I was kicked out of pub poker game!

[JMACK007]

fold out of turn is that not like betting out of turn? still stands. ~ : { >

But the "bet out of turn" rule also allows the bet to be taken back if someone before you raises, so even then, the bet only stands if circumstances allow it to...

[warboat]

**I'll admit I got stacks confused between BB & BTN earlier.

I must say, I am lucky to play most of my poker with two of SA's best TDs, Russ Learmonth & Steve Pope. Steve actually has a copy of the international rules with him at all games, and I have seen him produce it on many occasions. There is no way that either of these guys would allow this situation to occur.

I also have the TDA rules with me every time I play, either on my 5" Dell Streak or my mobile phone. I have it in PDF and TXT format.
On that Friday night, I had both the Dell Streak and my mobile phone in my pocket. I had TWO copies of the rules!

[666HARPS666]

fold out of turn is that not like betting out of turn? still stands. ~ : { >

But the "bet out of turn" rule also allows the bet to be taken back if someone before you raises, so even then, the bet only stands if circumstances allow it to...

I thought If it was re-raised the player would have to call or re-raise? I am not sure about that Jo.

[Caleb]

The rule in question is when the BB is last to act. He was not last to act in this scenario.

Does that change anything?

I don't think so, as allowing that situation to take place clears the way for collusion. If it wasn't the last hand of the tourney, then clearly the BB would be sat out for a period of time, but the hand would have to run out first....

I disagree here. If collusion is a concern cards may be rolled, but only to verify a collusion attempt. Cards are still mucked. And yes BB would be sat out as a penalty.

And considering this is the first tournament I've ever heard of that ended without someone being knocked out on the final hand (i.e. this situation is the final hand of play), I don't mind that it's a different interpretation.

The fact that BB's fold isn't the final action means that the "all-in situation" as you call it never occurs therefore his hand should stay mucked. Check for collusion if you wish, warning, penalty and move on.

[JMACK007]

fold out of turn is that not like betting out of turn? still stands. ~ : { >

But the "bet out of turn" rule also allows the bet to be taken back if someone before you raises, so even then, the bet only stands if circumstances allow it to...

But then doesn't the player have to call or re-raise? I am not sure about that Jo.

No mate, the player can take their chips back in that situation, but might get a sit out penalty.

[Caleb]

I also have the TDA rules with me every time I play, either on my 5" Dell Streak or my mobile phone. I have it in PDF and TXT format.
On that Friday night, I had both the Dell Streak and my mobile phone in my pocket. I had TWO copies of the rules!

What this thread is proving beyond anything else is:

There is a MASSIVE difference between reading the rules, and knowing how to interpret and enforce the rules.

[JMACK007]

I disagree here. If collusion is a concern cards may be rolled, but only to verify a collusion attempt. Cards are still mucked. And yes BB would be sat out as a penalty.

And considering this is the first tournament I've ever heard of that ended without someone being knocked out on the final hand (i.e. this situation is the final hand of play), I don't mind that it's a different interpretation.

The fact that BB's fold isn't the final action means that the "all-in situation" as you call it never occurs therefore his hand should stay mucked. Check for collusion if you wish, warning, penalty and move on.

Then, in your interpretation, shouldn't the SB go up against the BTN considering he also has enough chips in to cover the allin??

[Caleb]

I disagree here. If collusion is a concern cards may be rolled, but only to verify a collusion attempt. Cards are still mucked. And yes BB would be sat out as a penalty.

And considering this is the first tournament I've ever heard of that ended without someone being knocked out on the final hand (i.e. this situation is the final hand of play), I don't mind that it's a different interpretation.

The fact that BB's fold isn't the final action means that the "all-in situation" as you call it never occurs therefore his hand should stay mucked. Check for collusion if you wish, warning, penalty and move on.

Then, in your interpretation, shouldn't the SB go up against the BTN considering he also has enough chips in to cover the allin??

If the all-in has less than the SB, yes.

But in Ernie's situation the all-in is an amount in between SB and BB. So as horrible as it is, SB can fold just fine.

[JMACK007]

If the all-in has less than the SB, yes.

But in Ernie's situation the all-in is an amount in between SB and BB. So as horrible as it is, SB can fold just fine.

Sorry mate, but that is incorrect as Ernie said that the SB was awarded a side pot, which means he had the allin covered...

so ok utg wins his amount from both sb and bb, sb wins his side pot and change given to bb...

[Caleb]

Sorry mate, but that is incorrect as Ernie said that the SB was awarded a side pot, which means he had the allin covered...

You are correct. Don't know how I missed that. My apologies.

Then my interpretation is that as last live player SB should've been shown regardless.