"I'm All In" (Some of the More Pedantic Poker Rules Explained)
Recently I've returned to playing quite a lot of Texas Hold'em Poker and so have been playing a few live games. I used to work for a poker company as an account manager, this mainly involved playing a wide variety of poker game variations whilst maintaining the integrity of the game. My primary role was to monitor that the house rules are being followed; other responsibilities included managing tables to ensure that people were being respectful to fellow players and also checking that any player committing fraud, collusion and cheating was found and dealt with accordingly. The latter responsibilities are actually considerably more difficult than the first as generally casinos and leagues will have their house rules written down and if you choose not to agree to, or play by, these terms and conditions then it is very fair for a casino manager or tournament director to penalise you for this. House Rules pull rank on all other rules regardless of your location, and in most cases, you can ask your Tournament Director or Casino Manager to show you a copy of the terms which you need to abide by. Due to this experience, sometimes I find it frustrating in live games when people aren't playing to the rules and I often end up in debates about such rules so have decided to write this blog explaining the More Pedantic Rules of Poker.
The game which I am going to discuss is Texas Hold'em No Limit. I could explain to you the rules of many other variations of poker however this particular one tends to be the most popular. I will explain the true/pure rules of the game and can not comment on house/local rules other than to say if it is a house rule and it's written down, you agree to it whether you like it or not ie. if the house rule is to do a card trick every time you are dealer, then as stupid as it is, if you don't like it you can get your game in somewhere else. House Rules that are not written down are at the discretion of the Casino Manager or Tournament Director and should not be down to any player that may be involved in the dispute. Accidents that cause necessity for this are endless but common debated are those such as folding out of turn or showing your cards during a live hand. In a friendly game, then disputes can usually be agreed at the table; the dealer of a disputed hand (unless he is live in the hand) should generally be able to call the decision on how a dispute should be resolved however if any player of the tournament (not just the hand) would like to appeal to the decision, then this should be escalated to a Tournament Director or Casino Manager. You would very much hope that the Tournament Director will stick to the written House Rules but he/she doesn't technically have to as long as it doesn't cost you anything more than the chips that are already in play. A good rule during any unresolved dispute is to Check It Down. When you Check It Down all betting ceases immediately and any live players that have not had their option will have the opportunity to call or fold; no bets or raises are allowed and the cards go Heads Up all the way to The Showdown. Checking down may not be beneficial to all players and, whilst forfeiting a bet option may lose out to greater pot profit, in the long run, it is fairest for all players at a tournament and you should remember that one day it could save you from the game.
For basic rules of Texas Hold'Em, you're probably in the wrong place as this post is aimed at semi-professional players. If you're confused or lost by this point then reading further is only likely to confuse you more. The following examples are to explain some but not all of confusing situations that occur during tournaments; mostly during friendly games where there is a mixed bag of skill and experience.
Original Rules
There were the original rules of No Limit Texas Hold'em (NLTH), the purest of the pure but these have now evolved into two generally used set of rules, American and European. I will talk more about some of the main differences between American and European rules later but will firstly discuss confusing rules that are global to both of these.
Before Original Rules evolved to how they are today the All In rule did not exist but now this rule is generally accepted in NLTH as being an Original Rule and it exists in pretty much all Hold'Em games. Prior to the establishment of the All In Rule, you could bet anything (you didn't need to have at the table all what you were to bet with); if your assets were valued as greater than the person you were playing then you could overpower them regardless of if you'd only come to the table with a chip and a chair. The All In Rule has saved many players from complete disaster of losing their car, house, spouse, entire-life etc. in a bet and is probably one of the reasons that NLTH is now the preferred poker variation. Although the All In Rule is not technically an Original Rule, I've yet to be in any tournament where the House Rules have allowed a player to bet more than he/she has exchanged as chips in play.
Remember that House Rules take priority so always know what you're going in to before you sit at the table. If you're particularly worried or you don't think it's a friendly game, check the House Rules or with the Tournament Director that you can only play the chips that you have in front of you. If you don't like their decision, it's time for you to fold and leave.
For all of my examples, I would like you to imagine the table setup as follows:
No more than 4 players are required for any of these examples but if there were more than 4 players in your situation, you should understand them as another to the left of Person C.
OK... here are some of the most pedantic of the originally accepted rules. Please tell me if you think of any that I've missed and I'll add them.
The game which I am going to discuss is Texas Hold'em No Limit. I could explain to you the rules of many other variations of poker however this particular one tends to be the most popular. I will explain the true/pure rules of the game and can not comment on house/local rules other than to say if it is a house rule and it's written down, you agree to it whether you like it or not ie. if the house rule is to do a card trick every time you are dealer, then as stupid as it is, if you don't like it you can get your game in somewhere else. House Rules that are not written down are at the discretion of the Casino Manager or Tournament Director and should not be down to any player that may be involved in the dispute. Accidents that cause necessity for this are endless but common debated are those such as folding out of turn or showing your cards during a live hand. In a friendly game, then disputes can usually be agreed at the table; the dealer of a disputed hand (unless he is live in the hand) should generally be able to call the decision on how a dispute should be resolved however if any player of the tournament (not just the hand) would like to appeal to the decision, then this should be escalated to a Tournament Director or Casino Manager. You would very much hope that the Tournament Director will stick to the written House Rules but he/she doesn't technically have to as long as it doesn't cost you anything more than the chips that are already in play. A good rule during any unresolved dispute is to Check It Down. When you Check It Down all betting ceases immediately and any live players that have not had their option will have the opportunity to call or fold; no bets or raises are allowed and the cards go Heads Up all the way to The Showdown. Checking down may not be beneficial to all players and, whilst forfeiting a bet option may lose out to greater pot profit, in the long run, it is fairest for all players at a tournament and you should remember that one day it could save you from the game.
For basic rules of Texas Hold'Em, you're probably in the wrong place as this post is aimed at semi-professional players. If you're confused or lost by this point then reading further is only likely to confuse you more. The following examples are to explain some but not all of confusing situations that occur during tournaments; mostly during friendly games where there is a mixed bag of skill and experience.
Original Rules
There were the original rules of No Limit Texas Hold'em (NLTH), the purest of the pure but these have now evolved into two generally used set of rules, American and European. I will talk more about some of the main differences between American and European rules later but will firstly discuss confusing rules that are global to both of these.
Before Original Rules evolved to how they are today the All In rule did not exist but now this rule is generally accepted in NLTH as being an Original Rule and it exists in pretty much all Hold'Em games. Prior to the establishment of the All In Rule, you could bet anything (you didn't need to have at the table all what you were to bet with); if your assets were valued as greater than the person you were playing then you could overpower them regardless of if you'd only come to the table with a chip and a chair. The All In Rule has saved many players from complete disaster of losing their car, house, spouse, entire-life etc. in a bet and is probably one of the reasons that NLTH is now the preferred poker variation. Although the All In Rule is not technically an Original Rule, I've yet to be in any tournament where the House Rules have allowed a player to bet more than he/she has exchanged as chips in play.
Remember that House Rules take priority so always know what you're going in to before you sit at the table. If you're particularly worried or you don't think it's a friendly game, check the House Rules or with the Tournament Director that you can only play the chips that you have in front of you. If you don't like their decision, it's time for you to fold and leave.
For all of my examples, I would like you to imagine the table setup as follows:
Person/position A (Ash) His position is Small Blind- The Big Blind (BB) is §200
Person/position B (Brian) His position is Big Blind
Person/position C (Charlie) His position is Under The Gun
Person/position D (Delia) Delia is the dealer
No more than 4 players are required for any of these examples but if there were more than 4 players in your situation, you should understand them as another to the left of Person C.
OK... here are some of the most pedantic of the originally accepted rules. Please tell me if you think of any that I've missed and I'll add them.
The Check Raise
Unless specified otherwise by House Rules, a Check Raise is legal, this is often made illegal by House Rules of casinos internationally because it can reduce their rake profits. An example of a check raise is when A checks on his option, D bets §600; now A may Fold, Call or Raise. If he chooses to raise this is known as The Check Raise.
Post (Ante)
If you join a new table or were not there to put in your big blind, you have the option to Post. A Post bet is after (post) the Big Blind and it means that you can play the immediate hand after joining the table. A Post Bet is put in front of you as if it were your blind and it is equal to the Big Blind. If you choose not to post, you must wait until the dealer button passes you before you can partake in any hand. This is so that you don't get an unfair advantage on the amount of pot commitment you have to any hand. In our example, if a fifth person were to join the table; position E (Ed) and Ed was not in BB position, then Ed could post §200 prior to the cards being dealt. Ed would become the last person to check, fold or raise before the flop (BB Brian would now have the penultimate option pre-flop). Post flop betting continues as normal (clockwise from Small Blind). Ed is known to have made a Post Bet.
Now I will discuss the main difference between American Rules and European Rules...
NLTH should really be purely be played by American Rules but if you are in Europe, chances are that any casino you go to or tournament that you play follows European Rules (sometimes known as French Rules as this is where the variation was originally established). Not all establishments in Europe play European Rules but the majority do so we can generally accept that if we are in UK, Italy or Cyprus etc. then we will be playing the European variation of NLTH. French-Canadians generally play European Rules because of this French established cultural variation. There is only one difference in between the variations however it is a significant difference, or at least it can be.
The big difference is the amount that you are allowed to raise. In our post flop scenario; B bets §200 (anything less is smaller than the BB and would be an illegal bet/under bet); C then raises to §400 and D raises to §600. Acutely perceptive Europeans will be screaming out that D has made an illegal raise but in the case of American Rules, this is not true. This is because in American Rules poker, you may raise equal to or greater than the last bet. The last bet by C was §200 because he called B's §200 and raised by §200; the bet by C is §200. In European Rules, this is an Under-Raise as in this variation D would need to raise to at least §800 which is at least twice the total amount of bet before her; although the previous bet was §200, the total bet is §400 so if D wishes to raise (and lives in Europe) she must raise to §800. The above example is therefore legal in America but illegal in Europe. There are some regional variations where a bet/raise is allowed to be only 50% of the previous bet to not be classed as an under-raise however these are regional variations (veiled house rules) and not the generally accepted rules in either American or European NLTH.
The big difference is the amount that you are allowed to raise. In our post flop scenario; B bets §200 (anything less is smaller than the BB and would be an illegal bet/under bet); C then raises to §400 and D raises to §600. Acutely perceptive Europeans will be screaming out that D has made an illegal raise but in the case of American Rules, this is not true. This is because in American Rules poker, you may raise equal to or greater than the last bet. The last bet by C was §200 because he called B's §200 and raised by §200; the bet by C is §200. In European Rules, this is an Under-Raise as in this variation D would need to raise to at least §800 which is at least twice the total amount of bet before her; although the previous bet was §200, the total bet is §400 so if D wishes to raise (and lives in Europe) she must raise to §800. The above example is therefore legal in America but illegal in Europe. There are some regional variations where a bet/raise is allowed to be only 50% of the previous bet to not be classed as an under-raise however these are regional variations (veiled house rules) and not the generally accepted rules in either American or European NLTH.
An Under-Raise is only acceptable in any variation where the player making an Under-Raise does so in an All In situation. This under-raise is sometimes known as Call + Extra. It is better to understand it as the latter to avoid confusion if you are going to call. The following is an example of a legal Under-Raise using firstly European rules:
Post-flop position A bets §200, B raises to §600 and then C goes all in for §1100. The action is now on D who may fold, raise or call. If D chooses to call, she must call §1200: §1100 goes into the main pot and then a further §100 is placed in a side pot. This is because D has both A and B in front of her so she may not call just §1100 as she would then be committing an illegal under raise (European Rules). The bet that she needs to call is the §600 by B followed by a further §600 not §500 (§600 + §500 is not either a legal call or legal raise). If D plays §1200, this should be seen as a call but she can raise to anything greater than §1200 as to her the All In by C is no longer affecting her hand. Of course C will only get the increments of §1100 out of each player regardless of how many players there are. If D calls §1200 and so does A and B, there will be a side pot available to A. B and D of §300.
Post-flop position A bets §200, B raises to §600 and then C goes all in for §1100. The action is now on D who may fold, raise or call. If D chooses to call, she must call §1200: §1100 goes into the main pot and then a further §100 is placed in a side pot. This is because D has both A and B in front of her so she may not call just §1100 as she would then be committing an illegal under raise (European Rules). The bet that she needs to call is the §600 by B followed by a further §600 not §500 (§600 + §500 is not either a legal call or legal raise). If D plays §1200, this should be seen as a call but she can raise to anything greater than §1200 as to her the All In by C is no longer affecting her hand. Of course C will only get the increments of §1100 out of each player regardless of how many players there are. If D calls §1200 and so does A and B, there will be a side pot available to A. B and D of §300.
Now to explain the same example under American rules:
Post-flop position A bets §200, B raises to §600 and then C goes all in for §1100. The action is now on D who may fold, raise or call. If D chooses to call, she must call the §1100. She does not need to put any more chips in as in American Rules C's All In was not an Under-Raise / Under-Bet and was valid. This is because the last bet to person C was a bet of §400 by B on A's §200 so a minimum raise would be §1000 and as §1100 is greater than §1000 then it counts as both an all in and a raise. Person D may fold, (flat) call or raise. The minimum raise for D if she chose would be §1700. This is because the bet made by the player before her was §500 (the §600 was there by A + B). In this case if all players call then there is no side pot but if D decided to raise to (say) §2000 then any called increments of the extra §900 would be in a side pot not available to player C. Furthermore if D were to raise to §2000, a minimum raise by A or B would be §2900.
You can see why European Rules are catching on as being commonly accepted in many casinos around the world. As long as you don't commit an Under-Raise in European rules, it is much easier to track the bet because it's double the bets before you (whatever you see to your right hand side). The bets before you are not to be confused with the Pot. The Pot is in the middle of the table and committed from any previous round of betting, it is only during the round of betting that you are on where you count the bets in front of previous players. In Pot Limit Texas Hold-Em, the rules are very different as you are always betting on a percentage of pot rather than the round.
One final example applies to both European and American rules:
Position A pays small blind §100, B pays big §200, under the gun C calls §200 and D (or equally relevant A) goes all in §150. Under both American and European rules this all in is a legal under-raise but any players after this must fold or at least call the blind. If anyone after the under-raise would like to raise the blind themselves then the minimum legal raise would be §400 (unless all in themselves) creating a side pot with any called increments of the added §250. In this pre-flop scenario, once the option reaches the big blind, unless the big blind has been raised, then the next round of betting will continue. The big blind (B) still has the option to raise if he chooses to.
I think that this is about as complicated as it gets so thought it a good idea to explain these rules as simply as possible (not an easy task). Further questions welcomed as some I may discuss at a later point.
Position A pays small blind §100, B pays big §200, under the gun C calls §200 and D (or equally relevant A) goes all in §150. Under both American and European rules this all in is a legal under-raise but any players after this must fold or at least call the blind. If anyone after the under-raise would like to raise the blind themselves then the minimum legal raise would be §400 (unless all in themselves) creating a side pot with any called increments of the added §250. In this pre-flop scenario, once the option reaches the big blind, unless the big blind has been raised, then the next round of betting will continue. The big blind (B) still has the option to raise if he chooses to.
I think that this is about as complicated as it gets so thought it a good idea to explain these rules as simply as possible (not an easy task). Further questions welcomed as some I may discuss at a later point.
The moral of the story, as I like to have one, is about rules... Rules exist in all cultures and structures and although some rules cap the extent of our personal liberties they provide us the comfort that if we fall victim (directly or indirectly) then we will share the common protection of our fellow humans (citizens/players...) and all stand as one. If the rules do not allow the common denominators to stand as one, then it's time to change the rules.
Comments
Post a Comment
Post