blonde poker forum

Poker Forums => The Rail => Topic started by: Cotter1 on May 27, 2019, 05:21:03 PM



Title: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: Cotter1 on May 27, 2019, 05:21:03 PM
Played a satellite at Luton last night and was at a table of 9 players.

Pre flop, folded to button who bet 2.5x.
I called in the SB and the BB completed.

Flop comes and down and I check.
The BB then folds.
Button bets and I fold.

Before the Button had bet, I asked the dealer if he was calling the floor.
He asked what for and I said because the BB had folded when his options were check or bet.

No-one at the table or the TD seemed to understand my point that the BB had effectively acted out of turn and had given an unfair advantage to the Button.

Have I imagined that this isn't 'allowed', or is it right to just fold, with multiple players in the pot, when you have the option to check?

Many Thanks
Cotter.


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: Ledders on May 27, 2019, 05:30:14 PM
It's stupid but it's fine. Button hasn't gained any more than you have. He knows he has only one person to bet into, but you know that bb behind you isn't going to call or raise your action.


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: Cotter1 on May 27, 2019, 10:07:50 PM
In a way I agree Ledders but still think this 'rule' is more than just poker etiquette.

As an example, if a tournament was down to the last 3 players and seats 2 and 3 were friends or related, what would seat 1 think if this kept happening?

Also pretty sure you only have check or bet options online in this exact situation.

I'm all for sensible rulings and keeping the game flowing but am not a fan of this if it is a rule.



Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: doubleup on May 28, 2019, 10:42:32 AM

shouldn't be allowed.

Obv the player left to act has more information than you did when you checked.   More importantly, this is a tournament and the player has non-zero equity that he is passing to other players which is wrong.




Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: Cotter1 on May 28, 2019, 10:17:00 PM
I think you've called it right Doubleup.

It was the fact that no-one at the table could see any advantage that confused me most.

Was thinking about it, and imagine the satellite had got to the bubble.
8 tickets and 9 players.

If the rule didn't exist, as it appears not to according to Luton G anyway, all players with reasonable and large stacks could call the short stack pre-flop and then all fold, instead of checking, until the one with the 'winning' hand raises.
No short stack would recover from this situation if it happened every hand.

IMO, it sets a precedent for cheating to exist and pretty much stinks.
I always preferred Luton to any other Poker game. I like the other players and atmosphere and feel it's fair and consistent.

Not sure about this however.


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: celtic on May 28, 2019, 10:20:00 PM
I was informed the rule changed a while ago.

Horrible to not have this rule in place.

Button has a massive advantage as played. Assuming the button knows he has an advantage of course.


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: Cotter1 on May 28, 2019, 10:46:26 PM
Hi Vin,
Cheers for the info.

Tbf, I couldn't see, but the other players said the Button showed the goods.

Now I know of this new rule, I only hope I'm not ever in a situation to exploit it.

Nice to hear from you buddy.

Jamie. 


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: celtic on May 28, 2019, 11:06:49 PM
Hi Vin,
Cheers for the info.

Tbf, I couldn't see, but the other players said the Button showed the goods.

Now I know of this new rule, I only hope I'm not ever in a situation to exploit it.

Nice to hear from you buddy.

Jamie. 

Ahh hi mate, didn't realise it was you. Rule seems fine now ;)


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: Chompy on May 29, 2019, 08:49:07 AM
Another bad Luton habit that's been passed from player to player this one. Happens a lot.


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: Doobs on May 29, 2019, 09:22:20 AM
It isn't a new rule, isn't it just someone cocking up?

I know someone mentioned online, but pretty sure you just get a reminder that you can check for free when you cock up like this.   I think you can still just fold online if you ignore the reminder. 

People instafold when another reaches for chips frequently too.

People shouldn't do it, but it is pretty low on my annoyances in live poker.   Reminding the player he shouldn't fold in this situation and keep the game moving seems fine to me.   I dare say everyone has accidently folded before when they could check or folded out of turn.   It is very rare that I have seen anyone look like they have done it deliberately (probably only phone calls/toilet trips?). 


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: Pokerpops on June 04, 2019, 10:58:38 AM
Folding out of turn definitely matters

https://www.pokernews.com/news/2019/06/the-muck-wsop-controversy-sam-soverel-ike-haxton-dq-34351.htm


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: Doobs on June 04, 2019, 11:24:24 AM
Folding out of turn definitely matters

https://www.pokernews.com/news/2019/06/the-muck-wsop-controversy-sam-soverel-ike-haxton-dq-34351.htm


Nobody said it doesn't.  Ike Haxton's response seems a touch over the top.  Heath chucks something in, and Soveral mucks a second or two later.  It seems a bit quick for a calculated angle and I am not sure how anybody can be 99% sure it was.  Sure he should be paying more attention, but Soveral must know he isn't ever calling and so isn't likely to be paying as much attention as he should about what went in.  I can't believe anybody who says they have never folded out of turn.  Surely you are consistent and penalise/ban all and not just where it is a big final table and big stakes?  And if you aren't disqualifying or banning all, then how can you disqalify/ban here?  I wouldn't be averse to a round or two penalty, as that seems more proportionate. Maybe a round early doors where nothing much matters, two rounds at a final table or early where there is a big all in?


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: 4KSuited on June 04, 2019, 12:44:42 PM
 https://www.pokercentral.com/articles/sam-soverel-disqualified/

No to the DQ, but definitely a yes to at least an orbit penalty. The Hollywooding after the accidental fold is laughable. Of course it’s all down to each person’s own reading of the action, but it looked intentional to me (and he allegedly has history).


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: Doobs on June 04, 2019, 01:04:47 PM
https://www.pokercentral.com/articles/sam-soverel-disqualified/

No to the DQ, but definitely a yes to at least an orbit penalty. The Hollywooding after the accidental fold is laughable. Of course it’s all down to each person’s own reading of the action, but it looked intentional to me (and he allegedly has history).

Sometimes stalling a bit is a huge distance, walking slowly to a table and mucking when he should show are all a huge distance from intentionally folding out of turn at a big final table.  I am sure I have done the first 3, and never even remotely considered intenionally folding out of turm at a big final table, though my efforts at walking slowly have been pretty feeble.  I was smirking a bit when Ike suggested the "evidence" of previous and when Bonomo piped up about someone else's reputation...   

FWIW I am sure folding out of turn for toilet breaks used to be fairly standard, it is only recently that it has become more frowned upon/attracted penalties.  I am talking early doors here, not at big final tables.   


Title: Re: Poker Question - Luton Grosvenor Ruling.
Post by: tikay on June 04, 2019, 01:13:06 PM
https://www.pokercentral.com/articles/sam-soverel-disqualified/

No to the DQ, but definitely a yes to at least an orbit penalty. The Hollywooding after the accidental fold is laughable. Of course it’s all down to each person’s own reading of the action, but it looked intentional to me (and he allegedly has history).

Sometimes stalling a bit is a huge distance, walking slowly to a table and mucking when he should show are all a huge distance from intentionally folding out of turn at a big final table.  I am sure I have done the first 3, and never even remotely considered intenionally folding out of turm at a big final table, though my efforts at walking slowly have been pretty feeble.  I was smirking a bit when Ike suggested the "evidence" of previous and when Bonomo piped up about someone else's reputation...   

FWIW I am sure folding out of turn for toilet breaks used to be fairly standard, it is only recently that it has become more frowned upon/attracted penalties.  I am talking early doors here, not at big final tables.   


;)