Betting question in a home group nl game |
|
Posted Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:36 pm GMT by maxxximus
I am in a small group that just started playing nl holdem. We all put in $10 and get chips to start and we play something like .20/.40 (the denominations are all relative anyway right?). We don't play "tournament" style. We just basically play poker to see how much money we can win from each other. Frequently, if I or someone else loses the initial $10 in chips, we'll take out another $5 or $10 and buy back in so we can keep on playing. Then if that is lost, another couple bills come out of the wallet and this continues as long as necessary. And sometimes if a big bet is made (like $10 - ha! you must think I'm crazy calling a $10 bet big!) and the caller has only $2 in chips, then he might say I'll call your $10 - and upon losing take the extra $8 cash out of his poket to pay the debt.
Sorry for the long set up, but here's the question: The other day a guy had like $2.25 left in chips, it was my bet and I bet $3 after the river. The other guy calls but is .75 short so he put all of his remaining chips in and called. I won the hand and he was out of the game. The other players said that basically if he had won, then I would get to take .75 back from the pot.
A few hands go by and then this player decides to buy back in and puts $7 down because he didn't want to watch any longer. Then this big controversy broke out when I asked him for the .75 from several hands ago. I turned to this forum for a ruling on this matter.
From my perspective, what if I was trying to bluff or bully by overbetting what he had left - let's say hypothetically that I was trying to bluff by betting $3. That means for him to call, he would need his $2.25 plus .75 But, if he didn't have the money to call, can he call with just the $2.25 under the assumption that if he wins, I would get the .75 returned to me and if he loses, he's tapped out?
Again, I can't see how someone can call such a bet with the house rules that we play with - and not expect to owe the .75 after he buys back in several hands later. Maybe tournament rules are different but we have not progressed to that level yet. Suggestions are welcome. Thanks.
| 0 FPPs Awarded at PokerStars | Starts in 60 minutes | | | Trey Nations King of the Table Qualifier Speed at PartyPoker | Starts in 1 hour, 5 minutes | | | Micro $50 Gntd at PacificPoker | Starts in 1 hour, 15 minutes | | | Regular at PartyPoker | Starts in 1 hour, 30 minutes | | | Australian Poker League 17 at PacificPoker | Starts in 1 hour, 60 minutes | | | $200 Guaranteed Daily Turbo Free Roll NL Hold'em at EmpirePoker | Starts in 1 hour, 60 minutes | | | $100,000 Deep Stack Challenge Super-Satellite at PacificPoker | Starts in 2 hours, 15 minutes | | | KTT: Super Satellite Saturday Qualifier Speed Rebuy 6 Seats Gtd at PartyPoker | Starts in 2 hours, 50 minutes | | | KTT: Super Satellite Saturday Qualifier Speed Rebuy 6 Seats Gtd at PartyPoker | Starts in 2 hours, 50 minutes | | | 10 PP King of the Table Special Qualifier Turbo at PartyPoker | Starts in 3 hours, 25 minutes | | Show all upcoming online poker freerolls |
|
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:05 am GMT by maxxximus
With the "house rules" you play with, No Limit really means No Limit. In a tournament setting, No Limit basically still has a limit due to the total number of chips that were bought into. Right? Example: There are three players left in a tournament and player1 has $1000, player2 $50, player3 $3000. Player1 bets $400, player2 calls with his $50, player3 calls - if player2 wins, he only wins the equivallent of his bet from the others and if he loses he's out of the tournament - That's his loss but he doesn't have to go to the cash machine to give the winner of that hand the remaining money. The key is that he can not get back into the tournament - he's out and finished.
The lesson to be learned here is that if you are chip leader and head to head with someone with limited funds, the most you are going to be able to bet is whatever he has left. Bluffing with a much higher bet is unnecessary - in tournament play - BUT, if you are in a true backyard, home rules, No Limit game, then the sky is the limit for betting and if someone is going to call your bet, they will most definitely be expected to cover it no matter if it's .75 or $1000 higher than what they have in chips in front of them.
Unfortunately, there is not enough structure to your "home rules" game and it sounds like you and your friends are combining some rules from tournament style games with some rules of your own. There are several reasons why the tournament style exists and why it is so popular today. The main reason is similar to what you are experiencing. The rules are set in place to level the playing field and prevent "high rollers" from being able to take advantage of the average Joe by pushing a big bankroll around. In your game, at any point a guy could bet $10,000. If no one has the nerve or the cash to call, that guy could win every hand by the same method. (That's why "limit" betting started also).
So the first question: Is your maximum bet limited to the chip total you have in front of you or the amount of cash in your wallet? bank account? and if so, if another player has less chips, is he calling your full bet? or just the portion of the bet that he can with his chips? or just the portion that he can match with what's in his bank account? Are you seeing where the problem lies here? There needs to be a clearly definable line which can not be crossed. You either play to knock other players out by gaining their chips, or you go after their bank account and their first born male child. Although your seemingly harmless "house rules" game is only .20/.40, as long as there truely is No Limit, the first born child is up for grabs.
What similar groups have done to counteract this bulleying by the "high rollers" of the world is to set buy-in limits, make time limits, and yes, limit the betting to the chips you have in front of you. Kind of silly to call it No Limit poker with all of the limits put on it huh? However, the object of the game changes. Instead of trying to win as much of your friend's money as you can, you are now trying to win as many chips as you can. If you succeed in winning all of the chips in the end - you win all of the money (this is a tournament). Another way is to set a time limit and at the end of the alotted time, the chips are paid out individually OR the chip leader is the tournament leader and gets all of the money.
Once you buy-in, you are in untill you lose all of your chips. Some groups offer the option for a second buy-in for a pre-determined amount. But setting a buy-in limit will also limit the amount that you will be able to call on any particular bet. If you have $30 left and you're out of buy-ins and you are playing against someone with lots of chips, then any bet you call that's over $30 you will be limiting your potential win to $30 per caller but more imprortantly you risk being eliminated from further play that night with a loss. On the flip side, the "bulley" will also be limiting his potential win to whatever you have left to gamble - which also limits his ability to bluff by pushing around a higher bankroll. ***This can only happen, and must happen, when the player with less chips CAN NOT reach into his pocket for another buy-in. He has to know that by calling a larger bet, his ultimate loss is the inability to play any more that night. A better way to describe it is to call it a "Loss Limit".
To make a long explaination short, if you set a Loss Limit (an amount of money that each player can not lose more than on any given night) then all of your other "house rules" will work out. The tournament buy-ins are essentially Loss Limits.
Example: Player1, who makes the big bet against Player2 who is almost at their loss limit, will know, by rule, that Player2 can call ANY bet but will only be able to win whatever he has in chips. And if Player2 loses, he is not allowed to play anymore that night no matter how much cash he has in his wallet.
Posted Tue Feb 15, 2005 10:49 am GMT by Ensano
i may be able to offer some advice.. i play a home game like you.. it's just a (cash) game.. everyone buys in for $10 and if you lose that you can buy more chips.. but we do impose one house rule.. it's the same as pretty much any casino you'll find.. you can only play a hand with the chips you have sitting in front of you.. it the chip leader goes all in.. you can call using only the amount of chips you have.. if that's 20 cents then thats it.. the chip leader doesn't have to risk any more than that.. if there's other people in then they're a side pot for them.. a lot of people play where you can use cash out of your pocket.. if you wanna play that way thats fine.. I don't like that way cause there's no way of enforcing anything.. like say he's not too sure of his hand.. and you go all in.. well he's not going to go into his pocket if he doesn't think he's beaten you.. but then say the next hand he's got a royal flush... next thing you know he's got his entire bank account on the table... there's no control of how much money each person has.. so i would suggest usin only what you have at the table at the beginning of the hand (meaning they have to buy their chips before the next hand starts if they want to be able to use them).. if you really want to be able to use cash.. then you should set a rule that before the hands are flipped over you can declare how much you're calling with (ex.. guy bets 10 000$... you only have 20$ to call with.. he wins.. you only pay the 20$ you had)
Posted Tue Feb 15, 2005 3:15 pm GMT by maxxximus
Thanks for the reply. I like your idea about only using the chips you have in front of you for any particular hand. That certainly prevents someone from digging into their wallet with a straight flush. The only downside is that the person with the small amount of chips can call with a very little amount to lose and if the other guy had been bluffing and trying to get others to fold, a large bet would not scare off the person with only a little to lose - especially knowing that he could reach into his pocket and re buy-in the very next hand. For some reason I just can't get past that fact. There has to be some other penalty for the guy who can not stake the big bet but wants to call the hand. That's why I suggested a max. loss amount - and after that loss amount, no more buy-ins.
Posted Tue Feb 15, 2005 3:45 pm GMT by Ensano
yeah... that is kinda a downside... but you just have to learn how to both play short shack and against it... it's just another strategy you have to learn.. obviously the player who has only 3 chips left doesn't have much to lose... but also doesn't have much to win.. and i've certainly seen people go all in on the short stack and only win 1.50$... THAT'S their penalty for not buying more chips.. they can't win much if they do catch a hand.. try it and i'm sure people will rebuy well before they become that disadvantaged...
|
|
