1

After the river card, I made a "semi" value bet (I'm way far from having the nuts but I'm still relatively good). The community cards have a lot of potentials which I'm not gonna mention here. I'm gonna also ignore the stack sizes and the way the hand went. My question is: Is it allowed (or will I receive a penalty) if I declared "I call you anyway" in a serious manner right after I placed my bet? Now you might wonder what would make me want to give away free information. Well, according to the strategy in mind, a couple of benefits can take place here:

  • My opponent might have a slightly better hand than mine. And in my view, my strange declaration (which I don't mind it to be binding) increases the changes for him to fold.
  • My opponent might have a better hand than mine. But my strange statement can make him call instead of raise, which will save me some chips.
  • Unlike what I mentioned in the beginning (I mentioned that I made a "semi' value bet), let's say that I made a total bluff. In this case, my weird statement increases the changes for my opponent to fold thus my bluff to work.
  • Finally, I might be bluffing and my opponent might think of bluffing back. My ironic statement can hold my opponent from making a counter bluff.

These could be the pros of my statement in question. I'm aware of so many possible cons, like my opponent has the nuts and makes a snap All-in after my "beforehand" call. I'm okay with that. But, is my action allowed, and is it considered officially binding? whether it's a cash game or a tournament.

  • This is confusing. Why would you say "I call you anyway" when he has not made a bet that you can call? I don't see how this could be binding in any way when there is no actual action in front of you that could correspond to your verbal declaration. – Chris Farmer Nov 3 '15 at 15:22
  • @ChrisFarmer You mean like this (made for TV?) hand? youtube.com/watch?v=erNjXtuKawU&t=8m36s – user1934 Dec 15 '15 at 1:47
  • @Michael Yep, just like that. Wow, Jamie Gold was a little irritating there, but I guess he saved himself a lot of money talking Farha into a check. – Chris Farmer Dec 15 '15 at 5:09
  • What a great straightforward example of the situation! If normal poker was as flexible as high stakes poker I wouldn't have had to post this question. – yazanpro Dec 15 '15 at 6:11
2

If you and your opponent are heads up, you can say something like "I'm not folding", which basically communicates the same thing (if you raise, I'm going to call), and avoids the rule stated above in Dr.Drfbaglll's post (you haven't stated any action, you are just stating what you won't do). If there are more players in the hand, you should not say anything about what you might or might not do, as it may affect the actions of other players sandwiched between the two of you (possibly to your detriment), which is why acting out of turn is bad. Once you are heads up, you are free to verbally psych out your opponent like that.

This applies for both tournament and cash.

  • I totally agree. Since my act is most likely not binding, I think with the right combination of words (on heads up), I'd likely achieve the same result while certainly avoiding getting the floor called on me. Whereas what I proposed -as Dr. DrfbagIII suggessted- could cost me a warning. – yazanpro Nov 4 '15 at 21:06
3

From Robert's Rules of Poker: "Deliberately acting out of turn will not be tolerated. A player who checks out of turn may not bet or raise on the next turn to act. A player who has called out of turn may not change his wager to a raise on the next turn to act. An action or verbal declaration out of turn is binding unless the action to that player is subsequently changed by a bet or raise. If there is an intervening call, an action may be ruled binding."

So I think that your call would be non-binding if the other player raises. However, I think it's in poor taste and you shouldn't be surprised if you receive a warning for doing it (deliberately acting out of turn).

  • call would be non-binding if the other player raises ... but that basically nullifies the blind call, because in this circumstance, other than raise, the other player can literally take no action for which a call would be a valid response! – user1934 Nov 4 '15 at 5:00
  • 1
    I don't think this quote really describes the OP's situation. The implication in the quoted rule is that there is some pending action, but that a player is acting too early to induce some behavior in the intervening opponents. In the OP's situation, he seems to be mouthing off in order to discourage the action in the first place. – Chris Farmer Nov 4 '15 at 15:13

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.