[OutOfCrown]

In the back of my mind this has been discussed somewhere but I can't find it here or on the TDA site.

Home tournament, we follow 2007 TDA rules. Player goes all-in and starts to head outside for a smoke while other player contemplates a call. I immediately ruled he had to stay at the table. If nothing else, it seems unfair to the other player to allow the all-in player to shield himself from scrutiny by literally walking out the door.

However, I can't necessarily find the 100% backing for this opinion I wanted to have based on the TDA Rules, or rather, it depends on how you interpret this one:

38 Action Pending: Players must remain at the table if they still have action pending on a hand.

To me, in spite of what I "want" this rule to mean, I could see arguing it either way. There is no more "action" in the traditional sense of the word (in poker) as a reference to betting actions. That argument allows the player to get up and go smoke. The other point of view (the one I "want" to be right) says that tabling your hand (necessary for you to win if your all-in gets called) is also "action", therefore you have (potential) action pending and you cannot walk away.

I'm interested in any pointers to authoritative discussion on this topic.

We've all seen the old WSOP where I-forgot-who heads off to the bathroom while Scotty N contemplates a call. Thus I know there are examples of this being legal in the past ... the question is whether it is legal now (per TDA rules).

[rolandshoffinc]

I don't know if it's legal or not but I love doing it to people. Not going for a smoke but going AI and then walking away from the table and going to the bathroom.(of course I wash my hands)

[BassVillan]

This is a home game correct? It's seems a bit intense for a home game to be making "rulings". I suppose it'd be beneficial for the person contemplating the call to have the all-in player present but I see no problems with the guy leaving for smoke/bathroom break. They do on the WSOP all the time. That Irish dude was away from the table more than he was there each time he was all in.

[byline9]

Hmmmmm.....I guess that it doesn't matter what he does at this point, until the next hand...and if he wins and he's not back in time for the next hand, I'd treat it just like any other player taking a break...

My first thought was that he had to stay at the table -- and strictly interpreting the rule, then that might be true...but now, I'm inclined to think that he is (or should be) allowed to leave at that point.

Personally, I don't think that I would leave at the crucial moment of the game, myself.

[dad604]

I would not have a problem with my home game if someone went out for a smoke, especially when they are all-in. If he does not return when it is his turn to act, his hand will be folded. If it is a tourn. his blinds will be posted when it is his turn

[abby99]

The nice thing about house rules is that the house makes the rules. As long as everybody knows the house rule and that the house enforces it consistently, everybody's on a level playing field. Just my $0.02.

My group follows Robert's Rules and TDA rules, with a few well-known exceptions (rabbit hunting, and the precise moment when a hand is finished, to name two). Be clear, be consistent.

[reotexas]

I would rule that if you left your hand in the middle of a hand you fold (dead hand). You have become an absent player.

The guy calling the all-in is not going to take that long to act and you can wait a minute to smoke--in fact you might have a real long time to smoke if you lose.

[Captn_All_In]

Originally Posted by abby99

My group follows Robert's Rules and TDA rules, with a few well-known exceptions (rabbit hunting, and the precise moment when a hand is finished, to name two). Be clear, be consistent.

Threadjack....abby, can you explain the second exception a little more? I understand rabbit hunting but not the second rule. Thanks in advance.

[abby99]

Originally Posted by Captn_All_In

Threadjack....abby, can you explain the second exception a little more? I understand rabbit hunting but not the second rule. Thanks in advance.

Certainly, Captn. First, re rabbit hunting, we don't outlaw it. The person who wants to run the board must first expose his/her hole cards. Of course most people are reluctant to expose their cards, but it's the price they pay to satisfy their curiosity. This doesn't slow down the game at all, because we usually have only 1-2 rabbit hunts in an entire evening.

Re the line of demarcation between hands, section 15 of Robert's Rules states: 10. If there is a signal designating the end of a betting level, the new limits apply on the next deal. (A deal begins with the first riffle of the shuffle.)

This rule is a little tough to apply in games without a dedicated dealer. It would be particularly tough for us to use because because we play with two decks and shuffle behind. In our games, if the signal for the new blinds level sounds while a hand is still in progress, the next hand is at the higher level. A hand is in progress until the hole cards are exposed for the showdown, or until the second-last player in the hand mucks his/her hole cards. If the signal sounds after this point (showdown or second-last player in hand mucks)but before the next shuffle/deal/whatever, we are already in the new hand and play that hand at the old blinds level. Everybody seems to be really happy with this method. Credit goes to mrticsay for this idea.

/threadjack

[beekeeper]

How would this ruling be affected if the person deciding to call took a long time, like over 5 minutes to decide? Or would it not matter?