betting/all in
6 posts
• Page 1 of 1
betting/all in
I'm going to have an 8 player game of NL. Everyone pays $25, player with the most chips wins $200 after time limit. I like the idea of "all in" so a player can double up a small stack. I don't want to get into side pots etc. Two questions:
1. If the pot has some value to it after the turn, what is stopping the player with the most chips from betting more than remaing players have to force them out of the hand?
2. This may be the same queston. 3 players left in the hand - A with $200, B $100 and C$75. If player A goes all in is the value of the bet become $75, the amount left of the lowest player?
Thanks
duke
1. If the pot has some value to it after the turn, what is stopping the player with the most chips from betting more than remaing players have to force them out of the hand?
2. This may be the same queston. 3 players left in the hand - A with $200, B $100 and C$75. If player A goes all in is the value of the bet become $75, the amount left of the lowest player?
Thanks
duke
- duke
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2003 8:47 pm GMT
- Location: Canada
I think that if player A goes all in then player B can call with his $100 to double his $100 to $200 (or win 275 if C calls as well). And player C can call (putting up his/her $75 to double up to $150 (or triple up to 225 if both A and B call as well).
If both called these are the possible scenarios.
A in for 200
B in for 100
C in for 75
There are three pots.
pot 1:
A in for 75
B in for 75
C in for 75
pot 2:
A in for 25
B in for 25
pot 3
A in for 100
if A wins the hand, he gets pots 1, 2 and 3:
A gets ALL CHIPS
if B wins the hand, he gets pots 1 and 2:
B gets 275 (his 100 back, A's 100 and C's 75)
A gets 100 back from pot 3
if C wins, he gets pot 1:
C gets 225 (his 75 back, 75 from B and 75 from A)
Then pot 2 is given to the holder of the best 5 cards between player A and B (second winner, that person gets pot 2 = 50)
and finally if C wins, player A gets his 100 back from pot 3.
I hope i explained it correctly and in a way that you (and hopefully I) understand.
So basically if you are bet more than you have, all you can do is fold or call. If you call it means you're betting your chips to theirs. Just because someone with more TC bets more than your TC stack, doesn't mean you can't stay in to win. You can win, but you can only win back as much as you put in (from each player remaining).
If both called these are the possible scenarios.
A in for 200
B in for 100
C in for 75
There are three pots.
pot 1:
A in for 75
B in for 75
C in for 75
pot 2:
A in for 25
B in for 25
pot 3
A in for 100
if A wins the hand, he gets pots 1, 2 and 3:
A gets ALL CHIPS
if B wins the hand, he gets pots 1 and 2:
B gets 275 (his 100 back, A's 100 and C's 75)
A gets 100 back from pot 3
if C wins, he gets pot 1:
C gets 225 (his 75 back, 75 from B and 75 from A)
Then pot 2 is given to the holder of the best 5 cards between player A and B (second winner, that person gets pot 2 = 50)
and finally if C wins, player A gets his 100 back from pot 3.
I hope i explained it correctly and in a way that you (and hopefully I) understand.
So basically if you are bet more than you have, all you can do is fold or call. If you call it means you're betting your chips to theirs. Just because someone with more TC bets more than your TC stack, doesn't mean you can't stay in to win. You can win, but you can only win back as much as you put in (from each player remaining).
- schrek
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 6:06 pm GMT
- Location: Boston, MA
Sorry i got off on a tangent and didn't directly answer the questions:
Nothing is stopping them from betting what the other players have left to force them out. If those players bet a lot to begin with and are still in it at that point, then they better have good cards... That's NL poker.
No, there must be side pots. In this case 1 being the size of the smallest bet. And 1 for the size of the remaining bet of player B. Pot 3 is just there because technically player A went all in (actually placed his/her chips into the center of the table. Even though he'll get them back NO MATTER WHAT, its still there for the big effect of saying "I'M ALL IN!". So the first pot is for 75 each. The second pot is for 25 from each A and B. And pot 3 is simply the rest of player A's money.
1. If the pot has some value to it after the turn, what is stopping the player with the most chips from betting more than remaing players have to force them out of the hand?
Nothing is stopping them from betting what the other players have left to force them out. If those players bet a lot to begin with and are still in it at that point, then they better have good cards... That's NL poker.
2. This may be the same queston. 3 players left in the hand - A with $200, B $100 and C$75. If player A goes all in is the value of the bet become $75, the amount left of the lowest player?
No, there must be side pots. In this case 1 being the size of the smallest bet. And 1 for the size of the remaining bet of player B. Pot 3 is just there because technically player A went all in (actually placed his/her chips into the center of the table. Even though he'll get them back NO MATTER WHAT, its still there for the big effect of saying "I'M ALL IN!". So the first pot is for 75 each. The second pot is for 25 from each A and B. And pot 3 is simply the rest of player A's money.
- schrek
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 6:06 pm GMT
- Location: Boston, MA
I would reiterate what Schrek said - you HAVE to play side pots. If you don't a player with a big stack gets penalised.
For example if player A has 100 tc, B has 1000 and C has 3000 and player A goes all in before the flop, C HAS to have the option of setting player B all in otherwise B can limp in by calling A's all in with, say, suited connectors knowing that, despite his huge chip advantage, player C cannot pressurize his position. If you disallow side pots then you effectively give any drawing hand free cards all the way to the river when normally the big stack would make them pay for the cards.
When we were starting out on home games we disallowed side pots because none of us quite knew how they worked. Since we learned how to manage them our games have been far better.
For example if player A has 100 tc, B has 1000 and C has 3000 and player A goes all in before the flop, C HAS to have the option of setting player B all in otherwise B can limp in by calling A's all in with, say, suited connectors knowing that, despite his huge chip advantage, player C cannot pressurize his position. If you disallow side pots then you effectively give any drawing hand free cards all the way to the river when normally the big stack would make them pay for the cards.
When we were starting out on home games we disallowed side pots because none of us quite knew how they worked. Since we learned how to manage them our games have been far better.
- JimTheBullet
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 10:29 am GMT
- Location: London, UK
JimTheBullet, you're right about that (game being faster and better when you figure out how the game is really played). In the end it makes sense that the person with the biggest CHIP stack has the advantage to put anyone else at the table for all their chips on any hand. That's the beauty of the biggest total chip stack.
- schrek
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 6:06 pm GMT
- Location: Boston, MA
6 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Return to Rules and Beginner Questions
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

