智游城

标题: 请教一个关于牌桌规则的问题 [打印本页]

作者: daniel 时间: 2016-4-27 16:22
标题: 请教一个关于牌桌规则的问题
我跟一位玩家单挑，turn上我击中顶对带抽花，对手下注2000，后手剩余800，我放了3000进去但没说all in。
荷官只算我call，说我的下注没有构成raise，叫来了floor，判我这手牌只能算call，河牌出花，对手check，我all in，对手丢。

那么请问一下，在这种情况下，具体应该怎么算。

作者: Howard 时间: 2016-4-28 00:41
旧文重温。当时在微信也是很多人讨论。没空翻译了，凑合看吧

好像没回答楼主的问题，汗！

THE MOST-MISUNDERSTOOD POKER RULE – NLHE “INCOMPLETE RAISE ALL-IN”

Today we’re going to learn about what has to be one of the most misunderstood no-limit hold-em (NLHE) poker rules: what happens when someone goes all-in for an amount that is more than the current bet, but is not enough to be a full legal raise.

Example 1: Blinds are 100/200. UTG goes all-in for 325. UTG+1 wants to raise. What is the minimum UTG can bet (as a raise)?

The answer, except possibly in some European jurisdictions, is: 525.

You don’t have to take my word for it, you can get an answer from Matt Savage – one of the founders of the TDA (Tournament Directors Association) and a well-known WPT event runner (e.g., Bay101 Shooting Star). Here’s his answer:

https://twitter.com/savagepoker/status/350532051507752960

Matt SavageVerified account ‏@SavagePoker
RT @RobertLipkin: 100-200 blinds NL utg is allin for 325. folds to cutoff n he makes it 425. Is this a valid raise? Or must it be 525?<~525

Ok so how does this work?

In NLHE a legal raise must be equal to or greater than the previous RAISE amount (except in some European card rooms, more about this later). And, of course, it must be at least equal to the big blind amount. So at blinds 100/200 if UTG makes it 450, that is a raise of 250. The next legal raise would be 250 more than the current bet. In that case the next legal raise would be 450+250 = 700.

In our all-in example the UTG all-in is not a legal raise because it is only 125. The minimum raise amount in that spot is 200 – the big blind. An all-in is the only time such an incomplete-raise is legal in NLHE. The best way to understand how this incomplete raise works is to treat it as “a call, plus extra”. The all-in of 325 in this case is a call of the 200 big blind, plus 125 “extra”. That extra amount has no effect on game-play, except that it must be included (added into) all subsequent bets. So to arrive at the correct answer first ignore the extra, then compute the legal raise amount, then add the “extra” on to that.

Back to our example: Blinds 100/200, UTG goes all-in for 325. The “call plus extra” rule tells us that this is a call of 200 plus 125 extra. We can compute the next legal raise by pretending the all-in player simply called 200 and then figuring out the next legal minimum raise – which would be a raise of 200 to a total of 400 – and then adding the extra back in. 400 + 125 = 525. That is the next legal minimum raise.

This “call plus extra” rule also helps you understand whether or not betting is reopened by an incomplete all-in raise. Here’s another example. Blinds 100/200. UTG makes it 500. That is a raise of 300. UTG+1 goes all-in for 750, which of course is only 250 more than the 500. Button calls 750. Folds back to UTG. Can UTG raise?

Use the “call plus extra” rule. The UTG+1 all-in of 750 is a call of the 500 bet with 250 extra. It’s not a legal raise because the minimum raise at that point would have been 300 over the 500 (800 total).

Therefore when it gets back to UTG, UTG is NOT facing a raise. All that has happened by the “call plus extra” rule is two calls: UTG+1 called and the button called. And there is the 250 “extra” which is ignored as far as the game-play rules but of course must always be added into the final bets. Since no one has raised UTG’s original bet, UTG cannot reraise at this point. All he can do is call the extra 250 or fold.

Anytime you are confused by an incomplete partial-raise all-in, figure out what the answer would be if the all-in player had only called. That will give you the correct answer as to how the game play rules work (i.e., can other players raise), and don’t forget to add the “extra” back in after you arrive at your “what if he just called” answer.

Note of course that anyone after UTG+1 can still raise (except for UTG). The incomplete all-in raise certainly does not take away any subsequent player’s innate right to raise. If UTG+1 simply called 500, certainly the button could raise. When UTG+1 goes all-in for 750 (still just a “call, plus 250 extra”) this doesn’t somehow magically cap the button’s inherent options (sometimes you’ll find rooms where they make this terrible mistake too). The button can still raise at that point. Homework: compute what the button’s minimum raise would be at that point. Use the “call plus extra” rule to handle the UTG+1 bet of 750.

If you remember nothing else from this note, just remember: “call plus extra” and you’ll always get the right answer.

One place that players and sometimes tournament directors get confused is the 50% rule. You’ll hear this a lot: “UTG can raise (after the 750 all in) because the incomplete raise (250) is more than half of a legal raise” (300, or half being 150). This is wrong. This is always, unconditionally, wrong. There is no “half the raise” rule in NLHE except for when people make mistakes. What does that mean? Here’s an example.

Blinds 100/200. UTG throws out three 100 chips without saying anything, attempting to raise to 300 (in this example UTG is not all-in). Perhaps the blinds just went up and UTG forgot, and so his raise to 300 is illegal now. This is the only type of situation where the 50% rule applies. UTG’s illegal bet is 50% of a legal raise. It’s 100 more than the BB, but it needed to be at least 200 more. In this case, UTG will be forced to make a minimum raise – to 400 – because his illegal action is 50% of a legal raise.

That 50% rule only applies in this illegal raise situation. It’s how we decide what you will be forced to do (call or raise) when you make an in-between illegal action. The 50% rule has no bearing on legal all-in bets.

Loose ends: the answer to the homework question is 1050. UTG made it 500, which is a raise of 300. Without the incomplete all-in raise to 750, the next legal raise would be 800 (another 300 over the 500). But we have that pesky all-in of 750, which is a call of 500 plus 250 “extra”. So for subsequent players the next legal raise has to include that extra amount. Therefore the next legal raise is 1050: 800 plus the 250 extra.

Finally Europe. I’m told that in France (I think; I’m not sure specifically where this applies) they use different rules entirely for minimum bet sizes, forcing all bets to be at least double the previous bet. So, blinds 100/200, UTG makes it 500. The next player in those type of card rooms has to make it at least 1000 (vs 800 everywhere else on the planet). I have no idea how those card rooms treat the incomplete all-in raise situation. But any place in the US that plays by “standard” rules (and especially TDA rules) will operate as described in this note. Or should operate that way, if the Floor knows the actual rules (which, sadly, isn’t always the case).

作者: Howard 时间: 2016-4-28 00:47
依我所见，楼主的情况属于上文说的 “下注额错误，需要应用50% rule”的情况，而楼主的3000，恰好刚刚满足50% of previous raise (or bet)，因此应该被视为raise，楼主应该被强制raise 到4000。然后，敌人allin 800或者选择fold。

如果楼主放进去2990，而不是3000，则应视为call。990被退回。

作者: 闷闷 时间: 2016-4-28 03:40

Howard 发表于 2016-4-28 00:47
依我所见，楼主的情况属于上文说的 “下注额错误，需要应用50% rule”的情况，而楼主的3000，恰好刚刚满足5 ...

请教霍师傅，50% rule是世界通用还是依据赌场自己的规则

作者: daniel 时间: 2016-4-28 09:09

Howard 发表于 2016-4-28 00:47
依我所见，楼主的情况属于上文说的 “下注额错误，需要应用50% rule”的情况，而楼主的3000，恰好刚刚满足5 ...

感谢霍师傅，也就说，对手下注，我的加注不需要是两倍，只需要是超过1.5倍即可认为是rasie（即使不小心放错），如果对手后手筹码足够多，我这里是否只能补齐到2倍，而不能更多

但牌例里的这手牌，对手的后手筹码+下注筹码是小于我的下注量的，为什么这里不能认为我的下注是all in呢，我根本没必要推出更多的筹码来执行allin这个动作，这里的3000已经足够cover对手了。

作者: amandag 时间: 2016-4-28 11:01

daniel 发表于 2016-4-28 09:09
感谢霍师傅，也就说，对手下注，我的加注不需要是两倍，只需要是超过1.5倍即可认为是rasie（即使不小心放 ...

你的raise打对方allin

作者: muyir 时间: 2016-4-28 13:30
我这边赌场规则跟火化一致，达到50%即强制加另外50%达成mini raise

作者: July 时间: 2016-4-28 13:44
每个赌场规则都不一样。而且我们这边还经常出现不同pit不同规则的情况。所以，只能自己没用漏洞。

作者: daniel 时间: 2016-4-28 13:56

muyir 发表于 2016-4-28 13:30
我这边赌场规则跟火化一致，达到50%即强制加另外50%达成mini raise

这个我理解，正常情况都是这样，会强制补齐到rasie额度。
我这手牌的问题是，对手的后手筹码没有那么多，我的加注已经cover对手了，我还必须推出自己筹码或者说allin才算吗？

作者: daniel 时间: 2016-4-28 13:56

July 发表于 2016-4-28 13:44
每个赌场规则都不一样。而且我们这边还经常出现不同pit不同规则的情况。所以，只能自己没用漏洞。 ...

嗯，还是规范自己比较好，这个是正解

作者: muyir 时间: 2016-4-28 14:34

daniel 发表于 2016-4-28 13:56
这个我理解，正常情况都是这样，会强制补齐到rasie额度。
我这手牌的问题是，对手的后手筹码没有那么多， ...

这根对手有多少筹码没有关系，只要你推出筹码大于等于1.5倍下注，就是等同于mini raise

作者: daniel 时间: 2016-4-28 14:57

muyir 发表于 2016-4-28 14:34
这根对手有多少筹码没有关系，只要你推出筹码大于等于1.5倍下注，就是等同于mini raise
...

作者: unlimitspeed 时间: 2016-4-28 22:10
通常是50% rule。但有些赌场有自己的rule比如我所在的matrix。所以各有不同，floor说是跟注也是有道理的。

作者: 三脚架 时间: 2016-4-28 23:23
多数情况真的要注意比如 flop Hero cbet 25BB 对手 x-r到80BB 这个时候hero推出90BB dealer 刷刷刷就把turn 和river 发了然后对手可以说你只是call而不是all in....我是习惯性加注／all in是不说话的有一次吃过这个亏还在对手比较礼貌补齐了10BB 所以这样的情况还是说话比较好毕竟口头的action是最大的

作者: daniel 时间: 2016-4-29 08:54

三脚架发表于 2016-4-28 23:23
多数情况真的要注意比如 flop Hero cbet 25BB 对手 x-r到80BB 这个时候hero推出90BB dealer 刷刷刷就把tur ...

第一次遇到这种情况，毕竟极少有玩家会bet很大注码，只留下少量筹码在手里（有习惯留一个最小筹码在手里的不算）

我当时以为扔出cover对手的筹码就算是allin了，对手的架势应该也是要跟我打光的，没想到对手居然是在用这种方式bluff我，争了半天不愿意把余下的筹码放进去。

还是应该按标准动作来，要么说出allin，要么放出相对应数量的筹码，避免这种事情再发生。

作者: youus 时间: 2016-4-29 10:23
如果希望再加注（包括至ALL IN），而所需最小加注额的50%已经大于对手的剩余筹码，达成再加注的目的，确保不会发生歧义的动作：
1、口头声明再加注；
2、推出最小加注额以上筹码。

口头声明，说明自己意图，总是不会犯错的。

作者: youus 时间: 2016-4-29 10:28
还有一些要注意的一个筹码的情况，以现金桌25/50为例：

1、小盲位置放入一个100的筹码为call；
2、大盲位置拿回50的筹码再放入一个100的筹码为加注到100；
3、只放入一个筹码为bet，如不足一个大盲，补齐到一个大盲；
4、面对对手bet，放入一个筹码为call，而不同于锦标赛的all in；
5、声明all in后放入一个筹码，all in有效。

欢迎光临智游城 (http://zhiyoucheng.co/)