiime...... http://www.blondepoker.com/BeginnersTips13.htm Enjoy! Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: patman on June 11, 2005, 12:34:22 PM tks tikay...its all a learning curve ...hopefully upwards :D
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 11, 2005, 12:42:54 PM Hmm, my learning curve appears to go the other way......
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: AdamM on June 11, 2005, 12:49:32 PM wish you'd stop starting so many of your post "I'm the last person to give poker advice..." in all seriousness you should be happier to give advice. It's a little embarassing when you sometimces say something like that then suggest poeple take advice from far more novice players (like myself). We value Tikays opinions.
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 11, 2005, 01:25:29 PM I am afraid that won't change Adam, & it's not false humility either. With the (one hopes) wisdom of age, I dont mind offering advice on all manner of things, but that does not include advice on how to play poker. How to BEHAVE when playing poker, yes, but not on the game itself.
Hype creates illusions, & I have had a most extraordinary few months. Somehow I found myself on the TV - very nice - but I nearly died when in the first prog, they introduced me as "our resident expert, & poker professional". WHAT? And I was supposed to give poker tips, & answer viewers questions. I could imagine all the "real" players having a good snigger! Fortunately, I managed to steer them away from doing that, phew. And I am fortunate to write for a few publications, that's very nice too, earns a few shillings. But that, & the TV exposure, does not make me an expert, or even qualified, to give poker advice. Opinions, yes, advice, no. To add to my embarrassment, the Poker 425 website describes me as "Nottingham legend".....give these PR boys an inch, eh? The danger is to start believing the hype, taking oneself too seriously. No chance. I'll leave advice on how to pay hands to those that know better. Remember, the blonde Forum includes dozens of top pros, as well as loads of regular guys. I'm happy to read what they & others say. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: AdamM on June 11, 2005, 01:50:48 PM Most of the people who ask for advice are much further down th poker ladder than yourself. I'm sure you'll have no difficulty keeping your feet on the ground, especially with a bit of healthy ribbing from the Blondites but please don't feel you have to excuse yourself giving an opinion. I'm sure the seasoned pro's also value your take on it as much as the novices would. I quite liked the key hand break down stuff. I could see how it would be useful to novice players and to the rest of us you could have gone into a bit more detail about some key hands and caught bluffs or key laydowns people made. I thought it could have gone further than it did.
Just an observation really because when you've come up in conversation with home game buddies they've asked "is he actually any good?" because of your modesty going a touch too far. Not claiming to be world class is one thing but you don't want to come across as a plucky beginner either. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 11, 2005, 02:59:11 PM The "key hand" bit on Poker 425? We like doing that - a lot - & may do more of it, but there is only so much we can squeeze into 30 minutes, though I have a hunch this week's prog may bea little longer. I will mention it to the producer chappie.
We did, for a while, & rather unprofessionally, try covertly extending the programme by 5 or 10 or 15 minutes, & we got away with it for a few weeks. But nowadays on one night - Sunday I think - the prog is followed immediately by Live Football, so that scuppered that. But I will pass on your comments. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: Teacake on June 11, 2005, 03:25:10 PM First post... having been lurking for the last couple of days & have been really impressed with the quality of this forum. You guys obviously spend a lot of time making sure it runs smoothly.
The thing that has impressed me most is the friendliness of the guys who have obviously been here a while towards the newbies, I like the way its not treated as some kind of exclusive club. Also the credentials of some of the posters are top notch, I've seen at least a dozen or so on the box & I gather there are at least a couple of dozen playing in the Main Event at the WSOP. Good luck all. I know this has been off topic so far but I couldn't help but respond to patmans earlier post about playing out of turn as its usually me he does it to ;) It just goes to show it happens at all levels. Keep up the good work Tikay I know you've made quite an impression on my mate ( & arch nemesis at the poker table) dave. Hes the one responsible for the sudden influx of "sweaties" :D Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: snoopy1239 on June 11, 2005, 03:32:28 PM Welcome to the site bud.
Don't be shy in posting your views. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: londonpokergirl on June 11, 2005, 03:34:32 PM In a tournament situation, if you act out of turn,then your bet stands for a moment, until the original person has acted. As the original person acted raised to 7000, your bet doesn't stand and can be taken back for you to choose what to do
Your bet would only stand if the original person checked Hope it helps Mel Tournament Director :) Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: Nightfly on June 11, 2005, 03:42:02 PM surely your bet only stands if the player to your right checks. once he's bet the 7000 you should be able to call, raise or fold. he's had info about your intentions and if he wants your 1500 he can check raise you to get it. I agree with adam on this one... The bet must stand IN ORDER of betting and only stands if it is still a valid bet after the preceeding player has acted: a raise of 1500 is not valid after player 4 had put in a bet of 7000 and player 6 should have the right to call or fold. According to Roberts Rules of Poker: Deliberately acting out of turn will not be tolerated. A player who checks out of turn may not bet or raise on the next turn to act. An action or verbal declaration out of turn may be ruled binding if there is no bet, call, or raise by an intervening player acting after the infraction has been committed. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 11, 2005, 03:47:15 PM Yup, welcome aboard Teacake, lets see plenty of posts please. And thank you for your very flattering comments. But it's true, the blonde forum is a "nice" place to be, & the blondeites are a real friendly bunch, it's a no-flame zone".
When Dave Colclough first invited me to be his partner in this site, he gave me two criteria. Blonde must have a humorous edge. And he wants those associated with blonde to be reasonably well-liked in the poker community. We are working on both! There is, by the way, a splendid profile of Dave Colclough in this weeks Football First, in the Poker First section - "Meet Poker's Smiling Assassin". And it's also true that we have some serious "names" on blonde, of which many are playing in the WSOP biggie, or have been on the telly. And we cater for all ages, we even have some quite old people who contribute, as well as "young-ish" guys like me. (Official, see today's RP Magazine, free with the Racing Post). Now, routine question for you. Teacake - why so? Has Dave got any more mates? - let's hope so! Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 11, 2005, 03:55:31 PM Getting back to the business in hand, this ruling makarky is fascinating.
LondonPokerGirl (Mel Lofthouse,high class player & TD) make her point with authority, but then Nightfly countered it beautifully by quoting from "Roberts Rules of Poker" (who is this Robert fella?). But I'd have to point out to Nightfly the opening word of the relevant extract from RROP - "DELIBERATELY". Casting our minds back a very long way to the original post by jbsc7769 - it was clear that this was NOT "deliberate". So how does RROP deal with that? Not at all, I suspect, hence all the debate...... What view does AdamM, another of our rules experts, have on that I wonder? Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: Scottish Dave on June 11, 2005, 03:56:11 PM Ha ha Teacake i like it Steph, oops am i not supposed to yous your real name??
As soon as i seen the Newest member was 'Teacake', i almost choked on my Lunch, i knew it was you right away. You better watch what your saying about me on here, anymore bumming up from you guys (Teacake, Rod Paradise and Patman) and people will start to think im a nice guy :o Welcome Aboard Mate Dave Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: jbsc7769 on June 11, 2005, 04:00:21 PM I just accepted the ruling to be correct, there were a few big names at the table (including one WPT winner) so I didnt bother argueing the point, you kind of assume that the Bellagio would be correct. I did speak with several people after and at least a two people did say that the rule WILL vary between casinos. Again, this brings us back to the old chestnut of why there are not one set of rules that we all abide by.
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 11, 2005, 04:03:27 PM One set of rules? Now THERES a thought........
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: redsimon on June 11, 2005, 04:16:19 PM quoting from "Roberts Rules of Poker" (who is this Robert fella?). Robert or Bob Ciaffione. Author of lots of Poker books (Omaha, No limit & pot Limit poker etc) Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: Nightfly on June 11, 2005, 04:17:58 PM But I'd have to point out to Nightfly the opening word of the relevant extract from RROP - "DELIBERATELY". Casting our minds back a very long way to the original post by jbsc7769 - it was clear that this was NOT "deliberate". So how does RROP deal with that? Not at all, I suspect, hence all the debate...... this of course is the problem with direct quotes.. I did not mean to imply that jbsc7769's action was deliberate, as it is quite clear it was not. As for RROP on the "Deliberately" matter about the best he can do is: The same action may have a different meaning, depending on who does it, so the possible intent of an offender will be taken into consideration. Some factors here are the persons amount of poker experience and past record. combined with Management reserves the right to make decisions in the spirit of fairness, even if a strict interpretation of the rules may indicate a different ruling. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: AdamM on June 11, 2005, 04:29:02 PM Rules expert? you're having a laugh. That AdamMs home games rules I sent you and you published are basically a trimmed and better ordered version of Roberts Rules of Poker that Nightfly mentioned. It's Bob Ciaffone (spelling) who as many will know is a well known writer and player the other side of the pond. A decent attempt at a set of universal rules, if a little disjointed.
We've kind of moved onto a general acting out of turn thread now haven't we. My feeling is that intent should always be taken into account when giving rulings on this sort of thing. If player 7 passes out of turn because he's impatient or bored he should be bollocked because it alters previous players decision. If he does it knowing he's out of turn that should be treated more seriously and either warned officially or penalised in some way. If player 8 acts because player 7 has he shouldn't be penalised at all, unless again, it's obviously intentional. betting out of turn is the same. usually it's just a lack of concentration and consideration but the player who's been missed has gained an advantage. they can either check raise which is a very strong move, check pass which has saved them money or check and close the betting with a call. I'd love the player to my left telling me what they were going to do everytime. would make the game much easier. because I'm quite tight at the table, if the player to my left is a maniac they often act before me, assuming I'm passing. that often gives me good check raise info. It's perhaps a little bit border line morally by me but I might take abit of time thinking if i have a big hand and keep quiet, hoping the act assuming my cards are already mucked. Intent is a bit of a personal issue for me. String betting particularly is something that I think is badly ruled on. Not by TDs because it rarely gets that far. I understand the problem with moving chips in several trips and looking for a reaction, or dropping them one by one and looking for a reaction, but when a player says raise and drops chips infront of him/her in a verticle stack and someone says it's a string bet and takes only the bottom chip they're being an arse. there's no information being gained by the raiser. usually it's longtime players bullying newbies. If there's no intent to gain information by the string bet (which is obvious by where the raiser's looking) then the bet should stand. the set of rules I put forward says something about a players relative experience should be taken into consideration when ruling on etiquette. seems fair to me. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: AdamM on June 11, 2005, 04:30:01 PM there yuo go, summed up in two posts while I'm typing my long one.
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 11, 2005, 04:49:16 PM Ah, THAT Robert Ciaffone. Thanks Red.
As to Adam's tome, I agee 100% with his point about alleged string betting, the bizarre way it is usually used or, more correctly, abused. Partner Dave Colclough put it even better recently. He said that in 20 years, he had never once seen anyone gaining advantage from so-called string betting. That's maybe pushing it a bit far, but his point, like Adam's, is well made. A rule to be ditched, should we ever get a uniform set of rules..... And if anyone did genuinely try it on with a string bet, they could be nabbed under the moody rule. But that's another can of worms, we had better not go THERE...... Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: snoopy1239 on June 11, 2005, 04:51:46 PM I can't understand why there isn't a uniform set of rules. I mean, Thomas Kremsner (prob spelt wrong) seems to run every comp in the world, so isn't his rules the norm. ;D
I'm sure I saw him runnin the gala cardroom a few weeks back. :o Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: AdamM on June 11, 2005, 04:56:15 PM I think that's where it'll come from. Kremser and his european buddies should get the heads together then approach the WPT with the result. EPT and WPT will change poker in many ways. hopefuly this will be one major change they'll bring.
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 11, 2005, 05:35:37 PM Thomas Kremser DOES have an organisation, I think it's called the IPF - International Poker Federation. But I don't think their rules & the TD rules are the same in every respect.
The guy at Gala trying to run the show was not Thomas Kremser, it was Taffy. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: redsimon on June 11, 2005, 08:40:54 PM The guy at Gala trying to run the show was not Thomas Kremser, it was Taffy. Just spat my coffee over the keyboard there! ;D ;D Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: Ironside on June 11, 2005, 08:55:58 PM The guy at Gala trying to run the show was not Thomas Kremser, it was Taffy. Just spat my coffee over the keyboard there! ;D ;D tikay you need to sort out the manners of the members of this forum thats about 5 of them that spat over there keyboard in the last couple of weeks just hope they dont do this in the casino's Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 11, 2005, 09:04:48 PM Seems to be a Notts thing..... Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: DTD-Nick.W on June 11, 2005, 09:06:57 PM I spat me budweiser
It to l8 for coffee leave Thomas/Taffy alone tk Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 11, 2005, 09:10:38 PM Thomas is lovely. Taffy is Taffy. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: londonpokergirl on June 11, 2005, 09:26:25 PM IPF are supposed to be bringing out uniformed rules but as yet they're not done
I keep emailing them for a copy when its out but been trying for 6months Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: BlueWolf on June 12, 2005, 04:40:22 AM yeah but the IPF rules surely wouldnt cover the UK? unless soemone decides to alter them slightly although a new set are supposed to have been drawn up anyway
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: AdamM on June 12, 2005, 08:05:52 AM you can't alter them slightly, thats the point. We want to settle on universal rules, not UK/European/US rules.
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: tikay on June 12, 2005, 10:52:49 AM Corrrect Adam - that is the WHOLE point.
But I guess to arrive at that Holy Grail, we first agree country by country, then continent by continent, then eventually..... Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: BlueWolf on June 12, 2005, 11:57:42 AM yes Adam but you need to remember the wonderful gaming board we have here in the UK.
And there is no way EVER that we will have situations where the same ruling will be made for the same thing in different casinos by different people EVER. It just wont happen. Supervisors need to assess each situation individually and act on information given and prior knowledge. Best way to put it to you poker players is DO you play each variation of possible poker hands the same way EVERY time you get them? NO MATTER where & WHO you are playing??? I doubt it. Its just one of thiose things that makes the game interesting no game is ever the same there are countless possible situations and outcomes and its how you handle these situations that gives the game people who run these comps and get accolades for it. If everything became a uniformed way it would lead to just any numpty standing in a cardroom reciting prewritten decisions (which will still be adjudged incorrect by some) There would be no need for people with common sense anymore ( although i'd get to run more comps hehehe) Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: jbsc7769 on June 12, 2005, 12:15:30 PM I think you make some good points there BlueWolf but, lets make a sperate analogy. Football. THere are ONE set of rules only. You still get different "interpretations" in these different circumstances but either way, everyone knows EXACTLY where they satnd. For example, going back to my original thread, everybody would know the ruling rather than "well, lsat week at a different casino they said there was no intent so, take your bet back.)
It can only be good for the game. I know one of the 'Card Player' contibutors (Roy Cooke I think) is constantly trying to unify the game but before is happens, they need to get the top players (or a representative of them, another problem!), WPT, PPT, EPT etc etc togther and sit down and discuss it. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: BlueWolf on June 12, 2005, 12:26:38 PM yeah i have used the football analogy before on this forum, but this is a topic that seems to be arised quite regularry nowadays.
Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: AdamM on June 12, 2005, 01:40:31 PM JBSC has hit the nail on the head. I understand what you're saying about interpretation and experience but we all need to be interpreting the same set of rules. As was quoted from Roberts rules of poker earlier'
The same action may have a different meaning, depending on who does it, so the possible intent of an offender will be taken into consideration. Some factors here are the persons amount of poker experience and past record. Management reserves the right to make decisions in the spirit of fairness, even if a strict interpretation of the rules may indicate a different ruling. First time I made HU at Notts it was insisted that the dealer placed the BB. I couldn't find anyone to back me up that Dealer posted SB amongst staff or players. infact last time I mentioned the incident on here someone registered specifically to flame me for it. If mistakes as major as that can me made, the more expert stuff can obviously be even worse. Title: Re: Ruling, right or wrong? Post by: Nightfly on June 12, 2005, 02:31:38 PM One of the main problems with providing fair rulings is that very few situations are a clear breach of a simple rule... most situations where a ruling is required sometimes involve different rules. In the spirit of fairness these different rules must be prioritised and a decision made as to which rule applies before another. You also have to be careful that a ruling does not allow one player to enjoy a significant advantage to the detriment of other players who have acted 'in good faith.'
'Intent' will always be a key factor in rulings. All poker players are different (to state the obvious) and different players hold different rules to be more sacred than others. New players will make more 'unintentional errors' than a seasoned pro. A dishonest player may 'try it on' at every available opportunity. A standardised set of rules would be a help but it could never cover every possible situation. This brings us back to the 'Fairness and intent' principle quoted from RROP. The same action may have a different meaning, depending on who does it, so the possible intent of an offender will be taken into consideration. Some factors here are the persons amount of poker experience and past record. Management reserves the right to make decisions in the spirit of fairness, even if a strict interpretation of the rules may indicate a different ruling. or as Gala Casinos put it: Many situations arise in a card room where the rules need clarification and enforcement. The most important consideration in decision making is following a concept of fairness. However, occasionally a situation will arise where strict adherence to the rules would obviously be unfair. Therefore in certain circumstances we will base a decision upon intent and the spirit of the law rather than inflexible interpretation of a rule. An unintentional error is less serious than a deliberate violation. along with The [...] rules are intended to ensure that all games of poker within the room are conducted in a fair and honest manner, for the benefit and enjoyment of all participating players. They are also intended to protect any innocent player from suffering unfairness either by deliberate or genuinely accidental occurrences. |