[Devilboy]

In a tournament setup - what happens if a player annouces a bet when it's not his turn yet? If I read Robert's rules correctly, it seems like he'll be forced to bet when his turn comes (if, for example, everyone before him checks)

Is that right?

Reason I ask is that they Australian Poker League has this stupid idea that this player is then forced to either check, call or fold when his turn comes - he cannot bet or raise. That makes no sense to me. If it was not deliberate then surely the 'fair' thing to do is to allow this person to bet if everyone else checked before him?

[_GUN_]

The first thing is correct. If someone bets out of turn, their chips are pulled from the middle. Then the player in turn has the option to make their play. Everytime I see this come up in a televised game, the player in turn checks as a courtesy to the out-of-turn raiser. I think most pros recognize a bet out of turn as someone with a good hand who is anxious to make a play. I've never seen a penalty given for this.

Be warned, this donkey I play $5 games with, bets out of turn with 3rd pair and no draws all the time.

[_GUN_]

Only explanation I can offer you on their ruling is that they are Australian and just think that the ruling works for them. I could be wrong.

[krw17]

Originally Posted by Devilboy

In a tournament setup - what happens if a player annouces a bet when it's not his turn yet? If I read Robert's rules correctly, it seems like he'll be forced to bet when his turn comes (if, for example, everyone before him checks)

Is that right?

Reason I ask is that they Australian Poker League has this stupid idea that this player is then forced to either check, call or fold when his turn comes - he cannot bet or raise. That makes no sense to me. If it was not deliberate then surely the 'fair' thing to do is to allow this person to bet if everyone else checked before him?

"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."

So the way that reads it sounds like if everyone checked in front of him he MAY be forced to stick with his verbal announcement. It seems to leave it up to the tourney director. I would say make them stick to it, because that might have already altered the play of those in front of him. They might have checked because he already declared a raise.

[_GUN_]

yeah, he's right, the declared bet influences the play which is why everyone checks to the raiser.

It makes sense to me, that if everyone checks to the raiser, then his raise shall be put back in for its original value.

[Devilboy]

So you all agree that forcing him to check even though he clearly wants to bet is just silly yea?

[krw17]

Originally Posted by Devilboy

So you all agree that forcing him to check even though he clearly wants to bet is just silly yea?

I would say so, moreoever it seems ufair to the people in front of him who checked. They probably did so because he had already announced his intention to bet. This is why I think he should be made to do so. I feel that he has influenced action around him. If he knows that is the rule, he can discourage betting in front of him knowing that he will be forced to check and get to see a free card.

[Quads]

I like RRoP, but there is a gray area there.
In a local room I play in quite a bit, they have a little different rule which I believe works really well for people betting out of turn.

IF the dealer announces the action, and you are not paying attention, "chips in the pot, stay in the pot". So, those chips that were pushed in out of turn, go into the pot, the action continues, when it gets to you, then you can take appropriate action, (check, fold, bet, raise).

IF the dealer has not announced the action, they tell the player to simmer down, and that the action is not to him yet. If they player keeps acting out of turn, some of the dealers institute the "chips in the pot, stay in the pot" rule.

It works really well, and I'm actually thinking of starting to use it for the rare cases where I have that issue in my home game.

[Captn_All_In]

Here's a thought for you about this rule: verbal actions out of turn are binding

Player A is contemplating his action with AA, Player C acts out of turn and says "raise", the dealer tells him its not his turn, player A sees this happens and decides to take advantage of the situation and puts in a hefty 10 x BB bet. Player B folds. Action to Player C, now according to the rule he would have to make his "raise" of the previous bet which was 10 x BB. Which he probably doesn't want to do.[Insert sinister laugh from player A]


I have always dreamed of this situation with some of the fish that play at my game.

What are you thoughts??

Captn

[krw17]

Originally Posted by Captn_All_In

Here's a thought for you about this rule: verbal actions out of turn are binding

Player A is contemplating his action with AA, Player C acts out of turn and says "raise", the dealer tells him its not his turn, player A sees this happens and decides to take advantage of the situation and puts in a hefty 10 x BB bet. Player B folds. Action to Player C, now according to the rule he would have to make his "raise" of the previous bet which was 10 x BB. Which he probably doesn't want to do.[Insert sinister laugh from player A]


I have always dreamed of this situation with some of the fish that play at my game.

What are you thoughts??

Captn

I would consider it swift justice for those who should know better.

But on the other end of that argument, this is probably why poker can be intimidating and uninviting to new players trying to learn the game. Maybe this is why Robert's Rules doesn't explicitly say one way or another. I suppose it is up to the setting and up to the "host" of the game.

If it were my game, I would require that individual to complete his raise if nobody raised in front of him, if not, I would at least make him call. Because he announced a raise already he has announced his intention to play this pot. In your example, someone in between the guy holding AA and the guy betting out of turn may have contemplated calling that raise from the guy holding AA, but maybe he decides to fold because he assumes the guy behind him will play and his odds will be lowered with one more person in the pot.

I just think that when you make a verbal announcement out of turn it changes the thought process of those around you. And once you make that announcement, you should be held to it somehow. I would not allow the out of turn bettor to fold. Just my thoughts......

And knowing the guys I play with, my "ruling" would probably be unpopular. But at least I have some reasoning behind it.