blonde poker forum

I need help here guys if this moment happens again
17 player tourney at the pub last night, the 1st game of a new league
jane, who has been chip leader all night was heads up with my friend aaron, i were dealing for the final table
aaron claws it back to take the lead about 3-1 up in chips then this happens......
aaron limps in on small blind and jane in the bb checks
the flop 663, aaron goes all in and jane calls immeadiately, the rest watching go crazy (to probably see the game finish) and aaron shows 68
to everyones amazement i stop the game, as jane was the bb and should of had the option to check first but aaron went all in out of turn it made her mind up straight away.
I tried to explain to him that you cant do this but he said to me that it didnt matter as she called the all in already
I dissagreed with him and explained that tony g did this on the tv and got penallised and couldnt put any more chips into the pot and it had to be checked down as he bet out of turn
jane told me she would of checked the flop first and if aaron did go all in she would of probably called but wasnt 100%
Half the pub agreed with me and the others werent sure or agreed with aaron
aaron argued with me for around 5 mins over the ruling so we both agreed to take the all in away and just play for the chips  before the turn
anyway the turn was an 8 and the river was a jack giving aaron a full house and jane showed 2 pair with aj
aaron said he would of won the match by now but only won the small pot, he went on tilt and jane eventually won the match
This left a bad taste in the pub and spoilt a good nights poker game
 who was right, me or him?

As this is in the PHA, I'll assume we're playing Jane's hand. Raise pre. ;)

As a ruling, what should happen in a tournament situation: the action is still on Jane when Aaron jams. If she should check then the bet stands. If she bets, Aaron has all options, including fold without committing any chips. Now, although "call," isn't an action when you're the first to speak, common sense should be applied here and "call" should be treated as "check/call." Additionally, because it's a pub game the rules shouldn't be taken so seriously, especially if it's going to put a damper on the evening. Everyone is tired and probably drunk, just let the action go, have done with it, and if you must then bring it up with Aaron to make sure he acts in turn in future.

Also: Jane called immediately when jammed on, but if she was given an opportunity to check she would have maybe folded? ;carlocitrone;

that was my first thought. she should be DQed for being a liar

clearly they both want to be allin, just carry on. stopping the game here seems ridiculous

and don't believe everything you see on tv

the ruling is....

Aaron's all in stands, but action is refered back to Jane who has the same two options, bet or check.

If She checks, Aaron is committed to the all in, if she bets, aaron can take his all in back and has the complete option once again.

So the ruling you gave is actually wrong, sorry to say, and once Jane has said call, that stands and she is now committed to call the out of turn bet.

pics of Jane pls

Common sense just has to provail here, clearly both players were happy to go all, Jane is blatently lying/trying to get herself out of a terribly play by saying she might have folded. The all-in and call should just stand here and Aaron should have TID.

Seems pretty comical you stopped this happening and incorrectly consulted a TV ruling when playing pub poker... my experiances of which have been sociable and informal.

Hate to say it, but your mate is rightly aggrieved, but should also be slightly very ashamed he lost to a woman who limped in with AJ and called it off on a 366 board HU.

oh george lol ::)

Thanks for the advice guys, me and aaron were cool about it after all  :)