'I put you all-in'

[Timdog1010 0]

I hear this all the time in home games and it bugs the crap out of me. Obviuosly you cannot put someone all-in, only they can choose to bet their chips. The most you can do is declare yourself all-in and give them the opportunity to call. I know this seems like a small thing to get worked up about, but it comes up almost every time we play.I think a big part of it is that when people say this they tend to do so in such an arrogant tone of voice. IMO if you're going to be arrogant then at least you should make sure you know what the hell you're doing. To me, that's in the same ballpark as trying to flame someone cleverly, then misspelling half the words in your post.Does anyone agree with me or should I STFU?If I get flamed enough, maybe I'll back off this in the home games...

[Rokuban 0]

Does anyone agree with me or should I STFU?If I get flamed enough, maybe I'll back off this in the home games...

Don't get all worked up. Just answer "No, you don't" when you fold. That should tone down the arrogance.

[rsmbox 1]

sounds better than "I raise enough that you will be all-in if you call"

[Guest Zach6668]

I agree... It drives me nuts when the donkeys at the home games say it... Except that it usually means I can have all their chips Zach

[rog 0]

I know this seems like a small thing to get worked up about...

word

[alf13 0]

I hear this all the time in home games and it bugs the crap out of me. Obviuosly you cannot put someone all-in, only they can choose to bet their chips. The most you can do is declare yourself all-in and give them the opportunity to call. I know this seems like a small thing to get worked up about, but it comes up almost every time we play.I think a big part of it is that when people say this they tend to do so in such an arrogant tone of voice. IMO if you're going to be arrogant then at least you should make sure you know what the hell you're doing. To me, that's in the same ballpark as trying to flame someone cleverly, then misspelling half the words in your post.Does anyone agree with me or should I STFU?If I get flamed enough, maybe I'll back off this in the home games...

I agree.Whenever I am in a home game sng...and somebody tells me "I put you allin."I tell them: "AHHH...NO...only I can put me allin.....you mean....that you move allin...right?"They then say...."Oh yeah okay...I am allin..."

[kers2 0]

I'll say it to either induce a call from an egotistical opponent who would take offense, or to execute a bluff on a weak opponent who I think will fold.I think the real issue here is when people say "I call you all in" or "I call all in"... much more annoying

[Swift_Psycho 1]

sounds better than "I raise enough that you will be all-in if you call"

[jjdylan 0]

sounds better than "I raise enough that you will be all-in if you call"

.

[Timdog1010 0]

sounds better than "I raise enough that you will be all-in if you call"

.

But doesn't a simple 'I'm all-in' sound even better?

[chindi 0]

sounds better than "I raise enough that you will be all-in if you call"

.

But doesn't a simple 'I'm all-in' sound even better?

Nope.Because in the theoretical situation where tehre are three people in the hand, you may be betting enough to put the short-stack all-in, but not going all-in yourself.Generally though, in that case I'll just ask for a count and make that the bet.

[PFunk 0]

I am glad I am not the only one...I hear this crap all the time, and it annoys the shiat out of me, and once you say it to me, I am putting you on my top list of people to bust at the table and will make it a personal mission to do so.I usually give the same response if I know I cant call, or even if I can call...."No, I'll put myself all-in"Now that I know this irritated others just as much as me, perhaps I might use it here and there tho Another annoying all in is Carlos Mortenson in his accent saying "I move all in"....For some reason (just the way he says it i guess, strange i dunno) being at the table with him saying that would irritate me a little-P.

[Timdog1010 0]

sounds better than "I raise enough that you will be all-in if you call"

.

But doesn't a simple 'I'm all-in' sound even better?

Nope.Because in the theoretical situation where tehre are three people in the hand, you may be betting enough to put the short-stack all-in, but not going all-in yourself.Generally though, in that case I'll just ask for a count and make that the bet.

Fair enough, I guess in my hypothetical it was a heads-up pot. I wasn't really considering a 3-way pot...

[SapphireTiger 0]

sounds like its an effective tactic to put you on tilt.

[Timdog1010 0]

sounds like its an effective tactic to put you on tilt.

no, it's like it's going to affect my decision, I guess I'm just a little anal-retentive about these things. (Cue Ron)

[Swift_Psycho 1]

I actually find this thread more annoying than what the thread is criticizing.

[econ_tim 0]

you shouldn't care what they sayjust take their money if you can

[fryer98 30]

I don't get all worked up about it, but I do comment on it to players in my home games.The same when they say "raise" when they are leading out betting and small things like that. I don't do it to be a dick, I just do it because if I was using terms wrong, I would want someone to correct me so I didn't sound dumb.

[Rokuban 0]

I don't get all worked up about it, but I do comment on it to players in my home games.The same when they say "raise" when they are leading out betting and small things like that. I don't do it to be a dick, I just do it because if I was using terms wrong, I would want someone to correct me so I didn't sound dumb.

A lot of ppl do that in the cardroom I play. It's a tell in most of them. When they lead out betting by saying "raise", they usually flopped a monster.

[AndrewBlack 0]

I have a friend that used to say...." I CALL YOU ALL IN."Would that be less annoying?

[Timdog1010 0]

I have a friend that used to say...." I CALL YOU ALL IN."Would that be less annoying?

no.

[benhoug 0]

The most you can do is declare yourself all-in and give them the opportunity to call. I know this seems like a small thing to get worked up about, but it comes up almost every time we play.

There's a huge difference between moving all-in, or betting enough to put another player all-in.Say you're UTG w/ a short stack and you raise. I'm on the button w/ a hand I want to play heads-up and I've got you covered, but I've got the blinds to worry about. They have more chips than you, so if I declare myself all-in and one of them wakes up w/ a hand I'm ****ed. But if I bet the amount that you have I don't have to put any more chips at risk against the blinds.Sure I could eyeball your chips and bet approx what I think you have, but frankly it's much easier to declare, "I'm putting you all-in," or, "I'll bet whatever you've got."Maybe it's just a matter of semantics, but I think putting another player all-in is totally valid.By the way, I don't really do that very often, but it doesn't bother me when I hear it.

[Timdog1010 0]

The most you can do is declare yourself all-in and give them the opportunity to call. I know this seems like a small thing to get worked up about, but it comes up almost every time we play.

There's a huge difference between moving all-in, or betting enough to put another player all-in.Say you're UTG w/ a short stack and you raise. I'm on the button w/ a hand I want to play heads-up and I've got you covered, but I've got the blinds to worry about. They have more chips than you, so if I declare myself all-in and one of them wakes up w/ a hand I'm censored. But if I bet the amount that you have I don't have to put any more chips at risk against the blinds.Sure I could eyeball your chips and bet approx what I think you have, but frankly it's much easier to declare, "I'm putting you all-in," or, "I'll bet whatever you've got."Maybe it's just a matter of semantics, but I think putting another player all-in is totally valid.By the way, I don't really do that very often, but it doesn't bother me when I hear it.

Yeah, this was addressed above. I was referring to a heads-up situation, although I wasn't clear about that. I concede that in a 3 way pot you guys have a very valid point.My only retort is that the guys I'm talking about do not have such well-thought-out reasons for saying it. They're just annoying donkeys.

[fryer98 30]

I don't get all worked up about it, but I do comment on it to players in my home games.The same when they say "raise" when they are leading out betting and small things like that. I don't do it to be a dick, I just do it because if I was using terms wrong, I would want someone to correct me so I didn't sound dumb.

A lot of ppl do that in the cardroom I play. It's a tell in most of them. When they lead out betting by saying "raise", they usually flopped a monster.

Interesting...I'll have to watch for that sometime.I correct/help the people in my home game, because they're friends of mine and I don't want them to act like idiots if they ever go to a casino.

[Don Giovanni 0]

i dont see any problem with saying i put you all in. it doesnt mean someones a donkey if they say it. its different from going all in yourself. who really cares anyway, you know what they are saying and so does everyone else.