poker news
blondepedia
card room
tournament schedule
uk results
galleries
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
July 19, 2025, 11:14:01 PM
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Search:
Advanced search
Order through Amazon and help blonde Poker
2262325
Posts in
66605
Topics by
16990
Members
Latest Member:
Enut
blonde poker forum
Poker Forums
The Rail
tedious ruling thread
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
« previous
next »
Pages:
[
1
]
2
Author
Topic: tedious ruling thread (Read 2199 times)
George2Loose
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 15127
tedious ruling thread
«
on:
April 25, 2011, 10:35:12 PM »
C off limps. Sb taps the table to check. Dealer points out him he has to make up to call. He says "ok then I'm all in"
Should he be allowed to? Ruling was called
Logged
Ole Ole Ole Ole!
WarBwastard
Sr. Member
Offline
Posts: 828
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #1 on:
April 25, 2011, 10:38:20 PM »
Tapping table same as announcing call? Should only be able to call I reckon.
Logged
http://la-boca-de-la-cueva.blogspot.com/
http://mexico.worldcupblog.org/
"War does not determine who is right - only who is left." -- Bertrand Russell
Cf
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 8081
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #2 on:
April 25, 2011, 10:38:36 PM »
Erm.. my gut says no.
This reasoning might be flimsy but I'd take his "check" as a call. Eg, blinds are 100/200 and you throw a 1000 in to call. It then gets raised to 1000 and is back to you. Tapping the table is accepted as a verbal call here. So by checking in that manner he's at best calling the bet.
Logged
Blue text
mondatoo
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 22503
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #3 on:
April 25, 2011, 10:40:07 PM »
Sb has AA+
Logged
Eirrabs
Jr. Member
Offline
Posts: 61
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #4 on:
April 25, 2011, 10:48:13 PM »
Call at most. He showed zero intention to raise.
Logged
Boba Fett
Doctor of Thugonomics
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2922
Pain is Temporary!
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #5 on:
April 25, 2011, 10:53:48 PM »
All options open imo, if he wanted to fold it would surely be allowed? If he thought he was BB and checked, realised he was Sb then it is fair enough that he can be allowed to fold and not be held to call by trying to check. In that case, his attempted check cannot be held as a call and therefore he has option to call/raise/fold
Logged
Ya gotta crawl before ya ball!
Cf
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 8081
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #6 on:
April 25, 2011, 11:05:55 PM »
Quote from: Cf on April 25, 2011, 10:38:36 PM
Erm.. my gut says no.
This reasoning might be flimsy but I'd take his "check" as a call. Eg, blinds are 100/200 and you throw a 1000 in to call. It then gets raised to 1000 and is back to you. Tapping the table is accepted as a verbal call here. So by checking in that manner he's at best calling the bet.
Slightly more relevent example. Blinds are 100/200 and SB has no change so just puts 500 in. It's back around to him and he taps the table. This is taken as a call.
I don't like having all options open. I think it's too open to angle shooting.
Just view his illegal action as an out of turn action. He can't do higher than what he wanted to do in the first place. In this instance we view making up the SB to be the same as checking.
Or something like that.
Logged
Blue text
cambridgealex
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 14799
#lovethegame
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #7 on:
April 25, 2011, 11:50:06 PM »
If he doesnt already have an oversized chip in (ie. has 100chip in for his 100small blind) then I'd say all options open as tapping the table means fuck all. If he has a 500 chip in for his small blind at 100/200, then tapping the table means call so he has to call the 200.
Logged
Poker goals:
[ ] 7 figure score
[X] 8 figure score
doubleup
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 7127
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #8 on:
April 26, 2011, 12:24:22 AM »
It iseems to be an angleshoot - so depends on whether the TD wants to discourage angleshooting due to the bad feeling it creates.
Logged
borman09
Probation
Offline
Posts: 2
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #9 on:
April 27, 2011, 01:15:21 PM »
The server rules includes a rule that directs any incoming mails into A folder and my client rule has a rule that directs mails into B folder will mails still be directed into B folder, i mean the mails should have already been directed into A folder by the time the client rule is excuted.
Logged
kinboshi
ROMANES EUNT DOMUS
Administrator
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 44239
We go again.
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #10 on:
April 27, 2011, 01:27:20 PM »
Quote from: borman09 on April 27, 2011, 01:15:21 PM
The server rules includes a rule that directs any incoming mails into A folder and my client rule has a rule that directs mails into B folder will mails still be directed into B folder, i mean the mails should have already been directed into A folder by the time the client rule is excuted.
#botfail
Logged
'The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the simple unconscious expedient of discouraging rational inquiry.'
skolsuper
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 1504
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #11 on:
April 27, 2011, 01:57:23 PM »
Not an angleshoot IMO, since he gains no info off the other players (unless the bb snap checks behind I suppose), more of a ridiculous hollywood and it seems different places have a different idea of whether hollywooding (yep) is 'cheating'. I remember the old gutshot used to be very strict that you couldn't even talk while you were in a hand.
Personally I think they should be allowed, especially hollywoods as hilarious as this one, for example when someone who goes to fold their hand utg and is stopped by the dealer because they are actually in the bb, they always grab their hand back. I've always wanted to see someone 3bet shove over a raise in that spot, would be incred
Logged
Cf
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 8081
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #12 on:
April 27, 2011, 01:58:36 PM »
Quote from: skolsuper on April 27, 2011, 01:57:23 PM
Not an angleshoot IMO, since he gains no info off the other players (unless the bb snap checks behind I suppose), more of a ridiculous hollywood and it seems different places have a different idea of whether hollywooding (yep) is 'cheating'. I remember the old gutshot used to be very strict that you couldn't even talk while you were in a hand.
Personally I think they should be allowed, especially hollywoods as hilarious as this one, for example when someone who goes to fold their hand utg and is stopped by the dealer because they are actually in the bb, they always grab their hand back. I've always wanted to see someone 3bet shove over a raise in that spot, would be incred
See, the dealer shouldn't stop him in that scenario imo. Then his out of turn fold should stand when it comes to him.
Logged
Blue text
skolsuper
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 1504
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #13 on:
April 27, 2011, 02:01:17 PM »
Quote from: Cf on April 27, 2011, 01:58:36 PM
Quote from: skolsuper on April 27, 2011, 01:57:23 PM
Not an angleshoot IMO, since he gains no info off the other players (unless the bb snap checks behind I suppose), more of a ridiculous hollywood and it seems different places have a different idea of whether hollywooding (yep) is 'cheating'. I remember the old gutshot used to be very strict that you couldn't even talk while you were in a hand.
Personally I think they should be allowed, especially hollywoods as hilarious as this one, for example when someone who goes to fold their hand utg and is stopped by the dealer because they are actually in the bb, they always grab their hand back. I've always wanted to see someone 3bet shove over a raise in that spot, would be incred
See, the dealer shouldn't stop him in that scenario imo. Then his out of turn fold should stand when it comes to him.
You are a cold and joyless individual
Logged
Cf
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 8081
Re: tedious ruling thread
«
Reply #14 on:
April 27, 2011, 02:02:13 PM »
Quote from: skolsuper on April 27, 2011, 02:01:17 PM
Quote from: Cf on April 27, 2011, 01:58:36 PM
Quote from: skolsuper on April 27, 2011, 01:57:23 PM
Not an angleshoot IMO, since he gains no info off the other players (unless the bb snap checks behind I suppose), more of a ridiculous hollywood and it seems different places have a different idea of whether hollywooding (yep) is 'cheating'. I remember the old gutshot used to be very strict that you couldn't even talk while you were in a hand.
Personally I think they should be allowed, especially hollywoods as hilarious as this one, for example when someone who goes to fold their hand utg and is stopped by the dealer because they are actually in the bb, they always grab their hand back. I've always wanted to see someone 3bet shove over a raise in that spot, would be incred
See, the dealer shouldn't stop him in that scenario imo. Then his out of turn fold should stand when it comes to him.
You are a cold and joyless individual
lol. I find it funny when someone folds their BB by accident.
Logged
Blue text
Pages:
[
1
]
2
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
Poker Forums
-----------------------------
=> The Rail
===> past blonde Bashes
===> Best of blonde
=> Diaries and Blogs
=> Live Tournament Updates
=> Live poker
===> Live Tournament Staking
=> Internet Poker
===> Online Tournament Staking
=> Poker Hand Analysis
===> Learning Centre
-----------------------------
Community Forums
-----------------------------
=> The Lounge
=> Betting Tips and Sport Discussion
Loading...