6

After reading the following links about raising after an all-in in NLHE, there was still a scenario I wasn't sure about when multiple all-ins occur.

Links:
https://poker.stackexchange.com/a/2790/3387
https://poker.stackexchange.com/a/4109
THE MOST-MISUNDERSTOOD POKER RULE – NLHE “INCOMPLETE RAISE ALL-IN”

In the scenario:

Mike    blind   10
Luke    blind   20
John    AllIn   35      Called 20 + 15 extra
Pete    ...
Bill

Pete's legal raise here would be 55: call(20) + raise amount(20) + extra(15)

If Pete though only had 45 chips and pushed all-in

Mike    blind   10
Luke    blind   20
John    AllIn   35      Called 20 + 15 extra
Pete    AllIn   45
Bill    ...

If Bill wanted to raise, what would the next legal raise be?

Was Pete's 'AllIn' considered a raise because it is now more than the previous complete raise/bet(20) plus the legal raise amount(20)? If so, the new raise amount would be 25 and the next raise would need to be at least 70.

Alternative, is it NOT considered a raise because it was less than the min raise amount (only 10) above the previous all-in. Therefore, min raise amount remains 20, and the next raise would need to be at least 65.

Or, am I missing something and the answer is something else?

  • I think you answer your own question and the accepted answer is wrong. You say Petes legal raise would be 55, but hes all in 45, so its not a legal raise. The next raise should match 45+20=65. – Fernando Jul 14 '15 at 3:57
3

Common rules: The initial bet was the $20 big blind. John's $35 all-in does not constitute a raise, and so does not affect the action. Pete's $45 all-in is the first raise. The next raise would have to be $70.

There are a few places I've been with a house rule that an all-in of more than half the proper amount does constitute a raise, and so in one of those places the $35 would be the first raise, the the $45 would not be, making the next legal raise $55 ($35 + minimum $20). This is NOT the standard rule, and such places should be encouraged to change.

  • I thought Pete 45 matches 35+10, so is not a full raise. The next minraise would match 45+20 making 65...Are you sure its 70? – Fernando Jul 14 '15 at 3:12
  • Because the $35 is not a complete raise, it's treated like just a call, with extra money. So the next bet of $45 is actually the first raise of the BB's 20. The second raise must be 20 + 25 + 25. – Lee Daniel Crocker Jul 14 '15 at 3:30
  • I understand that, but the guy who bets 45 is himself matching the 35 bet with an incomplete raise of 10. So the valid raise still 20. The third link in the question seems to back this reasoning ( the homework part). – Fernando Jul 14 '15 at 4:24
  • There is no $35 bet. There's a $20 blind, a $20 cs – Lee Daniel Crocker Jul 14 '15 at 4:41
  • There is no $35 bet. There's a $20 blind, a $20 (with some extra money) and a FIRST raise of the $20 to $45. The extra $15 on the first CALL does not affect the action. – Lee Daniel Crocker Jul 14 '15 at 4:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.