[jbaclian]

Game is $.25/$.50 NLHE, 8 handed.
Player UTG raises to $3
Seat 4 (UTG+1) pauses to think about calling or raising.
Dealer/Button does not see Seat 4 still is still in he hand.
Dealer advises Seat 5 (UTG+2) that action is on him, seat 5 declares a raise to $12.
Seat 4 announces to dealer that he is still in the hand and points to his capped cards infront of him.
Seat 4 calls the $3
Seat 5 puts in his raise to $12
Action folds around to UTG
UTG shoves all in for $63
Seat 4 shakes his head and says "Well, I guess I have to call you" and calls.
Seat 5 folds.
UTG shows KhJh
Seat 4 shows AA
AA holds up, seat 4 wins
UTG player rebuys.

I drove home with player 4 that night and asked why he didn't raise with his AA, he said he knew that Seat 5 is really LAG/maniac and expected a raise from him no matter what he had and there were also aggressive players in later position if seat 5 didn't raise. He said he was planning on smooth calling the $3 and seeing who would raise it. I asked him if he thought that gave him an unfair advantage over the UTG player knowing that the $12 raise was coming. He said he kinda felt bad for him but he really didn't think it was a good idea of the UTG player to shove all in to try to win a $18.75 pot especially with the UTG knowing that he just smooth called knowing that there was a raise coming from Seat 5.
He felt that that they both had an unfair advantage of knowing what action was coming up and that UTG should of had alarms going off when he smooth called the $3 raise knowing the next player is about to raise to $12

So, your thoughts?

Did the seat 4 player have the advantage over the UTG player?

[Big Mike]

Originally Posted by jbaclian

Did the seat 4 player have the advantage over the UTG player?

Clearly he had the advantage of not sucking at poker. If utg really wants to just push allin w KJs against two players, then he would have given all his money to your friend eventually anyway.

Certainly there was nothing unfair about the situation, imo.

[Deuce]

Originally Posted by Big Mike

Clearly he had the advantage of not sucking at poker.

lol

[ipgyst]

My thoughts: Well-played Seat 4! Just because the dealer tells you something doesn't make it true.

[tomb1]

Originally Posted by jbaclian

Did the seat 4 player have the advantage over the UTG player?

No, not at all. (Except for Mike's perfect comment about not sucking at poker!)

UTG and #4 both had exactly the same information -- that #5 was going to raise. If anything, UTG had the advantage because he saw what #4 did (smooth call in front of a likely raise). He should have used that extra information to make the right play. If he had a huge hand he shoulda pushed, otherwise folded.

[Diamond_Don]

He had no idea that UTG would shove. Sounds like he had good reads on other players as well.

[dad604]

I hate out of turn action. Sometimes it benefits you, other times, it hurts you. In this case, it helped player 4. I don't think it was unethical for player to use the info that player 5 was going to raise, part of the game and great play by him.

[mike33]

No, I don't think he did. UTG had an advantage of information over the UTG+1 because if the action out of turn hadn't happened it just would have been a call without knowing what was coming. The smooth call into an almost guaranteed raise should have been huge alarm bells going off in UTG's head.

...my 2 cents

[JoseRijo]

Just so I'm clear... is Seat #5's action binding? Once Seat #4 limps, can he change his raise?

[abby99]

Originally Posted by JoseRijo

Just so I'm clear... is Seat #5's action binding? Once Seat #4 limps, can he change his raise?

It depends. According to Robert's Rules of Poker, Seat #5's action is binding if Seat #4 folds but not if Seat #4 calls:

10. Deliberately acting out of turn will not be tolerated. A player who checks out of turn may not bet or raise on the next turn to act. An action or verbal declaration out of turn may be ruled binding if there is no bet, call, or raise by an intervening player acting after the infraction has been committed.

But according to the current TDA rules, Seat #5's action is binding if Seat #4 calls or folds:

30

Verbal Declarations

Verbal declarations in turn are binding. Action out of turn may be binding and will be binding if the action to that player has not changed. A check, call, or fold is not considered action changing.

Both sets of rules state that Seat #5's action is not binding if Seat #4 raises.