Ruling please

[GreekStein]

I'm playing a £1/3 nl game at the vic last night when I raise AK to £15 in the cut off after two limpers and the small blind calls before everyone else gets out the way. Flop QJ8 and I c-bet £26 (one £25chip and one £1 chip), he thinks for about 30 seconds and throws in £31 (£25,£5 and £1 chips). Dealer says this goes as a raise. I, along with everyone else at the table thought it was an underraise but obv I'm not gonna say anything midway through a hand. So I announce 'raise' and pop it to £110 thinking he'll pass most of  Qx Jx K10 type hands here. Instead I'm met with a grin and an insta-all in. (My eye begins to hurt). I know I've been moodied. (My other eye hurts too now).

Should his flop have counted as a raise? Anywhere I've played before has always counted this as an underraise and ruled as a call.



p.s. Fk live poker

[relaedgc]

Was it heads up? The Vic allow under raising when heads up.

[boldie]

Was it heads up? The Vic allow under raising when heads up.

, really?

[gatso]

Was it heads up? The Vic allow under raising when heads up.

lol, just lol

[Cf]

Well, my gut reaction was to rule this as a call, following the 50% rule (ie, if he'd have put £39 or higher then round it up to £52). However, having looked through RRs I find no mention of this. The closest I could find was:

11. If a player tries to bet or raise less than the legal minimum and has more chips, the wager must be increased to the proper size (but no greater). This does not apply to a player who has unintentionally put too much in to call.

So I think the proper solution is for the dealer to quickly stop the action and say "did you intend to call or raise?" - if call, remove the extra £5. if raise, make it up for £52.

[GreekStein]

Was it heads up? The Vic allow under raising when heads up.

Yeah it was heads up. Made me so angry after - I don't mind losing the pot but to someone shooting an angle like that is so annoying.

Hopefully AlrightJack sees this thread and can give some sort of justification for the rule the vic uses or maybe even set about changing it. Is there any point in it at all?

[Woodsey]

I rule your a   

/thread

[doubleup]

Was it heads up? The Vic allow under raising when heads up.

lol, just lol

+1

so when he makes it 31, you could have made it 32 and then he thinks for half an hour and makes it 33.........

[turny]

Was it heads up? The Vic allow under raising when heads up.

Yeah it was heads up. Made me so angry after - I don't mind losing the pot but to someone shooting an angle like that is so annoying.

Hopefully AlrightJack sees this thread and can give some sort of justification for the rule the vic uses or maybe even set about changing it. Is there any point in it at all?

just curious but didnt u look to angle shoot by not pointing out his under raise should be a call and then repopping hoping to take advantage of a player who looks to have been made to raise when it looks like he wanted to call?

[Royal Flush]

Was it heads up? The Vic allow under raising when heads up.

Yeah it was heads up. Made me so angry after - I don't mind losing the pot but to someone shooting an angle like that is so annoying.

Hopefully AlrightJack sees this thread and can give some sort of justification for the rule the vic uses or maybe even set about changing it. Is there any point in it at all?

just curious but didnt u look to angle shoot by not pointing out his under raise should be a call and then repopping hoping to take advantage of a player who looks to have been made to raise when it looks like he wanted to call?

lol i was thinking that as well, angle only works on someone trying to take advantage!

[GreekStein]

Was it heads up? The Vic allow under raising when heads up.

Yeah it was heads up. Made me so angry after - I don't mind losing the pot but to someone shooting an angle like that is so annoying.

Hopefully AlrightJack sees this thread and can give some sort of justification for the rule the vic uses or maybe even set about changing it. Is there any point in it at all?

just curious but didnt u look to angle shoot by not pointing out his under raise should be a call and then repopping hoping to take advantage of a player who looks to have been made to raise when it looks like he wanted to call?

lol i was thinking that as well, angle only works on someone trying to take advantage!

Yeah I guess you're both partly right actually.

But him shooting an angle puts me in a spot it really shouldn't if he had raised properly. My thinking was if I just flat £5 more into a £85ish pot when I've raised pre and bet the flop he knows my hand, 99 times out of 100 is a lot weaker than I am repping, allowing him to either take the pot away from me if a blank comes on the turn or possibly not paying me off if i hit a 10 etc...

It puts me in an unfair position. I would have flagged this up whether I won the pot or lost it.

[relaedgc]

Was it heads up? The Vic allow under raising when heads up.

lol, just lol

+1

so when he makes it 31, you could have made it 32 and then he thinks for half an hour and makes it 33.........

Don't shoot the messenger.

[MC]

As far as I knew you had to raise more than half the bet for it to count as a raise, which acts as a min raise

If he had thrown in £40, it should have stood as a min raise to £52.

But this is just a call.

This ruling letting a raise from £26-->£31 seems absurd to me...

[relaedgc]

I am just taking a shot in the dark and trying to prescribe a motive to the dealer allowing it to stand. It's the only possible justification that I can think of. Personally, the min raise heads up rule has always baffled me anyway.

[GreekStein]

I sent AlrightJack a pm about this and he will raise the question amongst those in the know at the Vic.

If he doesn't post a response here I will update here.

Going there to play cash tonight, gonna quit poker if it happens again