|
Title: Split Pots. Post by: monitor on January 18, 2006, 04:23:02 PM Can anybody help me on the rules of split pots in texas holdem poker.
This is what happened. Player A, went all in with 19,500 chips, player B and player C, call him, player B+C still had about 80,000 chips each. Pot 1 was made,it was checked by player B+ C, on the turn, player C, check on the river then player B, went all in, thus creating pot 2, player C, folded. Player B won pot 2 and had better cards than player A for the pot 1 but player C had better cards than player B. Does player C take pot 1 as he had better cards or since he had folded from pot 2 is he out of pot 1. Please can you help me on this as one of my mates says i should have won pot 1 and one of my mates say that i lost both pots. Thank`s Marcus. Title: Re: Split Pots. Post by: Robert HM on January 18, 2006, 04:25:54 PM A folding player has no right to any pot.
Title: Re: Split Pots. Post by: Rod Paradise on January 18, 2006, 04:26:03 PM You lost both, folding at any point mucks your cards.
Title: Re: Split Pots. Post by: ruthless1 on January 18, 2006, 04:26:35 PM if player c folded before a show down then hes out of all the pots.
Title: Re: Split Pots. Post by: mikkyT on January 18, 2006, 04:46:27 PM Can anybody help me on the rules of split pots in texas holdem poker. This is what happened. Player A, went all in with 19,500 chips, player B and player C, call him, player B+C still had about 80,000 chips each. At this point, three players have a right to pot 1. This is the pot that player A is entitled to. Quote Pot 1 was made,it was checked by player B+ C, on the turn, player C, check on the river then player B, went all in, thus creating pot 2, player C, folded. At this point, a side pot would have been created had player C called. As player C folds, he loses entitlement to any pot. That is the definition of a fold. Quote Player B won pot 2 and had better cards than player A for the pot 1 but player C had better cards than player B. By folding his hand before the showdown, player C forfeits the right to any pot. Player C still had chips on the table, and as the game of poker is, you have to put your chips in the middle if you want to show it down. Title: Re: Split Pots. Post by: Triple X on January 18, 2006, 06:08:34 PM everyone has explained it perfectly monitor.
Here B has been clever - he has isolated C to knock out A and win everything. Had he checked it down he would have lost his chips to C. The fun really happens when a player bluffs into 'a dry side pot' - this is normally thought of as bad ethics (some people argue that it isnt as you should be concentrating on your own game but i personally am in the camp that it usuallytho not always is bad ethics). The idea that free checking is ganging up on the all-in player and therefore more chance of knocking him out and thinning the field. If you bluff and actually have worse cards than A then its not too clever unless you think A isno danger even with the chips whilst C with extra chips could be deadly. But as i said usually unless someone has a monster, side pots tend to be softly checked down |