Raise Rule Question

[ukwildcat09 0]

Player 1 - $43Player 2 - $300+Player 3 - $300+$1/$2 No Limit at a casino.Player 1 raises to $10.Player 2 raises to $30.Player 3 calls the $30. Player 1 then re-raises to all-in for $43. Player 2 calls the $13.Player 3 then goes all in. Player 2 mucks his hand.Obviously, player 3 has A-A and takes the pot down. After the river, player 2 gets mad and says he would have made a flush and won and player 3's all-in was illegal. The dealer says he has never witnessed something like this and calls the floor. The floor says that player 3's raise of all-in was not legal but their was nothing that the house could do about it. So, player 2 was out of $30 and potentially the pot. What is the real ruling on this?

[joefoely 0]

If I am reading it right, the raise of 13 more(by Player1) is more than half of the original raise of 20 more(of Player 2) and should count as a complete bet. Thus, giving either Player 2 or 3 the right to re-raise...

[MyPlayIsRAB 0]

no its not. yu can not reraise an allin unless the players allin raise is more than a minimum raisesay i have 170, 10/20 game. i limp UTG, raise ahead of me to 150, and ac aller. i then go allin for 20$ more.. the original raiser and caller can only call because im only raising an extra 20$ and its not a full bet. rules vary by casino though

[Naps_555 0]

Player 1 - $43Player 2 - $300+Player 3 - $300+$1/$2 No Limit at a casino.Player 1 raises to $10.Player 2 raises to $30.Player 3 calls the $30. Player 1 then re-raises to all-in for $43. Player 2 calls the $13.Player 3 then goes all in. Player 2 mucks his hand.Obviously, player 3 has A-A and takes the pot down. After the river, player 2 gets mad and says he would have made a flush and won and player 3's all-in was illegal. The dealer says he has never witnessed something like this and calls the floor. The floor says that player 3's raise of all-in was not legal but their was nothing that the house could do about it. So, player 2 was out of $30 and potentially the pot. What is the real ruling on this?

The Floor Person was correct. Player 3's all in bet was invalid. But Since player 2 mucked his hand, there is nothing that can be done to correct the situation and player 3 wins the pot.

[ukwildcat09 0]

So, a raise has to be atleast 1/2 the previous bet in order for some one in later position to raise?

[XXEddie 0]

Player 2 is correct, player 3 should not have been able to pushhowever, he needs to bring this up BEFORE they flip up the hands and reveal the flop, turn and river.

[ScottTK 0]

min. raise has to be at least the size of the last bet/raise.after P2 makes it $30 [raising $20] the min raise should be $20 more, for a total of $50.only a player with less than $50 and that goes all in can make a smaller raise [in the situation you described, P1].when that happens, players can only call, since the all in is less than the min raise possible.P3 all in was not legal.

[Bender24 0]

why didnt player 2 bring it to attention right away instead of seeing that he would have made a flush and won the hand, and then start complaining about it. if people would just take a second to think every once in awhile we would all be better off.

[ukwildcat09 0]

Player 2 is correct, player 3 should not have been able to pushhowever, he needs to bring this up BEFORE they flip up the hands and reveal the flop, turn and river.

But, this can be blamed directly on the dealer. He allowed the action to happen without saying a word until the river. That's why player 2 was so mad. A dealer in a known establishment not knowing the rules and screwing people out of money.

[NoSup4U 0]

If I am reading it right, the raise of 13 more(by Player1) is more than half of the original raise of 20 more(of Player 2) and should count as a complete bet. Thus, giving either Player 2 or 3 the right to re-raise...

The 'half bet' rule is a spread limit rule, not a no limit rule. In NL, the raise must be at least the previous raise. So 10 to 30, raise of 20. Guy needs to raise at least $20 more making it $50 total for someone to reraise behind him.Mark

[XXEddie 0]

But, this can be blamed directly on the dealer. He allowed the action to happen without saying a word until the river. That's why player 2 was so mad. A dealer in a known establishment not knowing the rules and screwing people out of money.

no, if a player sees a mistake made by the delear, he need to alert someone prior to throwing his cards in the muck.If he hadnt of made a flush he would of said nothing and would of been happy about saving the $13Player 2 is nothing but a prick who is trying to bend the rules in his favor. He threw his cards in the muck, his hand is dead.

[freak2304 0]

But, this can be blamed directly on the dealer. He allowed the action to happen without saying a word until the river. That's why player 2 was so mad. A dealer in a known establishment not knowing the rules and screwing people out of money.

Yes and no. Although it is part of the dealers job to catch these things, we all know alot of dealers know much less than most good players. It's mostly the players responsibility to catch it and bring it to attention.Edit: It's just like if the dealer mis-reads hands at showdown to see who won the pot. It's the player's responsibility to be paying attention and correct them.

[ukwildcat09 0]

And no, I was not one of the players described.

[DCJ001 0]

If I am reading it right, the raise of 13 more(by Player1) is more than half of the original raise of 20 more(of Player 2) and should count as a complete bet. Thus, giving either Player 2 or 3 the right to re-raise...

Incorrect. Read below link for applicable rules:http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...t&p=1817221

[psujohn 0]

It's irrelevant anyway. Player 3 would have pushed on the flop and player 2 would have folded his flush draw.As the action happened though Player 2 is a complete moron because he knew the rule and didn't say anything. He mucked his hand when he could have seen the flop by just pointing out the rule to the dealer - who would have called the floor and gotten the correct ruling.

[13CARDS 0]

First, everyone re-read the OP......<pause for re-reading...>OK,Where in that post does it mention anything about the dealer? Why are so many posters so quick to jump on the dealer doing something wrong?When I read the OP, it seems to me that Player 3 either pushed his chips in or declared All-In. Usually when that happens, and another player is intent on folding, they throw their cards in, mucking them. The dealer doesn't cause any of this action; players do it on their own. So, in the presented case, Player 2 simply jumped the gun, probably even before the dealer had a chance to correct Player 3's attempted raise (which would be the first thing to take care of!), and mucked his own cards.The ruling is right. Player 3's raise was not valid. Player 2 did muck his cards. Resolutions are not going to be made at the end of the hand, bring them to the attention of the dealer/floor AS SOON AS they happen.