opinion on this please

[antthecat]

just a question that arose at a poker tourney that i played last night, the situation is small blind vs bb, after the turn card the bb annouces "all in" out of turn, the small blind then says how much you got, then bets him all in, the bb folds after a minute in the tank.

i know that an out of turn action can be changed if the bet is different but the sb did technically call the out of turn all in, i thought it would stand.

opinions please as it is bugging me.

[Mikeyboy9361]

I"m no rules and regs expert, but I think it should stand. As the SB has just called the out of turn all in bet, and as such the verbal declaration should stand.

[deanp27]

had a similar thing before (might have been DTD or an APAT tournament or another casino)

if SB checks action stands and then he can call the BBs shove
if SB changes the action (by betting) then BB can choose to fold

it sounds really daft and i have no idea whether it is technically correct but that is how it was explained.

therefore SB should have checked, let BB shove then snap called whilst doing a little boogie

[Mikeyboy9361]

makes sense  

[antthecat]

it did look stupid, i just cant see how the action has changed as the bet and call would have been the same value, it was not like he out of turn bet 400 and previous player said all in, then action has changed and the 400 can be drawn back but if the player bet 400 then the out of turn 400 bet would have to call so when he out of turn went all in the bet of 7.5k was technically calling his action thus not changing the out of turn action. i might be wrong but i have played in some shady games when any bet out of turn stands regardless of change.  i still would like peoples opinions on this as it is bugging me.

[kinboshi]

The action has changed things.  The BB announced all-in before the SB had bet.  His bet now means the all-in would be a raise or a call, rather than an opening bet.

Although the end result is the same, the journey there was different.  Same as the difference between shoving all-in with 74o and calling with it.

[kinboshi]

Oh, and the BB should be warned not to act of turn again, and probably should be slapped with a wet trout.

[AMRN]

if the BB had bet say 100 out of turn, then the SB had moved all in, the BB could choose to fold..... but he would forfeit the 100 chips as they have already crossed the line, albeit out of turn.

In the example in this post, the BB just happened to bet out of turn for a larger amount - by saying all in, he has effectively moved his chips over the line,  even though they haven"t physically moved - and as far as I understand it, they cannot be withdrawn.

[kinboshi]

if the BB had bet say 100 out of turn, then the SB had moved all in, the BB could choose to fold..... but he would forfeit the 100 chips as they have already crossed the line, albeit out of turn.

In the example in this post, the BB just happened to bet out of turn for a larger amount - by saying all in, he has effectively moved his chips over the line,  even though they haven"t physically moved - and as far as I understand it, they cannot be withdrawn.

Steve, I believe you"re right and that"s the ruling in some venues.  But in others, if the betting changes then the BB has a decision on what to do even if he declared all-in.

Again a problem with regards not having standardised rules.

[Pears27]

The GUKPT has gone super-strict on this. Since the issue that arose in leg 1 this year (there"s a thread on it somewhere) the line is that ANY announcement in or out of position stands. Pretty sure that would apply to your case.

This provoked a fair bit of debate on my table in leg 3 when announced. Think through the implications - if I make some jokey throw-away comment to my mate in the next seat like "if this guy raises I"ll call in the dark!"... it stands.

[kinboshi]

The GUKPT has gone super-strict on this. Since the issue that arose in leg 1 this year (there"s a thread on it somewhere) the line is that ANY announcement in or out of position stands. Pretty sure that would apply to your case.

This provoked a fair bit of debate on my table in leg 3 when announced. Think through the implications - if I make some jokey throw-away comment to my mate in the next seat like "if this guy raises I"ll call in the dark!"... it stands.

Yes, there was a long thread about this on blonde.

The OP on this thread hasn"t said if it was a cash game or tournament either.  

[WYoung83]

hey kinboshi....i have just noticed (for some reason) that your first reply on this thread was timed at 1.29 and 12 secs.
then you posted an insta reply timed at 1.29 and 32 secs......


thats just 20 secs between two posts.....damn you are a fast typer. you must be the best on the click fests....

[AMRN]

he"s a Clickfest master!!  (not sure what that says about his Satellite record )

[Swinebag]

hey kinboshi....i have just noticed (for some reason) that your first reply on this thread was timed at 1.29 and 12 secs.
then you posted an insta reply timed at 1.29 and 32 secs......


thats just 20 secs between two posts.....damn you are a fast typer. you must be the best on the click fests....

most people would edit their posts if they forgot to add something.

Not Dan....post count is everything!!

[kinboshi]

hey kinboshi....i have just noticed (for some reason) that your first reply on this thread was timed at 1.29 and 12 secs.
then you posted an insta reply timed at 1.29 and 32 secs......


thats just 20 secs between two posts.....damn you are a fast typer. you must be the best on the click fests....

most people would edit their posts if they forgot to add something.

Not Dan....post count is everything!!

LOL - says the man who has his own thread so he can post useless crap it.  Now I know why

As for the clickfests, yes I rock at them.  It"s just the poker that"s a problem...