Rule #29: Reconsidering Action Out of Turn... binding or not?

[Martin L. Waller]

Everyone, I have a new pet peeve.

It's the last half of rule # 29, "Action out of turn will be binding if the action to that player has not changed."

I've seen too many players use this rule against us, players dealers and TDs.
It's a way of taking a shot and manipulating the action.
For example, a player raises out of turn to slow down a player in front of him raising.
Or, making a raise out of turn knowing that the action will change and he will be able to pull them back when it is his turn to act.

If a player does this often we can penalize him but that's about all.

Is changing the rule the only way to stop this?
Would it be more beneficial to have the action stand?
Would that make players pay better attention to the game and quit playing with their MP3s?
Or, would players begin to try to slow down and hide their cards to encourage out of turn action by other players?

Any ideas?

Good game to you,
Martin

[Nick C]

Hello Martin,
I've been working on this rule for some time, see how you like this.


RULE # 29    VERBAL DECLARATIONS / ACTING IN TURN

29.1   Players must act in turn. Verbal declarations in turn will have precedence over actions or gestures. Therefore a player stating a wager, but pushing a different amount into the pot, will be corrected to the spoken amount.

29.2    Players acting out of turn because they were misled by another player, or the dealer, will have the right to retract their wager and change their action provided another player has not acted after them. If another player acts, (substantial action) the skipped player or players may only fold or call when action returns to them, they can not raise.

29.3    Deliberate action out of turn, including words and gestures, WILL BE AS BINDING AS A BET IN TURN.. The deliberate action out of turn will remain in the pot even if the intervening player raises in front of them. The out of turn player can call, or surrender their bet and fold. The option to raise will be taken away.

29.4    Any out of turn action may seriously disrupt to flow of the game. Deliberate action out of turn is highly unethical in any form of poker. Therefore, repeat offenders will be penalized up to, and including being eliminated from tournament play, at the discretion of the floor.
Nick C


I really think many of the problems stem from weak wording...like...if you do this we might do something about it! I think the rules should be overstated at times, just so we can show how serious we are. Then, I think, a floorman can show them the written rule, explain the seriousness of their infraction and issue one warning. That should get the message across and justify any action taken by the floor for a repeat offense

Thanks

[Martin L. Waller]

Nick,

I think this is the right direction. The words "can" and "may" gives the TD an opportunity to make a call in the best interest of the game but also allows for side stepping an issue at hand. The TDs need the backbone to enforce the rules and the rules should help back them up.

I strongly agree that a player betting or raising out of turn should not have the choice of taking his wager back. That's what started my obsession with this rule. The term "action changed" just got to me when it was used against another player.

I believe this would also force players to pay attention and to quit playing with their iPods.

In 29.2 are you saying that when a player acts out of turn and there is action after him the skipped player has no action option until the rest of the table has acted? That sounds like a smooth flow but it also means the skipped player's opportunity to act was taken form him.

29.3 really should make players quit taking a shot and play like gentlemen.

Thanks for your input. I hope this is a subject for next year's summit.

Good games to you,
Martin

[Nick C]

Martin,

29.2 could probably use a little fine tuning but, what I am trying to do is stop a player from "sandbagging" and sitting back and DELIBERATELY allowing the action to go past them. The dealer should always know how many players and who the players are that have live cards in a hand but, players have a responsibility to the dealer and the other players to speak up if the dealer or another player skips them.

Thanks Martin....more input is welcome.
Nick C