888Poker Tournament Bug

S

subsinind

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Total posts
305
Chips
0
I was playing this tournament in 888. I caught this bug and I am not sure how this is allowed in 888Poker.

Situation: When the blinds are 200/400, after flop, SB goes all in with 150 (<400 min bet). Why does it allows other to just call 150 when they should in fact at least bet 400 because there is one another player after the caller/better.

I have the screen shots bellow which clearly shows this. Common 888Poker, you can fix this. This is wrong and shouldn't be allowed. One can only think what else could be wrong at 888Poker because this makes the room seems untrustworthy.

Before Flop - blinds 200/400:
10hljk0.png



After Flop:
bfqb7p.png

vmyjjd.png



Attached:
Pref
After flop1
After flop2
 
Last edited:
moots

moots

Min-cash specialist
Loyaler
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Total posts
9,380
Awards
8
CA
Chips
90
Isn't this the standard for every site?
 
S

subsinind

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Total posts
305
Chips
0
Isn't this the standard for every site?

I don't think so because this is not a valid call by the players involved above.

I have not paid attention in pokerstars but I will see how PS handles such a situation.
 
S

subsinind

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Total posts
305
Chips
0
this image should clear up what the blinds are:

3486kax.png



Hand History:

#Game No : 966952273
***** 888poker Hand History for Game 966952273 *****
$200/$400 Blinds No Limit Holdem - ***
Tournament #101240506 $0.01 - Table #28 9 Max (real money)
Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 8
Seat 1: benfold72 ( $4,390 )
Seat 2: kostgalstyan ( $8,975 )
Seat 3: aquinoerick ( $1,000 )
Seat 4: Gintaras42 ( $3,440 )
Seat 5: Legioner33 ( $5,790 )
Seat 6: Nibil2012 ( $1,720 )
Seat 7: rela666ing ( $8,646 )
Seat 10: yanuara ( $1,920 )
kostgalstyan posts ante [$50]
benfold72 posts ante [$50]
rela666ing posts ante [$50]
Gintaras42 posts ante [$50]
yanuara posts ante [$50]
Nibil2012 posts ante [$50]
Legioner33 posts ante [$50]
aquinoerick posts ante [$50]
aquinoerick posts small blind [$200]
Gintaras42 posts big blind [$400]

** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to rela666ing [ Kd, 4s ]
Legioner33 calls [$400]
Nibil2012 folds
rela666ing folds
yanuara folds
benfold72 calls [$400]
kostgalstyan folds
aquinoerick raises [$600]
Gintaras42 folds
Legioner33 calls [$400]
benfold72 calls [$400]
** Dealing flop ** [ Qs, 4c, 3c ]
aquinoerick bets [$150]
Legioner33 calls [$150]
benfold72 calls [$150]

** Dealing turn ** [ 2c ]
Legioner33 checks
benfold72 checks
** Dealing river ** [ 5h ]
Legioner33 bets [$400]
benfold72 raises [$800]
Legioner33 calls [$400]
** Summary **
benfold72 shows [ 9h, Ah ]
aquinoerick shows [ 9s, Kc ]
Legioner33 shows [ Td, Qh ]
benfold72 collected [ $3,650 ]
benfold72 collected [ $1,600 ]
 
Last edited:
Gorak

Gorak

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 7, 2009
Total posts
2,944
Chips
0
Why does it allows other to just call 150 when they should in fact at least bet 400 because there is one another player after the caller/better.
I don't think it is a bug.

The 2 other players in the hand had the option to call (150) bet (400) or raise(800+).

They chose to call in that case.

But in certain circumstances they could only call the 150. For example if the short stack is last to act and shoves his last 150 on the flop then others can only call since 150 is not a full poker move. This is to prevent players to squeeze behind the short stack by reraising.

Anyway someone could explain this better and we lack the complete information since you were not in the hand to see the options call bet raise.
 
S

subsinind

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Total posts
305
Chips
0
OKAY CORRECTION IT IS NOT A BUG. I was WRONG!


Weird Rule that I never realized before or may be thought it wrong.


According to the Poker TD Forum -> http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=842.0
pre flop rules are different than post flop rules when someone goes all in for less than the blinds.

But, also there are TDs currently arguing why this post flop rule allows for this difference.

IN MY OPINION, I feel this rule should change.
 
alienat3d

alienat3d

easy-going alien grinder
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 3, 2017
Total posts
2,954
Awards
14
Chips
50
@subsinind, well i'm not sure it should be a rule, if someone has less than Big Blind and goes all-in postflop, that everyone else should call more than that. What if he didn't push all-in, so the others two could check it, but cause he did, they can decide to call, cause it's cheap, what they probably wouldn't do, if it was full big blind bet. At that point they just call and not bet. If they would call 400 instead, it can be seen as 150call +250bet. And what if nobody want that bet? With that 150 call they just accomplish the common pot and not start a side pot for rest two, who still have chips. Well i don't think it's something wrong there. Seems pretty logical and legit to me, i would say let it stay as it is.
 
S

subsinind

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Total posts
305
Chips
0
@subsinind, well i'm not sure it should be a rule, if someone has less than Big Blind and goes all-in postflop, that everyone else should call more than that. What if he didn't push all-in, so the others two could check it, but cause he did, they can decide to call, cause it's cheap, what they probably wouldn't do, if it was full big blind bet. At that point they just call and not bet. If they would call 400 instead, it can be seen as 150call +250bet. And what if nobody want that bet? With that 150 call they just accomplish the common pot and not start a side pot for rest two, who still have chips. Well i don't think it's something wrong there. Seems pretty logical and legit to me, i would say let it stay as it is.

The Quotes in Red: Exactly what the TDs (Tournament Directors) are arguing for in the link i posted previously and i see that point.

But to me, the blinds are there for a reason. If nobody was shortstacked they can check, or bet atleast the amount of the blind or more.

As you said "cheap" - it is exactly my point. The point is instead of calling the short stack amount, IF they are required to atleast call a blind (shouldn't be considered as shortblind + difference as raise), then at some point in tourneys, other players might be hesitant to play and it might sway their decisions because they don't want to lose more chips at a crucial point in tournaments and might tend to fold after seeing the flop without chasing. Afterall, the blinds are there for a reason but is only enforced strictly pre flop.

Do you see the reason? It might be easier to chase by calling the shortstack lesser than the blinds at that moment but if they are required to atleast call the blind, it might affect their decision. Ofcourse, this situation is only when there are two or more players after the shortstack.


For example, at a crucial point in a tourney with blinds 30K/60K, after flop, short stack moves all in for 100, others can call 100 easily instead of calling 60K which might affect their stack. It induces more interesting action in tournaments than colluding to get the shortstack busted.

In wsop, they have rules that checking with absolute nuts in river yields a penalty. https://www.cardschat.com/forum/general-poker-13/check-nuts-penalty-190583/
They should also prevent collusion to get shortstack busted in such a scenario.
 
Last edited:
alienat3d

alienat3d

easy-going alien grinder
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 3, 2017
Total posts
2,954
Awards
14
Chips
50
The Quotes in Red: Exactly what the TDs (Tournament Directors) are arguing for in the link i posted previously and i see that point.

But to me, the blinds are there for a reason. If nobody was shortstacked they can check, or bet atleast the amount of the blind or more.

As you said "cheap" - it is exactly my point. The point is instead of calling the short stack amount, IF they are required to atleast call a blind (shouldn't be considered as shortblind + difference as raise), then at some point in tourneys, other players might be hesitant to play and it might sway their decisions because they don't want to lose more chips at a crucial point in tournaments and might tend to fold after seeing the flop without chasing. Afterall, the blinds are there for a reason but is only enforced strictly pre flop.

Do you see the reason? It might be easier to chase by calling the shortstack lesser than the blinds at that moment but if they are required to atleast call the blind, it might affect their decision. Ofcourse, this situation is only when there are two or more players after the shortstack.


For example, at a crucial point in a tourney with blinds 30K/60K, after flop, short stack moves all in for 100, others can call 100 easily instead of calling 60K which might affect their stack. It induces more interesting action in tournaments than colluding to get the shortstack busted.

In WSOP, they have rules that checking with absolute nuts in river yields a penalty. https://www.cardschat.com/forum/general-poker-13/check-nuts-penalty-190583/
They should also prevent collusion to get shortstack busted in such a scenario.

Yes, surely i see the point you did mentioned, but look, on another side if you force other players to pay full amount of blind in this situation, the second big stack player has a huge advantage against the first one, in case they both are having something to chase with. So, as in your example blinds are 30K/60K, and the short stack moves all-in for 100, then next player folds, because 60K is a notable part of his stack, but then the second one calls 100 chips behind, cause it's like nothing for him. So it seems to be even less fair now, because now last position has a huge advantage after all.
But have to admit this is very interesting, but also an arguable question you brought in. I guess you can't really say, if this rule or opposite one will be absolute right and totally fair. So it's like choosing the bad from between the bad and the worse. :rolleyes:
 
S

subsinind

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Total posts
305
Chips
0
Yes, surely i see the point you did mentioned, but look, on another side if you force other players to pay full amount of blind in this situation, the second big stack player has a huge advantage against the first one, in case they both are having something to chase with. So, as in your example blinds are 30K/60K, and the short stack moves all-in for 100, then next player folds, because 60K is a notable part of his stack, but then the second one calls 100 chips behind, cause it's like nothing for him. So it seems to be even less fair now, because now last position has a huge advantage after all.
But have to admit this is very interesting, but also an arguable question you brought in. I guess you can't really say, if this rule or opposite one will be absolute right and totally fair. So it's like choosing the bad from between the bad and the worse. :rolleyes:

There is no bad. I feel the rules should be same pre and after flop. Well there is no advantage for anyone because it doesn't necessarily mean the last to call will win ofcourse it can still be folded.
 
888 Guides: 888 Casino - 888 Casino Deutsch - Italiano - Français - Deutsch - Dansk - Português - Español - Svenska - 888 Mobile - Deutsch Mobil
Top