Who's Right?

[Grier78]

What constitutes an under raise and a full raise varies depending on where you play. Usually Unusually an under raise can be anything between 1 chip less than a full raise and 1 chip less than half a full raise. Consequently a full raise could be anything from half a normal raise and the usual full raise.

afsadGFSDGDZFHZFGJGFXJGHK


This is bollocks and anyone holding this out to be a rule is an idiot who has not bothered to do any research.  In nl an under-raise is any bet less than a minimum raise.  It is that and only that.  Get very angry with anyone who says anything else.

In all situations if an under-raise is treated for further action purposes like a call, it makes life simple.

Sorry I think I was too vague with my language, I would normally expect (99% of the time) an under raise to be anything less than a normal standard raise, I just wanted to point out that this is not 100% everywhere and I have encountered a very small minority of games where it counts as a full raise if it is larger than half a full raise. I would suggest being aware of house rules as they do vary for a lot of different rules.

[Grier78]

From Ladbrokespoker.com:
UNDER RAISE
This occurs when a player raises a prior bet but has to go all-in to do so. If the player under-raising - going all-in to raise - has less than half of the expected raise for that betting round, the betting round is locked. The term locked here means that any player who has already acted in the round (checked, called, or raised) may no longer raise. They may only call or fold. However, players who have yet to act (betting has not reached them yet) may raise the expected raise for that betting round, after calling. If the under-raise is half or more than the expected raise, the lock rule does not apply.

PokerRoom:
Under-raise
This occurs when a player raises a prior bet but has to go all-in to do so with an amount less than the full raise

Paddypower Poker:
Under-raise:   This occurs when a player raises a prior bet but has to go all-in to do so.  If the player under-raising … going all-in to raise … has less than ½ of the expected raise for that betting round, the betting round is locked.  The term locked here means that any player who has already acted in the round (checked, called, or raised) may no longer raise.  They may only call or fold.  However, players who have yet to act (betting has not reached them yet) may raise the expected raise for that betting round, after calling.  If the under-raise is ½ or more than the expected raise, the lock rule does not apply.

Internet-poker.co.uk
Under-raise - This scenario is when a player raises a bet but must go all-in to do so by placing an mount less than the full raise into the pot.

I think the confusion arises due to the differences between Limit and No-Limit but as you can see not everyone agrees.

[doubleup]

I think the confusion arises due to the differences between Limit and No-Limit

Correct!

But I wld still shout

sgadrshfsgjghjkljkljk;khl;'jkljkl'l;'hkjgfhdfvdacvsdv dfbcvbnfgjn

when such idiocy occurs

[Laxie]

Next case/argument - Blinds are 2k/4k.  Limp fest pre.  Flop SB Check, BB Check next to act bet 10k next guy goes all in for 15k.  Next guy wants to make a raise and is told he can't because the all in guy couldn't double the 10k bet made previous and the most anyone is entitled to do until the turn is flat call the 15k.  When the turn comes down it's betting as normal unless the situation happens again where someone re-raises with less than double the initial turn bet.

So basically, if you haven't acted yet, you are entitled to do whatever ya bloody well want...there or there about.  Yes? 

1/2 bet or more means the betting is still open for everyone to do what they like.  Just want to be crystal clear on accepted practice. 

[MANTIS01]

Yes Laxie, if you haven't acted yet you are entitled to do whatever you want.

By the way, it seems to be increasingly common to keyboard bash on Blonde. There must be a reason for this...

JFVAJDSPGFE[RWIGEJBV*BVQ[KMFW#£JGOPL

Hmmmmm

That was somewhat enjoyable I suppose.

[Laxie]

Cheers lads.  I tried to tell them that, but they'd prefer to hear it from other men besides listening to a woman...which is why I stay home most Thursday nights...sighhhhhhhhhhhh.