Triple Ruling

[GreekStein]

1. It should be deemed a call.

2. Betting is reopened.

3. He is allowed to call.

+1

+2

+10000

2 is an under raise at luton, rightly or wrongly if someone makes it 1600 then a min raise would need to be 3200.

This is such a retarded rule, was the same in Ireland.

Not as retarded as the Vic's 'you can under-raise in a heads up pot rule'

[relaedgc]

That double the last raise thing tilts me so hard. It's just so illogical.

If you're facing a bet of 1100 and you put in 2x1000 without comment the consensus is a call, correct? How about if it's 200/400 - > Raise to 800 - > Raise to 1200 - Your 2x1000 chips could go as a raise in this spot, so is it? Does that extra 100 make all the difference from it being a call or a raise despite you doing the same action both times?

[Cf]

That double the last raise thing tilts me so hard. It's just so illogical.

If you're facing a bet of 1100 and you put in 2x1000 without comment the consensus is a call, correct? How about if it's 200/400 - > Raise to 800 - > Raise to 1200 - Your 2x1000 chips could go as a raise in this spot, so is it? Does that extra 100 make all the difference from it being a call or a raise despite you doing the same action both times?

It'd be a call because removal of one of the chips makes 1000 which is less than the 1200 bet you're facing.

I had a similar one a while back that I posted on here. Blinds were 25/50. There was a raise to 100. Then a raise to 150. Then I decided to raise to 200 and threw in 2x100. General consensus was that this is just a call.

I think the general idea is that if there's ever any ambiguity then your bet will just be taken as a call and a request for change. If it's ever not clear then make sure you announce that you're raising.

[doubleup]

That double the last raise thing tilts me so hard. It's just so illogical.

If you're facing a bet of 1100 and you put in 2x1000 without comment the consensus is a call, correct? How about if it's 200/400 - > Raise to 800 - > Raise to 1200 - Your 2x1000 chips could go as a raise in this spot, so is it? Does that extra 100 make all the difference from it being a call or a raise despite you doing the same action both times?

It'd be a call because removal of one of the chips makes 1000 which is less than the 1200 bet you're facing.

I had a similar one a while back that I posted on here. Blinds were 25/50. There was a raise to 100. Then a raise to 150. Then I decided to raise to 200 and threw in 2x100. General consensus was that this is just a call.

I think the general idea is that if there's ever any ambiguity then your bet will just be taken as a call and a request for change. If it's ever not clear then make sure you announce that you're raising.

If you throw in enough chips for a valid raise, then its a raise (whether you say anything or not).  The ambiguity only comes into play when someone throws in chips that don't make a valid raise and says nothing.

In your case, it was just standard homophobia when they ignored your triple minraise.

[Cf]

That double the last raise thing tilts me so hard. It's just so illogical.

If you're facing a bet of 1100 and you put in 2x1000 without comment the consensus is a call, correct? How about if it's 200/400 - > Raise to 800 - > Raise to 1200 - Your 2x1000 chips could go as a raise in this spot, so is it? Does that extra 100 make all the difference from it being a call or a raise despite you doing the same action both times?

It'd be a call because removal of one of the chips makes 1000 which is less than the 1200 bet you're facing.

I had a similar one a while back that I posted on here. Blinds were 25/50. There was a raise to 100. Then a raise to 150. Then I decided to raise to 200 and threw in 2x100. General consensus was that this is just a call.

I think the general idea is that if there's ever any ambiguity then your bet will just be taken as a call and a request for change. If it's ever not clear then make sure you announce that you're raising.

If you throw in enough chips for a valid raise, then its a raise (whether you say anything or not).  The ambiguity only comes into play when someone throws in chips that don't make a valid raise and says nothing.

In your case, it was just standard homophobia when they ignored your triple minraise.

Nope. Read the rule.

Eg, blinds are 200/400. Someone raises to 1200.

I throw in 2x1000 because I don't have change. That's enough to be a valid raise, but it's actually a call.

[doubleup]

Nope. Read the rule.

Eg, blinds are 200/400. Someone raises to 1200.

I throw in 2x1000 because I don't have change. That's enough to be a valid raise, but it's actually a call.

Hmm dont think they have thought this through then.  I don't see why a player should be obliged to say anything at the table.  (Although I concede that this may be unavoidable if he has one large chip left)

IMO the multiple chips/nothing said issue is straightforward - if the chips are a valid raise then they are a raise, if not its a call.

[Cf]

Nope. Read the rule.

Eg, blinds are 200/400. Someone raises to 1200.

I throw in 2x1000 because I don't have change. That's enough to be a valid raise, but it's actually a call.

Hmm dont think they have thought this through then.  I don't see why a player should be obliged to say anything at the table.  (Although I concede that this may be unavoidable if he has one large chip left)

IMO the multiple chips/nothing said issue is straightforward - if the chips are a valid raise then they are a raise, if not its a call.

You could argue the same thing for an oversized chip though. Eg, 200/400 and I throw in 1x1000. It's certainly enough to be a raise, but we assume that without any verbal it's only a call. The other strat is to make it so without verbal whatever we put in is our bet. But we don't do it this way. We assume it's a call. Makes sense to apply this thinking to multiple chips too.

[relaedgc]

I don't take issue with this, actually. I think if you're going to just call then you needn't state your intent. If you're intending to make a raise, though, it ought to be declared.

[dik9]

If someone throws in 2 x 1000 is there anything wrong in the dealer confirming the action in the case of 200/400 raise to 1200 if there is or can be a doubt?

[Cf]

If someone throws in 2 x 1000 is there anything wrong in the dealer confirming the action in the case of 200/400 raise to 1200 if there is or can be a doubt?

No. In fact that's probably the sensible thing to do. If someone were to object though then I imagine you'd have to rule it as a call.

[Ironside]

i dont like the dealer asking as the player can judge reactions of other players then decide what he wanted to do

[pokermuppet]

If someone throws in 2 x 1000 is there anything wrong in the dealer confirming the action in the case of 200/400 raise to 1200 if there is or can be a doubt?

No. In fact that's probably the sensible thing to do. If someone were to object though then I imagine you'd have to rule it as a call.

So your saying if he throws in 4 x 500 chips its a call as 3 chips is less than 1650

but if he puts in 20 x 100 chips you would make it a raise

not a good rule in my opinion

it is up to a player to protect himself during a hand if he puts in multiple chips and more than 50% on top of the bet then it should be a minraise imo

[Cf]

If someone throws in 2 x 1000 is there anything wrong in the dealer confirming the action in the case of 200/400 raise to 1200 if there is or can be a doubt?

No. In fact that's probably the sensible thing to do. If someone were to object though then I imagine you'd have to rule it as a call.

So your saying if he throws in 4 x 500 chips its a call as 3 chips is less than 1650

but if he puts in 20 x 100 chips you would make it a raise

not a good rule in my opinion

it is up to a player to protect himself during a hand if he puts in multiple chips and more than 50% on top of the bet then it should be a minraise imo

Using the same 200/400 -> 1200 example...

Putting 4x500 would be a raise. If removal of one chip results in less than the amount to call then it's a call. Removing a chip results in 1500 which is more than the call amount.

It does get a bit daft when you consider the case of putting in 1x1000 and 2x500. To me this is clearly a raise though according to the rule it's only a call as removal of the 1000 chip leaves less than 1200. Maybe the rule should read "removal of one of the lowest denom chips"?

[RichEO]

If someone throws in 2 x 1000 is there anything wrong in the dealer confirming the action in the case of 200/400 raise to 1200 if there is or can be a doubt?

No. In fact that's probably the sensible thing to do. If someone were to object though then I imagine you'd have to rule it as a call.

So your saying if he throws in 4 x 500 chips its a call as 3 chips is less than 1650

but if he puts in 20 x 100 chips you would make it a raise

not a good rule in my opinion

it is up to a player to protect himself during a hand if he puts in multiple chips and more than 50% on top of the bet then it should be a minraise imo

Using the same 200/400 -> 1200 example...

Putting 4x500 would be a raise. If removal of one chip results in less than the amount to call then it's a call. Removing a chip results in 1500 which is more than the call amount.

It does get a bit daft when you consider the case of putting in 1x1000 and 2x500. To me this is clearly a raise though according to the rule it's only a call as removal of the 1000 chip leaves less than 1200. Maybe the rule should read "removal of one of the lowest denom chips"?

This was all obvious and ridiculous until this last point.....

So if for example, as I often do in a cash game... Someone has bet £30, I can't be bothered to say raise and throw in a £100 chip and a £5 chip to make it (quite clearly and obviously) £105 to go. Removal of the £5 chip makes it a call therefore it's a call, well don't bloody remove my £5 chip then! What's the score with that?

[Cf]

If someone throws in 2 x 1000 is there anything wrong in the dealer confirming the action in the case of 200/400 raise to 1200 if there is or can be a doubt?

No. In fact that's probably the sensible thing to do. If someone were to object though then I imagine you'd have to rule it as a call.

So your saying if he throws in 4 x 500 chips its a call as 3 chips is less than 1650

but if he puts in 20 x 100 chips you would make it a raise

not a good rule in my opinion

it is up to a player to protect himself during a hand if he puts in multiple chips and more than 50% on top of the bet then it should be a minraise imo

Using the same 200/400 -> 1200 example...

Putting 4x500 would be a raise. If removal of one chip results in less than the amount to call then it's a call. Removing a chip results in 1500 which is more than the call amount.

It does get a bit daft when you consider the case of putting in 1x1000 and 2x500. To me this is clearly a raise though according to the rule it's only a call as removal of the 1000 chip leaves less than 1200. Maybe the rule should read "removal of one of the lowest denom chips"?

This was all obvious and ridiculous until this last point.....

So if for example, as I often do in a cash game... Someone has bet £30, I can't be bothered to say raise and throw in a £100 chip and a £5 chip to make it (quite clearly and obviously) £105 to go. Removal of the £5 chip makes it a call therefore it's a call, well don't bloody remove my £5 chip then! What's the score with that?

The rule wouldn't get invoked though because £105 is more than double £30.