Statesvegas
Flush
This is how it has always been at my game. Must buy from the bank before the start of hand, and you can only play the chips in front of you (cash does not play).
-
This site contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, Poker Chip Forum may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!
Cash Game Partial Cash-Out (a.k.a. Rebuying from the Deep Stack Player) (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter BirdCage
- Start date
I maybe take poker rules and etiquette too seriously, but it just flat out makes me angry when somebody doesn’t know how to play poker and then is smug and showy about his ignorance.
NotRealNameNoSir
4 of a Kind
Being smug about ones ignorance is a tenant of American life 'round here!
grebe
Full House
I also love limit, for most likely all the same reasons you do. I agree that it SHOULD be the preferred style of home game play. However, this is not limit, and therefore the niceties that go with limit do not apply. No limit by nature is cutthroat.
If later on in the night, I am up to 300 bb's and he SHOULD be up to 300 bb's, but has 200 in his pocket, we now are no longer playing deep, are we?
There is no card room I am aware of that would allow this (can't do it online, either). I am surprised you see no big deal in it.
Obviously, this happened from a player that doesnt realize it is at best unethical, and therefore should not be keelhauled for it. However, I would expect any decent host would correct this immediately, and let all players know under no uncertainty that this is not acceptable. If this did not happen, this is when I would check out of this game. Luckily, I have options.
A “loophole” I’ve seen is to change stakes. Move to a different game and at many casinos you’d be allowed to buy in for the minimum at the new stakes, play for an hour and move back to the previous stakes and you might not be required to rebuy for how much you stood up with before.
I guess it’s not that different from standing up and leaving the casino for an hour to get some dinner and the going back and buying back in? How long until the previous stack rule expires at casinos?
OP
OP
BirdCage
Flush
After a bit of research, ratholing does appear to be largely banned in casinos and on-line. It is also frowned upon/banned at many home games. I've been thinking through examples on why it feels so ugly. Here's a scenario/reason I've come up with. Casinos and on-line don't permit cash-outs and lower rebuys without a waiting period (like an hour or so).
Playing poker isn't just one hand or hand-to-hand events, but a session. A session occurs over time. While a session could be as little as a hand, it is generally longer. Various players interleave their sessions together. So if a player removes chips/winnings/betting pool from a table during a session then they effectively limit their downside plus increase their ability/likelihood to go all-in when pushed in. If a deep stack player with all their chips on the table was pushed by another deep stack player, they'd have to more carefully consider responding to an all-in. Not having to fold with a questionable hand is an unfair advantage. This is one angle for the ratholer. And there are others, as well.
Playing poker isn't just one hand or hand-to-hand events, but a session. A session occurs over time. While a session could be as little as a hand, it is generally longer. Various players interleave their sessions together. So if a player removes chips/winnings/betting pool from a table during a session then they effectively limit their downside plus increase their ability/likelihood to go all-in when pushed in. If a deep stack player with all their chips on the table was pushed by another deep stack player, they'd have to more carefully consider responding to an all-in. Not having to fold with a questionable hand is an unfair advantage. This is one angle for the ratholer. And there are others, as well.
4SUMERZ
Flush
Re - Buying chips from the table players is wrong is so many ways.
1) The Banker is responsible for collecting the $$ and dispensing the chips on intial buy in and rebuys.
2) Prior to game time, starting chips should always be pre stacked for the initial buy-ins. Rebuys stacked in various denoms in chip tubes if available.
3) The only time money leaves the table is at cash out.
1) The Banker is responsible for collecting the $$ and dispensing the chips on intial buy in and rebuys.
2) Prior to game time, starting chips should always be pre stacked for the initial buy-ins. Rebuys stacked in various denoms in chip tubes if available.
3) The only time money leaves the table is at cash out.
Frogzilla
Straight Flush
it’s just a principle of home games shouldn’t have people uncomfortable with the stakes. Yes you are right that opponents uncomfortable with the stakes (wanting to risk 100bb but forced to make 300 bb deep decisions) can be profitable but home games maybe shouldn’t be about profit as much.
As to card rooms, you’re right…but they do let you rathole 300 out of 300bb at any time. A lot will let you change tables and go south in between. All will let you cash out, go south, and buy back in for less the next day sometimes even less time though
Not sure I see the point of that for a cash game, where starting stacks will vary.
SendThatStack
3 of a Kind
Recently this happened in my game where a player was felted and the guy next to him 'rebought' him back in with $100 off of his chipstack. Instantly 2 other players jumped on it and insisted new chips be brought in from the bank 
. I was going to make that happen anyways but it was funny how quickly some of my players reacted.
. I was going to make that happen anyways but it was funny how quickly some of my players reacted.
NotRealNameNoSir
4 of a Kind
That's not ratholing or going south, those are different sessions; rathole is by definition taking some and still playing, hoarding some cheese like a rat while fighting over the scraps still at play. Sorry, with some people learning the term for the first time I just want to be clear about what it means.
As for being uncomfortable with the stakes, this is the best argument for ratholing, but they sat down with less than that amount and now have that amount due to the game we all agreed to play. If they can't afford to lose money they just won gambling, they should leave, etiquette be damned go pay the bookie or buy your daughter braces or whatever lol.
Some may not, but many casinos will stop you from going south between tables, or at least throws you back on a waiting list. Sure, changing stakes you can, but if nothing else its very bad etiquette. Personally I don't care much about casino etiquette, I'm a paying customer so I'll stick to talking about home games.
And this idea is back to hands vs sessions. Unless its a several day MTT, no one considers coming back the next day going south no matter the amount (unless some weird agreement's been made, IDK, caveats for everything). I guess we can toke up and consider life as one big session lol, but a "game" is usually one day or nights worth of play with similar people. I know you're trying to make a point but its not working with the terms.
This is a previous discussion that has a lot of good information.
To better understand why its consider 'bad' you should understand why it was implemented. It can be a good thing to allow players to take chips off the table.
To better understand why its consider 'bad' you should understand why it was implemented. It can be a good thing to allow players to take chips off the table.
4SUMERZ
Flush
All starting stacks, whether it's 20-30-40 etc can be pre stacked in tubes so little time is used for counting it out at the time of buy in or rebuy. The host of a regular home game generally knows who buys in for what amount. All I'm saying is be pro active for having stacks ready when needed.
NotRealNameNoSir
4 of a Kind
Interesting point, where is that highlighted section from? Just for my own thoughts, I like to find the source especially when a writer pitches "the real reason" as opposed to other reasons about some tradition.This is a previous discussion that has a lot of good information.
To better understand why its consider 'bad' you should understand why it was implemented. It can be a good thing to allow players to take chips off the table.
NotRealNameNoSir
4 of a Kind
Ha! Didn't mean it as an accusation, promise! Okay thanks, I'll pick this up.
not at all, I value citing sources and I should have mentioned it, I think its in the other thread
Johnblue
Flush
I would have had no problem whatsoever, saying “ that money stays on the table” , “just put the cash under your chips there”
Or…
“Is everybody okay with this guy partially cashing out 150? Table rules”
When someone blatantly breaks poker etiquette, I’ll say something, firmly.
House rules is house rules, but table rules and votes are important too.
When you get 8 people agreeing in front of your face, there’s not really anything to do, but comply.
Or…
“Is everybody okay with this guy partially cashing out 150? Table rules”
When someone blatantly breaks poker etiquette, I’ll say something, firmly.
House rules is house rules, but table rules and votes are important too.
When you get 8 people agreeing in front of your face, there’s not really anything to do, but comply.
Sal Bandini
Pair
Do you get to vote at a casino?
It's called house rules for a reason. The house makes the rules. The problem with leaving sticky situations up to a vote is you can get different results on different sessions and then you have no consistency. Following rules as best as possible makes the game run more smoothly and minimizes these and other difficult situations.
Johnblue
Flush
yeah, chop-chop blinds is a vote, chopping/splitting/ending a tournament early is a vote, "check it down", that's a vote. "run it twice" that's a vote
There's plenty of occasions where a table/active players decides to make changes/rulings the game, happens less in casino's, but it happens there too.
i think ratholing in no limit is against the rules nearly universally, so this would be a vote for the table to let the guy rathole 150, and if everybody agreed then... go for it i guess. At least the players all had a say... if even one person objects..., then nope, either cash out completely or money stays at the table. and i personally would object 90% of the time
this type of ratholing would signify that the poker game is nearly over, or at least that's how i would perceive it. i would be pretty pissed, unless i was tired and ready to go, but i would perceive it that the meat of the game is over.
in a casino it comes up all the time, "are you guys ready to chop this tourney?" if one person objects then we keep playing.
nearly every time i get to the last 5 in a casino tourney, we literally start hammering out who gets what, table share... chip count blah blah, when everyone agrees, the table decides what happens. everyone is staring at the short stack, like, come on man.... take what you can.... its final table politics haha.
plenty of home games end with the last few players... "okay... lets all cash out $100 and play for the remaining $40" type of thing.
there's never any rules about that, but if a group decides on something, thems the rules.
its always unanimous and never majority to make impromptu rules at the poker table. of course the house could override something like this, but in my hosting experience, its always better to just bring any situation like this to the table, either, the ratholer will see that most of the people think its shady, and would probably have a change of heart, or maybe nobody actually does care at all and the game is winding down...
i also would have no problem whatsoever in saying "money stays at the table" end of story. it would just depend on how i read the players and where we are in the night.
Last edited:
ArielVer18
Flush
This shouldn't even be a discussion. Ratholing is against the rules of poker. Anyone who doesn't agree with universally accepted poker rules is free to start a movement to change them.
Don't rush the host. Urgency isn't important. Purchased chips, even if they have not arrived yet, may play at the start of the next hand. If the players who need chips really really want to use their new chips, borrow $10-$20 from a bigger stack until the host find time to bring in new chips.
This is called upstuck. He's down on money from his high.
MeridianFC
Flush
All right thinking games are table stakes, chips bought from the bank, cash does not play.
For people here anything that keeps more chips from the table should be a mortal sin.
For people here anything that keeps more chips from the table should be a mortal sin.
This is called upstuck. He's down on money from his high.
[/QUOTE]
@ArielVer18
I love how there’s a poker term for almost everything. Is there an unofficial official poker dictionary - A Pokerictionary if you will???
[/QUOTE]
@ArielVer18
I love how there’s a poker term for almost everything. Is there an unofficial official poker dictionary - A Pokerictionary if you will???
merkong
Full House
Under no circumstances can players sell chips to another player. Why would someone want to lose chips to player A and have them wind up in player B’s stack.
That’s what large denominations are for. Sell them a couple of 20’s and they can make change.
That’s what large denominations are for. Sell them a couple of 20’s and they can make change.
SendThatStack
3 of a Kind
My game is a monarchy not a democracy.
grebe
Full House
Under plenty of circumstances is this totally normal and ok. As long as that money stays on the table, it's just fine. I mean, we are still playing for money, correct? I don't get to take the poker chips home with me at the end of the night.
bergs
Royal Flush
Find me a player that wouldn’t be pissed as hell about losing a big hand to a guy and having the guy take those chips off the table and keep playing and I’ll find you a dickhead and a guy that doesn’t play poker. Pretty easy to figure out who’s which.
I’d rack up and leave a home game (never to return) that allowed players to go south. It’s one of the unbreakable rules in poker IMO - table stakes means the chips on the table.
I’d rack up and leave a home game (never to return) that allowed players to go south. It’s one of the unbreakable rules in poker IMO - table stakes means the chips on the table.
bergs
Royal Flush
Seriously if you’re going to allow ratholing, just allow players to exchange cards whenever they want. You’ve already broken a cardinal rule, you might as break them all.
The previous thread we explored other ideals without Slut Shaming!
Due to the nature of the rule and its original purpose, there are other viewpoints that should at least be considered.
The pros is that it is used to help new players stay in the game, and allows players that would get up stay in the game with less risk. It is likely if someone takes chips out of play, if they get stacked they would likely buy back in.
I'm not making the argument; I'm just pointing it out that there are other aspects worthy of consideration.
This is one of the reasons I miss @CrazyEddie
As long as we all get opinions, here’s mine. That’s the kind of bullshit made up by somebody who’s struggling to find a counterpoint. But it is indeed bullshit. If we were that worried about noobs, we could also offer them a 33% rebate on every pot they lose. But nobody is doing that either, because it’s bullshit.
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
Similar threads
