Fundraising for 2020/2021: Currently at $1580. Fundraising has begun, see the global post for options. Paypal Donation Links US dollars CDN Dollars

OO MTT NLHE 2007 Poker Tournament Main Thread

This is the place for self-contained forum games

Moderator: Zaxxon

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

OO MTT NLHE 2007 Poker Tournament Main Thread

Post by The Meal »

Sign-ups in this thread only, please. Sign-ups close(d) at the end of June 2007.

This thread is to contain:
  • the rules,
  • tournament-wide discussion,
  • rule modifications, and
  • tournament status updates.
I would like to spell out the rules and procedures to be used in the OO Multi-Table Tournament (MTT) No Limit Hold 'Em (NLHE) tournament. These rules are meant to be comprehensive (at the attempt at forestalling any debate once we're into the tournament), but may be changed or violated at any time for any reason by the Tournament Directory (The Meal).

Addtionally, this thread is meant to be the repository of various in-game activities, including listing the tables at which players are playing, and to contain all "tournament-wide" discussion (be it conversation of interest to all participants, to rule modification announcements, to "interesting hand alerts" at your table).

Additions/modifications/clarifications to the rules will be noted with a time/date stamp.

Please post in this thread if you have any questions. If you're curious about some of the mechanics at work, chances are that you're not alone, so other's would likely want to see your Q's and my A's.

Tournament Director
The Meal is your Tournament Director, and as such his powers are boundless. If down the road I decide to divvy up my duties, I'll make explicit the powers I've granted.

Acronyms
BB - Big Blind, the larger of the forced bets placed prior to dealing out hole cards
MTT - MultiTable Tournament, a poker tournament spanning multiple tables
NLHE - No Limit texas Hold 'Em, the particular game of poker we're playing in this tournament.
SB - Small Blind, the smaller of the forced bets
SNG - Sit aNd Go, a single-table poker tournament



~Neal

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Action at the Table
  • All community cards ("the board"), betting actions, and "back" announcements (see below) are to take place in the thread dedicated to that particular table.
  • Betting actions are declared in the following formats, PREFLOP: Action: Fold, Action: Call, Action: Raise to #, or Action: Raise by #. In an unraised pot, the Big Blind (BB) has the additional option to "Action: Check." POST-FLOP: Action: Fold, Action: Check, Action: Bet #, Action: Raise to #, or Action: Raise by #. In the SNG, there was a lot of confusion fostered by ambiguous actions taken, and it necessitated these rather draconian declaration rules. See discussion here if interested.
  • Action proceeds in the thread without intervention by the Tournament Director if at all possible. If one is uncertain of their options, either a message should be written in the thread, or a PM sent to the Tournament Director. The T.D. may assist in shepherding the thread at tricky junctures, but players should not, in the general case, wait for the Tournament Director prior to taking action.
  • Out-of-turn actions are not binding if caught prior to the Tournament Director revealing cards. Action will corrected and pick up at the point of error.
  • Illegal raises (see below) will be made legal at the minimum allowable level. The flow of the hand will resume with the first player taking action after the illegal raise. An illegal raise cannot be retracted.
  • Players have 24 hours from the previous action to decide how to play their hand. Players are "on the clock" as of the time of the post declaring previous action or in the case of revealing board cards, after the Tournament Director's post.
  • To assist in the flow of the hand, players should identify which player is "on the clock" after their action and send that person a private message (PM) indicating such. This is not a point of etiquette, but a rule of the game. Unfortunately it is an unenforcable rule to send the PM, so players are responsible to check the table thread once every 24 hours to ensure they have not missed action to them (do not rely upon PMs from persons taking action in front of you). If a player is unsure who takes action after them, they should indicate such in their action declaration post, and send a PM to the tournament director indicating confusion.
  • [6/28/07] The button advances based on the Dead Button Rule.
  • [7/06/07] Rabbit hunting is acceptable upon request.
~Neal

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Legal Raises
  • A legal raise must be at least the amount of the bet or raise to the player. A player may go all-in for less than a legal raise, in which case the action does not open the betting for reraises.
  • EXAMPLE 1: The player action after the blinds (SB1/BB2) raises by 4 to 6. A player wishing to reraise must increase the bet by a minimum of 4 chips, so the minimum "reraise" would total 10 chips.
  • EXAMPLE 2: Post-flop there are three players remaining. The first player checks, the second player bets 8 chips. The third player calls for 8 chips. The first player then goes all-in for his 15 remaining chips. Neither of the other two players may raise at this point, their options are either to call 15 total chips or to fold.
~Neal

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Discussion (not "Etiquette")
  • Table talk is encouraged. Players may, at any time, discuss cards they're holding, cards they held, ways they would have played hands, etc. Players are under no obligation to be truthful in these discussions. Note carefully, this bullet point allows for behavior quite different than what is permissible in a live game (but closely approximates behavior commonly seen in online poker).
  • Any and all discussion of the current hand or of previous hands between tournament participants *must* take place in the MTT threads. PMing, telephoning, chatting over the dinner table, etc. is not allowed between participants still active in the MTT. Off-thread discussion with players seated at other tables is forbidden.
  • Players may utilize any outside resource in making their decisions. These resources include other poker players (not in the tournament), poker software, poker forums, pig entrails, etc. Off-thread collaboration with other players involved in the tournament is NOT PERMITTED.
  • Players are not permitted to repost PMs from the Tournament Director in the thread to add authority to their claims.
~Neal

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Around the Table
  • A player may hand the control of their chips to another player (either temporarily or permanently) who is not currently involved in the tournament. Declaration of such should be made both in the thread, and via PM to the Tournament Director.
  • [7/06/07] This includes players in the tournament but playing on different tables.
  • If a player knows they will be away, they can either post in the thread or PM the Tournament Director that they would like to set their status as "AWAY." While status is set as AWAY, players will be automatically checked or folded (as appropriate). Upon returning, a player's "BACK" declaration must be made in the table's thread. If the player has live cards, they may then participate in a hand that is in-progress, otherwise their participation will begin with the next hand dealt.
  • A player timing out twice consecutively will have their status set to AWAY.
  • If a player is set to AWAY during heads-up play, it is the player-who-is-present's decision to wait for their return or to claim victory.
  • A player wishing to fold out of turn may PM the Tournament Director to expidite play. If the T.D. notices that player is on the clock before the player notices, the T.D. will declare the player folded and indicate the next player's action. Players are encouraged to keep checking the thread in this case, as it is possible they may notice that they are on the clock prior to the Tournament Director noticing.
  • A player may have the Tournament Director reveal mucked hole card or hole cards. They may also declare their hole cards themselves, but in doing so there is no requirement for truth.
  • All card randomization is performed with a physical deck of cards without any manipulation on the Tournament Director's part. There is no adjusting the dealt cards to make things more interesting.
  • All hands participating in a show down will be revealed by the Tournament Director.
  • Tables will be broken down and players combined based on many considerations to the Tournament Director. These considerations include (but are not limited to): expected speed of play, chip stacks, maintaining position relative to the button, and breaking up the slowest tables first. There's a lot of flexibility here, and you'll have to trust that I'm not trying to make things difficult on any specific player.
  • Positions will be redrawn when down to 3 tables, and again for the final table.
~Neal

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Structure
  • The structure is unlike anything you're familiar with. There was a lot of thought (and some discussion) associated with the stucture in this thread, including here and especially as updated here.
  • There are an ever increasing amount of blinds and antes from hand to hand. These increases happen no matter at which table hands are dealt, the 10th hand dealt will have a smaller level of blinds and antes than the 11th hand dealt no matter the table for which the hands are dealt.
  • In other words (it sometimes helps to say things two different ways), "Have the blinds (and antes, as they would get folded back into the concept) go up with each hand, not specific to the table. In other words, the blinds and antes go up ever time I deal out new cards, no matter at which table."
  • The mechanics probably aren't too important, but things are set such that the overall preflop chips per pot goes up roughly 7.2%/N per hand, where N is the number of tables in play (always assuming 10 players at the table per hand to make these calculations). The ratio of blinds and antes is SB = 1/2 BB, and ante = 1/16th BB.
  • Why ~7.2% per hand (when down to one table)? Because that makes the total preflop chips at the table double every 10 hands, which seems like a very nice pace. (Mathematicians take note, the actual calculation uses 7.17735%.
  • Starting stack is 10,000 chips, and things kick off at BB18/SB9/a4.
  • Example of the increasing blinds can be found below.
  • I'll try to keep a table of upcoming blinds updated throughout the tournament, but since the equation is affected by the number of tables in play, I can't generate this list ahead of time.
~Neal

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Blinds/Hand History
Hand | SB | BB | Ante
001 0009 0018 0004 MHS (+170)
002 0009 0018 0004 Pyperkub (+445)
003 0009 0018 0004 Jeff V (+604)
004 0009 0018 0004 Inverarity (+2486)
005 0009 0018 0004 Shinjin (+303)
006 0010 0020 0005 hentzau (+575)
007 0010 0020 0005 Remus West (+560)
008 0010 0020 0005 Inverarity (+610)
009 0010 0020 0005 Grundbegriff (+210)
010 0010 0020 0005 Jeff V (+120)
011 0010 0020 0005 Ralph-Wiggum (+2040)
012 0010 0020 0005 The Mad Hatter (+305)
013 0011 0022 0005 tgb (+1398)
014 0011 0022 0005 Remus West (+184)
015 0011 0022 0005 Papa Smurph (+3627)
016 0011 0022 0005 tgb (+2922)
017 0011 0022 0005 The Mad Hatter (+533)
018 0011 0022 0005 Inverarity (+1639)
019 0012 0024 0006 LawBeefaroni (+20296)
020 0012 0024 0006 flycatcher (+460)
021 0012 0024 0006 ScubaV (+690)
022 0012 0024 0006 Grundbegriff (+714)
023 0012 0024 0006 Trent Steel (+1414)
024 0013 0026 0006 ChrisGrenard (+10292)
025 0013 0026 0006 Unagi (+1104)
026 0013 0026 0006 Austin (+562)
027 0013 0026 0006 Lord Mortis (+476)
028 0013 0026 0006 Pyperkub (+2165)
029 0013 0026 0006 UnicornPoint (+6284)
030 0014 0028 0007 Ralph-Wiggum (+3956)
031 0014 0028 0007 Grundbegriff (+1540)
032 0014 0028 0007 godhugh (+3577)
033 0014 0028 0007 Steron (+1180)
034 0015 0030 0007 Steron (+7646)
035 0015 0030 0007 Padre (+11608)
036 0015 0030 0007 dedewhale (+684)
037 0015 0030 0007 Chaosraven (+7991)
038 0015 0030 0007 Jeff V (+1086)
039 0016 0032 0008 Remus West (+2136)
040 0016 0032 0008 hentzau (+1384)
041 0016 0032 0008 LordMortis (+724)
042 0016 0032 0008 Cortilian (+104)
043 0017 0034 0008 Green Giant (+10944)
044 0017 0034 0008 flycatcher (+8420)
045 0017 0034 0008 jaskerr (+3890)
046 0017 0034 0008 Jeff V (+2415)
047 0018 0036 0009 dedewhale (+4189)
048 0018 0036 0009 Clanwolfer (+207)
049 0018 0036 0009 tjg_marantz (+1635)
050 0018 0036 0009 LordMortis (+639)
051 0019 0038 0009 Trent Steel (+1613)
052 0019 0038 0009 Papa Smurph (+1338)
053 0019 0038 0009 Padre (+3565)
054 0019 0038 0009 dedewhale (+177)
055 0020 0040 0010 noxiousdog (+430)
056 0020 0040 0010 Unagi (+1300)
057 0020 0040 0010 Austin (+6324)
058 0021 0042 0010 Trent Steel (+596)
059 0021 0042 0010 Cortilian (+1612)
060 0021 0042 0010 Steron (+970)
061 0022 0044 0011 Grundbegriff (+2331)
062 0022 0044 0011 Remus West (+8649)
063 0022 0044 0011 Steron (+209)
064 0023 0046 0011 ScubaV (+2414)
065 0023 0046 0011 Cortilian (+8913)
066 0023 0046 0011 Baroquen (+838)
067 0024 0048 0012 Moliere (+1858)
068 0024 0048 0012 Remus West (+930)
069 0024 0048 0012 Green Giant (+780)
070 0025 0050 0012 flycatcher (+1359)
071 0025 0050 0012 godhugh (+4769)
072 0025 0050 0012 Moliere (+284)
073 0026 0052 0013 ScubaV (+9072)
074 0026 0052 0013 Ralph-Wiggum (+169)
075 0043 0086 0008 Austin (+4224)
076 0043 0086 0008 LordMortis (+1230)
077 0044 0088 0008 noxiousdog (+2416)
078 0045 0090 0009 Chaosraven (+1497)
079 0046 0092 0009 Moliere & Genghis (+128, each)
080 0047 0094 0009 Jeff V (+3116)
081 0047 0094 0009 dedewhale (+222)
082 0048 0096 0009 Crux (+7356)
083 0049 0098 0009 SpaceLord (+4911)
084 0050 0100 0010 Papa Smurph (+16548)
085 0051 0102 0010 godhugh (+8939)
086 0052 0104 0010 Grundbegriff (+17372), Crux (-5762)
087 0053 0106 0010 hentzau (+2226)
088 0054 0108 0010 Jeff V (+1678)
089 0055 0110 0011 Shinjin (+6256)
090 0056 0112 0011 noxiousdog (+889) & hentzau (+888)
091 0057 0114 0011 Inverarity (+3400)
092 0058 0116 0011 Crux (+11697)
093 0059 0118 0011 Austin (+6577)
094 0060 0120 0012 in progress (Gold)
095 0061 0122 0012 Padre (+6591)
096 0062 0124 0012 in progress (Moneymaker)
097 0063 0126 0012 in progress (Varkonyi)
098 0064 0128 0012 flycatcher (+404)
099 0065 0130 0013 in progress (Hachem)

Upcoming Blinds (4 tables) When tables break down, blinds will go up more quickly than indicated below
Hand | SB | BB | Ante
100 0067 0134 0013
101 0068 0136 0013
102 0069 0138 0013
103 0070 0140 0014
104 0072 0144 0014
105 0073 0146 0014
106 0074 0148 0014
107 0076 0152 0015
108 0077 0154 0015
109 0078 0156 0015
110 0080 0160 0016
111 0081 0162 0016
112 0083 0166 0016
113 0084 0168 0016 *earliest estimate to 30 players*
114 0086 0172 0017 *median estimate to 30 players*
115 0087 0174 0017
116 0089 0178 0017
117 0090 0180 0018
118 0092 0184 0018
119 0094 0188 0018
120 0095 0190 0019

~Neal

[edit: I deleted the blinds example, due to unwieldiness. I spelled out the process of calculating your own table of blinds in a post later on in this thread.]

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Seating history

Austin Varkonyi HAND005-
Baroquen Hachem HAND002-
Captain Caveman Raymer HAND003-073, Varkonyi HAND075-
Chaosraven Moneymaker HAND004-
ChrisGrenard Moneymaker HAND004-
Clanwolfer Moneymaker HAND004-078, eliminated in 39th place
Cortilian Moneymaker HAND004-
Crux Raymer HAND003-073, Hachem HAND076-
dedewhale Varkonyi HAND005-089, eliminated in 36th place
flycatcher Hachem HAND002-
gbasden Raymer HAND003-073, eliminated in 40th place
Genghis (from itaiyo) Raymer HAND064-073, Gold HAND077-087, Hachem HAND088-
godhugh Varkonyi HAND005-084, Moneymaker HAND085-
Green Giant Moneymaker HAND004-
Grundbegriff Hachem HAND002-
hentzau Gold HAND001-
Inverarity Moneymaker HAND004-
itaiyo Raymer HAND003-056 (to Genghis)
jaskerr Gold HAND001-
Jeff V Raymer HAND003-073, Hachem HAND076-
Lars (from tjg_marantz) Varkonyi HAND097-
LawBeefaroni Varkonyi HAND005-
LordMortis Hachem HAND002-086
Malificent Hachem HAND002-044, eliminated in 42nd place
MHS Gold HAND001-034, eliminated in 44th place
Moliere Gold HAND001-
msteelers Hachem HAND002-
noxiousdog Gold HAND001-
Octavious230 Moneymaker HAND004-037, eliminated in 43rd place
Padre Hachem HAND002-
Papa Smurph Raymer HAND003-073, Varkonyi HAND075-
Pyperkub Hachem HAND002-095, eliminated in 35th place
Ralph-Wiggum Moneymaker HAND004-
Remus West Varkonyi HAND005-
rshetts1 Varkonyi HAND005-071, eliminated in 41st place
RunningMn9 Varkonyi HAND005-019, eliminated in 46th place
ScubaV Raymer HAND003-073, Varkonyi HAND075-
Shinjin Varkonyi HAND005-
SpaceLord Raymer HAND003-073, Gold HAND077-
Steron Gold HAND001-
stimpy Varkonyi HAND005-026, eliminated in 45th place
Sudy Nym Moneymaker HAND004-
tgb Hachem HAND002-082, eliminated in 38th place
The Mad Hatter Gold HAND001-
tjg_marantz Gold HAND001-023, Varkonyi HAND026-093 (to Lars)
Trent Steel Gold HAND001-
Unagi Raymer HAND003-073, Moneymaker HAND078-
UnicornPoint Gold HAND001-

Order of Finish
46 RunningMn9
45 stimpy
44 MHS
43 Octavious230
42 Malificent
41 rshetts1
40 gbasden
39 Clanwolfer
38 tgb
37 LordMortis
36 dedewhale
35 Pyperkub
34

User avatar
ChrisGrenard
Posts: 10587
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:19 pm

Post by ChrisGrenard »

Is there a list of who is in yet, or is there a running list or anything?
I'm special!

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Just the player sign-ups in the sign-up thread thusfar. I'm closing entries at the end of June, but likely cards won't be in the air for a day or two as I get all the seating arrangements figured out.

~Neal

User avatar
Octavious
Posts: 17206
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:50 pm

Post by Octavious »

You know if you're not going to put any effort into it I would't bother..
Looks like I'll be spending all weekend reading the rules. ;)
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.

Shameless plug for my website: www.nettphoto.com

User avatar
Trent Steel
Posts: 8085
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:28 am
Location: Pain Dome

Post by Trent Steel »

The Meal wrote:EXAMPLE 2: Post-flop there are three players remaining. The first player checks, the second player bets 8 chips. The third player calls for 8 chips. The first player then goes all-in for his 15 remaining chips. Neither of the other two players may raise at this point, their options are either to call 15 total chips or to fold.
Don't quite understand this one. If player 1 goes all-in for his 15 remaining chips, players 2 & 3 should still be allowed to re-raise by 15+ or go all-in themselves if they have more than 15 chips in their remaining stack.

I may be missing something, but want to clarify this.

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Trent Steel wrote:
The Meal wrote:EXAMPLE 2: Post-flop there are three players remaining. The first player checks, the second player bets 8 chips. The third player calls for 8 chips. The first player then goes all-in for his 15 remaining chips. Neither of the other two players may raise at this point, their options are either to call 15 total chips or to fold.
Don't quite understand this one. If player 1 goes all-in for his 15 remaining chips, players 2 & 3 should still be allowed to re-raise by 15+ or go all-in themselves if they have more than 15 chips in their remaining stack.

I may be missing something, but want to clarify this.
Certainly.

Post flop, the chipstacks sit at:
Player 1 15
Player 2 100
Player 3 100

The action goes
Player 1: check
Player 2: bet 8
Player 3: call 8
Player 1: bet 15 {all in}

Since Player 1's "raise" of 7 chips is less than a full legal raise, it does not reopen the betting. Player 2 and Player three only have the options of calling 7 more chips or folding.

[To confuse things] In limit poker, an all-in "raise" equal to or more than half of the limit amount on that street does reopen the betting. In no-limit, you have to make a full legal raise to reopen things.

David Williams had famous angry words with a dealer when he pointed this out during the final table (IIRC) of the 2004 Main Event. David (sitting in Player 3's position as in the example) was upset because he would have been given more information had Player 2 attempted to reraise.

~Neal

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

The five tables are set. Please peruse these lists to ensure that you're at one of the tables. If you noticed that I missed you, scream loudly and quickly, as I intend to start rolling the cards out imminently.

Players are listed in seat order, from 1 to 10.

Gold
hentzau :Ah: button
Moliere :Ks: SB
tjg_marantz :Jd: BB
jaskerr :7s:
Trent Steel :7h:
The Mad Hatter :6h:
MHS :5s:
Steron :3d:
UnicornPoint :3c:
noxiousdog :2h:

Hachem
Pyperkub :As: button
msteelers :Ac: SB
Grundbegriff :Qc: BB
Baroquen :Td:
tgb :9s:
LordMortis :7c:
flycatcher :6c:
Padre :4h:
Malificent :4c:
!empty :3c:

Raymer
ScubaV :Qs: button
JeffV :Jc: SB
Papa Smurph :Td: BB
SpaceLord :8d:
Unagi :7c:
Crux :5s:
CaptainCaveman :4h:
itaiyo :3d:
!empty :3c:
gbasden :2c:

Moneymaker
Chaosraven :As: button
Clanwolfer :Qs: SB
ChrisGrenard :Qh: BB
Ralph-Wiggum :Qc:
Cortilian :Js:
!empty :Th:
Green Giant :Td:
Octavious230 :5c:
Inverarity :3s:
Sudy Nym :3h:

Varkonyi
godhugh :As: button
!empty :Kh:
Austin :Js: SB
dedewhale :Jc: BB
RunningMn9 :Th:
Shinjin :8c:
stimpy :7d:
Remus West :4d:
LawBeefaroni :2d:
rshetts1 :2c:

Players were preselected for one of the five tables based on their schedules given in the sign-up thread. Seating order within the table was accomplished by having each player select a card, and then ordering the players from highest card to lowest. The highest card got seat 1 and is given the button.

Players should next expect to see their table opened as a new thread, and to receive a PM for their hole cards. I'll be opening the threads in the order given above. I'm in the middle of doing laundry right now, as well, so expect things to roll out a bit slowly today.

~Neal

User avatar
Trent Steel
Posts: 8085
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:28 am
Location: Pain Dome

Post by Trent Steel »

The Meal wrote:In no-limit, you have to make a full legal raise to reopen things.
Huh. Never heard of that or played that way before.

I'll have to look that up.

Interesting. Learned something new about poker:

Raising Rules for Texas Holdem tournaments (bottom of page).

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Trent Steel wrote:
The Meal wrote:In no-limit, you have to make a full legal raise to reopen things.
Huh. Never heard of that or played that way before.

I'll have to look that up.
My Poker "Bible" is The Rules of Poker: Essentials for Every Game by Lou Krieger and Sheree Bykofsky (Lyle Stuart Books, 2006). On pages 115 - 7:
5.2 No-Limit Poker
5.2.1 RAISING REQUIREMENTS
With the exception of a player who goes all-in, bets must be sized at least equal to the bring-in designated for that game. Raises must be at least equal to the previous bet or raise on that round. The only exception is an all-in wager.

5.2.2 CHECK-RAISING ALL-IN BETS
A player who has checked may not raise an all-in bet that is less than the minimum bring-in. A player who has checked and called may not raise an all-in bet that is less than the last bet or raise.

INTERPRETATION NOTE
If Ron bets $20 and Amber wishes to raise, she must do so by raising at least $20 more. However, if Amber only has, say, $30 total in chips, she can move all-in for that amount.

In this example, if Amber has at least $40 in chips, then she must commit at least $40 to the pot in order to re-raise Ron — in essence she is matching Ron's initial $20 bet, then raising at least that amount herself. Should she wish to re-raise by more than the minimum re-raise amount ($40), she can bet anything up to and including the sum total of chips in her possession.

INTERPRETATION NOTE
Let's assume that Manny bets $20, Moe raises another $20 (for a total bet of $40), and Jack re-raises all-in by committing his last $50 to the pot. In essence, Jack has called Manny's initial bet and Moe's raise, which made the bet $40 to go, then raised again with his final $10.

If Manny calls Jack's $10 all-in raise, Moe does not have an option to raise again, because he was raised by a player posting less than a full raise to the pot. However, Manny, whose initial bet was raised by Moe, has all options available to him. In this example, Manny may fold his hand, call the raises, or re-raise. If Manny exlects to raise, then Moe will have all available options open to him because he is now reacting to Manny's full raise.
Typos mine.

~Neal

User avatar
Trent Steel
Posts: 8085
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:28 am
Location: Pain Dome

Post by Trent Steel »

The Meal wrote:5.2.2 CHECK-RAISING ALL-IN BETS
A player who has checked may not raise an all-in bet that is less than the minimum bring-in. A player who has checked and called may not raise an all-in bet that is less than the last bet or raise.

INTERPRETATION NOTE
Let's assume that Manny bets $20, Moe raises another $20 (for a total bet of $40), and Jack re-raises all-in by committing his last $50 to the pot. In essence, Jack has called Manny's initial bet and Moe's raise, which made the bet $40 to go, then raised again with his final $10.

If Manny calls Jack's $10 all-in raise, Moe does not have an option to raise again, because he was raised by a player posting less than a full raise to the pot. However, Manny, whose initial bet was raised by Moe, has all options available to him. In this example, Manny may fold his hand, call the raises, or re-raise. If Manny exlects to raise, then Moe will have all available options open to him because he is now reacting to Manny's full raise.
So the key point is who made the initial raise. In your case:

Post flop, the chipstacks sit at:
Player 1 15
Player 2 100
Player 3 100

The action goes
Player 1: check
Player 2: bet 8
Player 3: call 8
Player 1: bet 15 {all in}


Player 1 made the initial raise, which was lower than the "legal" amount so it cannot be re-raised by anyone.

However, the following scenario can also happen:

Player 1: check
Player 2: bet 4
Player 3: calls 4, raise by 4 (bet @ 8)
Player 1: calls 8, raise by 7 {all in} (bet @ 15)


Now, since player 3 made the initial raise, player 2 has the option to re-raise when the action comes back to him. If player 2 just calls the 7 raise from player 1, player 3 cannot re-raise. However, if player 2 re-raises then player 3 can also re-raise.

I *think* that's the way it works.

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 63084
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Post by LordMortis »

All hands participating in a show down will be revealed by the Tournament Director.
Crappy. I have a habit of calling small river bets and mucking when I lose, especially to keep other people's bluffs in check. I like to keep the other people guessing what WTF I was thinking. Having your losing check/call hidden in a showdown and forcing the other guy to make all of the decisions is strategically and tacticly way different than showing every showdown no matter where you fall in the line.

I'll have some thinking to do for the approach to how to bet my cards on the river.

:D

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

You are correct in stating that only a full legal raise reopens the betting for other non-all-in players. In your example, Player 3 performs a full legal raise (which would reopen the betting to Player 2 no matter what Player 1 does). In your example, Player 1's raise by 7 is also a full legal raise (as it is larger than Player 2's raise by 4), and so both Player 1 and Player 2 have had the betting reopened to them.

~Neal

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

LordMortis wrote:
All hands participating in a show down will be revealed by the Tournament Director.
Crappy. I have a habit of calling small river bets and mucking when I lose, especially to keep other people's bluffs in check. I like to keep the other people guessing what WTF I was thinking. Having your losing check/call hidden in a showdown and forcing the other guy to make all of the decisions is strategically and tacticly way different than showing every showdown no matter where you fall in the line.

I'll have some thinking to do for the approach to how to bet my cards on the river.

:D
In a live game, any of your tablemates have the option to see your hole cards if you lose a showdown (for the purposes of ensuring no collusion is taking place), and in any of the online software I've used, your hole card information is contained in the table histories (but generally not automatically displayed to the people playing at the table).

~Neal

User avatar
Trent Steel
Posts: 8085
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:28 am
Location: Pain Dome

Post by Trent Steel »

The Meal wrote:In your example, Player 1's raise by 7 is also a full legal raise (as it is larger than Player 2's raise by 4), and so both Player 1 and Player 2 have had the betting reopened to them.
:?

But player 1's raise by 7 does not match the previous bet of 8 by player 3 so it is not legal in that sense. However, since player 1 did not make the initial raise, player 2 still has the option to re-raise and if he does, player 3 can then re-raise.

Not trying to make this go around in circles, just want to clearly understand this.

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Player 3 did not bet 8. Player three raised 4. The next minimum legal raise would be 4 more chips (making the total bet 12). But player 1 didn't just raise 4, he raised 7.

~Neal

User avatar
Trent Steel
Posts: 8085
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:28 am
Location: Pain Dome

Post by Trent Steel »

The Meal wrote:Player 3 did not bet 8. Player three raised 4. The next minimum legal raise would be 4 more chips (making the total bet 12). But player 1 didn't just raise 4, he raised 7.
I know you're trying to get the tables going so I'll try to figure this out myself. :)

Ok, I see about only needing to re-raise by the previous raise (or bet) amount.

Let me change up the situation to be clear:

Player 1: check
Player 2: bet 4
Player 3: raise by 8 (12)
Player 1: raise by 3 {all in} (15)


Now, player 2 can re-raise if he wants. If he does then player 3 can re-raise. If player 2 calls, player 3 cannot re-raise.

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Now you've got it.

~Neal

User avatar
Trent Steel
Posts: 8085
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:28 am
Location: Pain Dome

Post by Trent Steel »

Hooray!

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

I'm going to pull questions of general interest out from the individual table threads, and respond to them here.
Pyperkub wrote:What happened to Hand 001 though (or are they numbered sequentially overall?)
I thought it'd be more confusing (for me, mostly) if I had to keep track of individual hands like Gold-001, Gold-002, ..., Hachem-001, Hachem-002, ..., etc. Couple that with the blinds that go up every hand (no matter at which table the hand falls), and I thought it made a lot of sense to increment each hand sequentially independent of table.

~Neal

User avatar
Austin
Posts: 15192
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:49 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Contact:

Post by Austin »

Can we PM you with pre-folds to keep things moving quicker or with all the tables, would you prefer not?
Your ad here.

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Austin wrote:Can we PM you with pre-folds to keep things moving quicker or with all the tables, would you prefer not?
Yes, absolutely, but please include your table name and HAND # in the subject line of the PM.

~Neal

User avatar
Ralph-Wiggum
Posts: 16194
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:51 am

Post by Ralph-Wiggum »

I'm at the Moneymaker table? Why'd I get stuck with the loser name? :(

(Though Gold got extremely lucky last year as well).

User avatar
Ralph-Wiggum
Posts: 16194
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:51 am

Post by Ralph-Wiggum »

P.S. Can I make a rule request that might make the game go faster (if it hasn't already been implemented)?

Once a player times out, I think he should remain timed-out until he declares that he's back at the table. Otherwise, you might have situation where a hand takes days all due to one player continually timing out.

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 63084
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Post by LordMortis »

Ralph-Wiggum wrote:P.S. Can I make a rule request that might make the game go faster (if it hasn't already been implemented)?

Once a player times out, I think he should remain timed-out until he declares that he's back at the table. Otherwise, you might have situation where a hand takes days all due to one player continually timing out.
And I thought I was the one who never reads. :) Neal will give you two consecutive timeouts before you are marked away. (Unless you mean that you should only get one timeout)

User avatar
Austin
Posts: 15192
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:49 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Contact:

Post by Austin »

LordMortis wrote:
Ralph-Wiggum wrote:P.S. Can I make a rule request that might make the game go faster (if it hasn't already been implemented)?

Once a player times out, I think he should remain timed-out until he declares that he's back at the table. Otherwise, you might have situation where a hand takes days all due to one player continually timing out.
And I thought I was the one who never reads. :) Neal will give you two consecutive timeouts before you are marked away. (Unless you mean that you should only get one timeout)
One would be better. If you can't make it to the table in 24 hours you should probably mark yourself away for the period your away anyway.
Your ad here.

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

I have received your feedback regarding timeouts and reject it with a preference for the rule as currently written. Depending on how things work out, I may change it once we get into the game.

~Neal

User avatar
Trent Steel
Posts: 8085
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:28 am
Location: Pain Dome

Post by Trent Steel »

Austin wrote:
LordMortis wrote:
Ralph-Wiggum wrote:P.S. Can I make a rule request that might make the game go faster (if it hasn't already been implemented)?

Once a player times out, I think he should remain timed-out until he declares that he's back at the table. Otherwise, you might have situation where a hand takes days all due to one player continually timing out.
And I thought I was the one who never reads. :) Neal will give you two consecutive timeouts before you are marked away. (Unless you mean that you should only get one timeout)
One would be better. If you can't make it to the table in 24 hours you should probably mark yourself away for the period your away anyway.
Agreed.

User avatar
Austin
Posts: 15192
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:49 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Contact:

Post by Austin »

The Meal wrote:I have received your feedback regarding timeouts and reject it with a preference for the rule as currently written. Depending on how things work out, I may change it once we get into the game.

~Neal
(See single table thread)
Your ad here.

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Austin wrote:
The Meal wrote:I have received your feedback regarding timeouts and reject it with a preference for the rule as currently written. Depending on how things work out, I may change it once we get into the game.
(See single table thread)
(See me enjoying brief breaks as they come up.)

~Neal

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 63084
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Post by LordMortis »

Austin wrote:One would be better. If you can't make it to the table in 24 hours you should probably mark yourself away for the period your away anyway.
I'm ambivalent on the one or two, and therefore have no real opinion.

But to the courtesy of marking one's self away, life changes all of the time and that will affect people's ability to play in a game that is going to take monthst to complete. I think one ought to extend the courtesy of marking themselves "away" when at all possible. I don't think the courtesy necessary, nor even strategically prudent to mark how long you anticipate you will away when you decide to leave. Committing that kind of information changes the dynamic of the table, most directly against you. Being away and losing opportunity, ante, blinds, and potentially real bets is punishment enough in itself, IMO.

User avatar
Inverarity
Posts: 2634
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:09 pm
Location: Oregon

Post by Inverarity »

Helluva job on this, Neal.

User avatar
Austin
Posts: 15192
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:49 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Contact:

Post by Austin »

The Meal wrote:
Austin wrote:
The Meal wrote:I have received your feedback regarding timeouts and reject it with a preference for the rule as currently written. Depending on how things work out, I may change it once we get into the game.
(See single table thread)
(See me enjoying brief breaks as they come up.)

~Neal
You can take breaks whenever you choose. You can do it independently, and not be dictated by when someone is away for 24 hours. ;) I'm not really arguing the point as it's your game and I'll play and have fun regardless. It can get boring waiting around for folks to make a move though. In a multi table one person could put a whole table weeks behind the rest of the pack.
Your ad here.

User avatar
The Meal
Posts: 26794
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
the_meal’s avatar
Loading…

Post by The Meal »

Austin wrote:I'm not really arguing the point
Thanks. If I see something is an issue, I'll step in to correct it. That said, I appreciate feedback from folks when they are and are not having fun with things.

~Neal

Post Reply