For some time now, something has been bothering me. It has actually something to do with what happened to me at a regular game where in the big blind haven’t had enough to cover the blinds.
Let us just put this way, the blinds were at 75/150 and the big blind only has 50. I’m wondering, do you think he is entitled to win the blinds though he doesn’t have enough? Or rather, he can just win the amount he had since the beginning?
Personally, I believe he should only win the amount he had in the first place. But I’m not so sure about this. Any advice for me?
Thank you.
Roan
Roan,
The big blind could only win up to the amount he has in front of him. The player in the small blind would get back 25 and they would play for the 100 chip pot. At no time can a player win more from a single player than they have in front of them.
VN:F [1.7.5_995]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.7.5_995]
Tags: big blind, blinds, regular game
Hello,
I’ve got here a few questions. Hope you could find some time to answer them. Thanks in advance.
- For an instance, the blinds are 500 and 1,000 but the person who is supposed to be the big blind has only about 800 to post and a number of players are still on board. I don’t know whether or not these players have to post 1,000 in order to stay in or otherwise just match the 800 of the big blind.
- In what specific situations do you think there are no small or big blinds? I’m not so sure, but I think you already shared something about such before.
- For example there is a King high straight on the board and it’s the best hand. However, in the later part, it turned out that one of the players also holds a King in his pocket hand. What do you think, does the King that first occurred on the board overrule the King in pocket hand? Or else, the player could claim the hand?
- For an instance the blinds are 100 and 200, then after the flop, a certain player raises to 400. I’m wondering if the player to the left of the one who raises wants to raise, does he need to raise to 800 or just double the big blind otherwise? Any idea about this?
Thanks,
Francis
Francis,
- The players need to call the full 1,000 blind amount.
- The only possible way there would not be a blind would be a case that both opponent were all-in for the ante. There are instances in a tournament where a small blind is eliminated the hand prior to their turn to post. In that case there would not be a small blind.
- The player king in his hand is irrelevant. The object of Holdem is to make the best five card hand. Since the best five card hand is on board, everyone still in the pot splits the pot.
- A reraise must be in the amount of the prior raise. In this case, they must raise to 800.
VN:F [1.7.5_995]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.7.5_995]
Tags: big blind, blinds, King high straight, poker rules, raise
Hi,
As I am writing this, I just finished playing Holdem by which my friend who had $10 in chips left became very troubled because he was informed he could no longer play because of not having sufficient chips for the big blind, which during that time was actually $40.
Well, I believe that he could have played, but only for $10 from every player. But I’m not so sure about this, so I’m looking for any piece of advice from you.
Thanks in advance! Great site!
John James
John,
You were correct. Your opponent could have still played, but the most he could have won from each player was $10. In no limit holdem you can go all in for less than the big blind if that is all that you have in front of you. Of course, the most you can win from each player is that amount.
VN:F [1.7.5_995]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.7.5_995]
Tags: big blind, chips, Holdem
