I was recently involved in some dialogue with a small group of tournament directors and players about an interesting decision. At first glance, it appeared to be a complex situation with several possible "correct" decisions, but after some thought, I realized that it wasn't difficult at all. After identifying the correct decision, what I found very interesting was the decisions that two players had to make once the rules decision was made.
The setting is a no-limit hold'em tournament with $100-$200 blinds. The player in first position calls the big blind of $200, the player directly behind him calls, as well, and then everyone folds around to the button, who moves all in for $5,000. The small and big blinds both fold, at which point the raiser mucks his hand, thinking that everyone folded. He quickly realizes his mistake, and the floorperson is called to the table to make a decision. For a floorperson, this would not be a quick or easy decision to make. All of the information available would have to be processed, and the dealer's perspective would be important. In this case, there is a player who has made a huge raise and now has no cards. The problem is, there are two players who have folded because of that raise and two players who are yet to act. In my discussions with some of my colleagues, one of the initial reactions was that the raiser would have to get his bet back, but that was quickly ruled out. How could a player be given back his raise that has been acted upon by the blinds? That wasn't an option. Another option would have been to try to retrieve the hand, but there is no reason to make an extra effort just because of the size of the bet. If the hand was mucked, it has to stay there. Ultimately, the player is responsible for protecting his hand and his interest in the pot, and in this case, the raiser made a very costly mistake; he put all of his chips into the pot and then mucked his hand when there was action still pending. Unfortunately, the only decision to make is that his raise must stand, and the hand must be completed. The two players left with cards will have to fold, call the $5,000 all-in bet, or reraise. Of course, the second player to act has a huge advantage, which is where the interesting decisions by the players come into play.
The first player to act is in a very precarious position. He is staring at an uncontested $5,000 all-in bet, and all he has to do is get the player behind him to fold. Both players have less than $5,000, so a raise to force the other player out isn't possible. Instead of a bet to force the other player out, the actions and demeanor of the first player probably would determine the outcome. If the first player hems and haws, trying to decide what to do, and weighs his options, the second player could call with a very large range of hands. But if the first player acts quickly and decisively, he can appear as though he had a big hand in first position to start with. If the first player folds, he is handing the pot to the second player. If the first player calls, the second player is then faced with another interesting decision. The whole thing is definitely interesting, and I wish I could have seen this situation play out, but all I have is the details of the decision itself!
On a different note, the Tournament Directors Association continues to work on standardizing rules for poker tournaments throughout the industry. Although this is great for tournament poker, there is not really much being done for cash games, and that's too bad. The problem with cash-game rules is becoming even more complicated because rules of tournaments, which players see more and more on TV, are starting to find their way into cash-game rules. There are many rules that are designed specifically for tournaments that don't make sense in cash games, but poker rooms are slowly starting to blur that line in favor of standardized rules across cash games and tournaments. Here's a word of advice to all players: Make sure that you understand the rules of the poker room where you play, or you could end up making a mistake that will be very costly.
Mike O'Malley is a consultant for www.PartyGaming.com, and can be reached at [email protected]. His website is updated regularly at www.rzitup.com.
