I received the following question from a faithful reader:
In a cash game, if someone makes a bet on the river and you throw out one chip, everyone knows that that is a call. However, in a tournament, if someone raises and you put out an amount that is not the full raise, you always have the option to leave those chips in and fold your hand. So that is not considered a call.
What is the difference? Are the cash and tournament rules different? Please illuminate, if you have a moment. I really appreciate and enjoy your columns. Thank you.
I think TDA Rule 51 clearly covers this situation in a tournament:
51: Binding Declarations / Undercalls in Turn
A: General verbal declarations in turn (such as “call” or “raise”) commit a player to the full current action. See Illustration Addendum
B: A player undercalls by declaring or pushing out less than the call amount without first declaring “call.” An undercall is a mandatory full call if made in turn facing 1) any bet heads-up or 2) the opening bet on any round multi-way. In other situations, TD’s discretion applies. The opening bet is the first chip bet of each betting round (not a check). In blind games the posted BB is the pre-flop opener. All-in buttons reduce undercall frequency (See Recommended Procedure 1). This rule governs when players must make a full call and when, at TDs discretion they may forfeit the amount of the intended undercall and fold (see Illustration Addendum). For underbets and underraises, see Rule 52.
C: If two or more undercalls occur in sequence, play backs up to the first undercaller who must correct his or her bet per Rule 51-B. The TD will determine how to treat hands of the remaining bettors based on the circumstances.
The rule says that an underbet to the opening bet is always a call. It is also a call if the players are heads up, and of course, if the player says “call” and then puts in the underbet. I’m not sure this rule is always followed, however, as I have seen instances where the floor has allowed the player to fold when there is an underbet to the opening bet, particularly where the opening bet is an all-in and the player does not realize it.
Note that the rule encourages the house to use all-in buttons so that players get visual information on top of what is audible. The rule goes on to say that if there is a raise after the opening bet, the Tournament Director has discretion to rule the underbet a call or to allow the player to fold and forfeit the underbet.
As the reader’s question indicates, the floor seems to always give the player the option to forfeit the underbet even though the rule says it has discretion to rule otherwise.
(By the way, I always hate it when I am the bettor in this situation. The player who underbets and is given the option to complete the bet or forfeit the bet and fold usually grudgingly completes the bet even though they would have folded if they had been aware of my bet. It feels like they win the pot 90% of the time when that happens!)
It seems to me the same rule should apply to a ring game. In the provided example, on the river, it will often be the case that the underbet is to the opening bet or the players are heads up, so that should be a call.
If this is not the situation, then the floor should have discretion. In a tournament, that discretion is almost always used to rule that the player has the option to fold and forfeit the underbet. But it may well be that in your ring game, the house has exercised its discretion to rule that the player must make the full call, and that is why the players know it as a call.
Interestingly, there are no standardized rules for ring games. I note that Card Player’s website hosted some “General Rules of Poker” devised by the late Bob Ciaffone, who was a Card Player columnist. One of these rules states:
A player who bets or calls by releasing chips into the pot is bound by that action. However, if you are unaware that the pot has been raised, you may withdraw that money and reconsider your action, provided that no one else has acted after you.
I don’t like the way that rule is worded when it states, “if you are unaware that the pot has been raised.” A rule should never be based on the state of mind of a player, since that can’t be determined objectively.
I also don’t like the rule itself, which would allow the player to withdraw the underbet rather than forfeit it. If that rule was followed in your ring game, then the player would have the option to fold at no cost.
This might encourage angle-shooting where a player might put out the underbet to get a read on the raiser.
For example, if the raiser appeared unhappy with the apparent call, that might indicate the raise was a bluff, so the player would complete the bet. Conversely, if the raiser appeared happy with the call, the player would withdraw the underbet.
In the situation described, however, the player often goes into the tank, and then grudgingly flips in a chip. In that event, they were clearly aware of what they were doing, so it should be a call, even under this rule.
The TDA rule is better in giving the floor discretion to distinguish between the player who made an honest mistake (which should be based on what has been observed and not on the player’s say-so) and the angle-shooter. ♠
Scott J. Burnham is Professor Emeritus at Gonzaga University School of Law in Spokane, Washington. He can be reached at profburnham@yahoo.com.