The worst ruling I have ever seen and it's me who has to be the victim

[AndrewT]

This is not dealer's fault.

If you want to lead your set then either a) say something like 'I bet' or b) take notice of people checking around you and say 'hold on' or something.

[George2Loose]

This is not dealer's fault.

If you want to lead your set then either a) say something like 'I bet' or b) take notice of people checking around you and say 'hold on' or something.

Andrew you're posts are usually well informed but to say you have to say "bet" if you wanna lead is ridic.

quality of dealers at dtd are usually top notch but not compared to dealers I encountered in Vegas. They didn;t miss a trick

[action man]

youre comparing apples and pears george. Vegas attracts smart dealers who mostly play the game, dtd attracts mostly local semi attractive skanks from the estate that dont have a brain, obv there gonna miss loads of stuff, whose gonna want to deal in front of leering blokes and listen to "four king ten" haha everynight for
close to min wage.

[Boba Fett]

Pretty com, Player 2 checks out of turn causing player 3 to check out of turn and player 4 to bet out of turn, the dealer has failed to keep up with the correct action yet player 1, the only player to not have done anything wrong, is penalised.

I think the dealer really needs to take the blame here, they should be on top of the action and stop players from checking out of turn to allow player 1 his right to act.

[Alverton]

Ridic ruling.

[relaedgc]

 For what it is worth, I have always been aggravated by how ludicrous some players are with checking, The smallest twinge of a finger, or the fractional inclination of their head. Which is fine when I spot it.

I have been in situations where everyone has insta checked and I am still looking at the first to act because I haven't caught their check.

Then you have the times where you take those actions as a check and they throw a bet in 30 seconds later and say they have not checked yet.

Perhaps it doesn't apply to this scenario, but I've been doing my job long enough to know that this behaviour is a cause for a lot of these problems.

Say "check" or make a deliberate hand motion. I suspect your table image will endure.

[outragous76]

I don't really think apportioning blame is that relevant here, but how can player 1 stop subsequent actions when he is looking at his chips and the actions behind are silent.

This rule and punishment too punitive and makes no sense. The rule is formed on the assumption that player 1 is seeking an edge.

This is far more open to an angle shoot because the rule exists. For player 1 to benefit the dealer must make an error, for others to use it as an angle all they need to do is act and induce action from behind, which when that action is a check can happen fairly quickly!

[RED-DOG]

youre comparing apples and pears george. Vegas attracts smart dealers who mostly play the game, dtd attracts mostly local semi attractive skanks from the estate that dont have a brain, obv there gonna miss loads of stuff, whose gonna want to deal in front of leering blokes and listen to "four king ten" haha everynight for
close to min wage.

Wow Trigg, there must be better ways of making a point than that.

[Cf]

RR's cover this and state that if 3 or more people act after you before you've made your action then you may lose the right to act. What it doesn't cover however is the two different scenarios you may be facing:

Facing a bet - If OP was facing a bet then I agree with DTDs ruling. We can't assume that the player would have called the bet. And we certainly can't now give him the option to call or fold due to the extra info he's had from 3 people acting behind. The hand has to be dead here.

Not facing a bet - This is a little bit different. We can assume they'll have just checked. It's a free action. Yes, they may have wanted to bet, but they've lost that right. But unlike the other case there's no advantage to be gained here. They've not received any extra info that they wouldn't have done from just checking themselves.

It's not often I disagree with DTD but I do here. I think they understand the reasoning for the rule but I think they've misapplied it.

But also to OP: keep your eye on the table and don't allow three people to act out of turn after you. Protect your own interests and tell them to stop.

[kinboshi]

If the OP had claimed he'd checked originally, he'd have all his options open to him?

[gatso]

If the OP had claimed he'd checked originally, he'd have all his options open to him?

no. he's put 500 in before realising what's going on so it's a call

[doubleup]

RR's cover this and state that if 3 or more people act after you before you've made your action then you may lose the right to act.

Yes seems like they have misinrepreted this and not considered that the loss of the right to act makes no difference when not facing a bet.. 

[kinboshi]

If the OP had claimed he'd checked originally, he'd have all his options open to him?

no. he's put 500 in before realising what's going on so it's a call

I mean before the 500 bet is made.

[RED-DOG]

My 10 cents:

It's a bad rule, not a bad ruling.

[the rage]

youre comparing apples and pears george. Vegas attracts smart dealers who mostly play the game, dtd attracts mostly local semi attractive skanks from the estate that dont have a brain, obv there gonna miss loads of stuff, whose gonna want to deal in front of leering blokes and listen to "four king ten" haha everynight for
close to min wage.

What a rude post. So insulting to decent people who are trying to earn a living.