03- 8-04, LearnTexasHoldem:
All-In Player: Do I have to call the side pot to keep my hand live?
Bill
Top 3 Beginner Rooms
My question involves going all in when making a bet and side pots.
Assume 3 players are now at the fifth street. In other words, they've gone through the pre-flop, the flop, and have gone through all the betting. Fifth street comes up. player 1 goes "all in" and bets $100. Player 2 calls. Player 3 calls, but wants to raise $50.
My understanding was that Player 2 may "call" Player 3's raise by placing a side bet or side wager of $50 in a side pot - which player 2 and 3 play for - but is not required to. Normally, of course, player 2 would have to raise or call player 3's bet - but are the rules different when a player goes all in?
May player 2 simply decline to do the side bet (and the chance to play for an additional side pot of $100 ($50 x 2)) and just play for the $300 ($100 x 3) in the main pot? In that case, there would be no side pot.
Or, is the side pot always "mandatory?" Player 2 either must "call" the $50 raise of player 3 or fold?
If this is the case (and I think it is), to me, this result doesn't make any intuitive sense. Why shouldn't player 2 at least be able to play for what is in the main pot? Why should player 2 have to fold if he doesn't want to do the additional raise? Player 1 can't meet the raise of player 3 either, but he gets to stay in and play for the main pot? He doesn't h ave to fold. Why should player 2, who's put the same money in the main pot as player 1, have to fold?
Answer: Thanks for the questions Bill. Also I appreciate that you are enjoying the site. Now for the questions... If Player 3 raises and Player 2 would like to keep his hand live, able to win part or all of the pot, then he has to at minimum call Player 3's raise. Here are a couple reasons why this rule may be the way it is:
1. All-ins don't only happen on the river. The all-in rule has to be consistent over all betting rounds (preflop, flop, turn, river). What if someone went all-in and I could choose whether to go all-in with them regardless of my chip amount? That's basically what we are talking about here. If Player 1 goes all-in on the flop and I have a draw and you have Aces, I would love to just call whatever Player 1 had to.
2. Being able to call only what the all-in player had to would also significantly remove the power the person betting has -- for money, bluffing, protecting ones hand, etc. You can't have poker without betting and if the players can decide when they want to stop the betting, it would remove a key element from the game. Texas holde em's All-in rules are designed to be fair and minimally impacting to the game.
3. An all-in player can't be a protective tool for him or for some other player. That is exactly what it would be in this situation because it limits his risk. There are no shelters in poker. If you have chips and want a piece of the action, you have to put your money in the center, regardless of whether someone else has run out of money.
Hope that helps... I'm sure there are other reasons that I may have missed but these seem adequate.
Your rating:
Click on the clover of your choiceTop 5 Poker Rooms
| Colt Poker Free $10 | Read Review |
|---|---|
| Cake Poker Free $10 | Read Review |
| Minted Poker | Read Review |
| Poker Stars | Read Review |
| 888poker | Read Review |
