Cash Game Rulesets from the wayback machine. (1 Viewer)

[JustinInMN]

So as a service to all PCF hosts (and to try and relocate a present threadjack from elsewhere) I am putting out there two rulesets that used to be readily available during the "boom" but sadly now are only available if you use some search kung-fu with the Internet Archive "Wayback Machine" ( https://web.archive.org/ ).

Robert's Rules of Poker

The most famous and widely used is "Robert's Rules of Poker" authored by Bob Ciaffone, aka "The Poker Coach" who also wrote strategy books and articles not just on Poker, but Backgammon, and Chess as well. Sadly, Ciaffone passed away about year ago. A couple years before that, I observed his website was taken down and as it turns out, being transferred to other poker coaching interests. Thankfully, his content (including his work on rulesets) can still be found using the internet archive by finding the snapshots before 2020.

Here is a version of Robert's Rules for Home games that is linked in my home rules site.
https://web.archive.org/web/20191125054549/http://www.pokercoach.us/RobsPkrRulesHome.htm

Here is the final "standard" version (11) of Robert's Rules for cardrooms as a Word download.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190513033331/http://www.pokercoach.us/RobsPkrRules11.Mht

Caro and Cooke's Rules of Real Poker

Now in a few other threads @Machine has mentioned being partial to "Cooke's Rules of Real Poker" which is not freely available but a rather inexpensive e-book download. But I know this was originally a collaboration between Roy Cooke and Mike Caro and used to be freely available on Caro's former Poker1 site. Here is a "wayback machine" link for that. I did have to go back to a snapshot from 2003 to find this. (Also who remember "PlanetPoker.com" being a thing?)

https://web.archive.org/web/20031208191649/http://poker1.com:80/mcu/mculib_rules.asp

I certainly think Caro and Cooke's is a ruleset about as worthy as Robert's given the expertise behind it. It's structured a little differently and honestly without going side by side, the material differences aren't obvious (but I am hoping some posters will look and point out differences below.)

Final Thoughts

Personally, I don't think it matters much which you use, the most important thing for hosts is to make a complete ruleset part of existing house rules that one of these texts is a reference of last resort in case a host needs to decide on something not covered in house rules.

Having these resources available, even if only by way of the Internet Archive, is important to hosts that want to depend on these rulesets.

(And FWIW, good on the TDA for keeping their tournament rules easily accessible: https://www.pokertda.com/view-poker-tda-rules/ )

If you know of other rulesets and/or want to debate which is your favorite ruleset and why, have at it below .

 

[Machine]

For those more interested in Tournament play, here is the link to the TDA website https://www.pokertda.com/poker-tda-rules/

Also a link back for New Members Start Here thread

 

[glynn]

Adding some of my past comments for nuance:

With these conversations, it's important to distinguish between descriptivism and prescriptivism, as well as what it means to be a (descriptivist or prescriptivist) "standard". Bob Ciaffone realized that there was not a single reference of poker rules. He sought to describe a set of common rules that were observed across card rooms. RRoP became self-referential, in that card rooms based their rules off of RRoP.

TDA takes a more prescriptivist approach, though rooms are still free to choose whether and which parts to implement. Rooms are widely adopting the relevant TDA rules for their cash games in recent years.

This is a small thing since house rules ultimately control, but card rooms are trending away from RRoP and toward the applicable TDA rules as a base for their cash games. The TDA duties have evolved beyond the 'TD' in their name. You might be surprised to find how familiar the TDA rules are to how you are used to playing (and how foreign RRoP rules are).

The point is that RRoP sought to be a descriptivist document in the absence of anything like it at the time, but it hasn't evolved with the game. TDA is more like a living specification.

TDA rules are referred to as "tournament rules" by the OP and first comment, but there is more to it than that. If you really look into it, you will find that your home game rules are more accurately and completely reflected by the applicable TDA rules.

 

[umbkcshah]

9.15 BETTING CAPS.
In limit poker, all games allow a maximum of a bet and four raises in pots involving three or more players who are not all in. (Alternate Rule. A bet and three raises shall be allowed.) In head's up situations there is no limit on the number of raises. (Alternate rule. In head's up situations if the betting has been capped while the street was three handed or more, it cannot be uncapped when a player folding results in a head's up situation. This alternate rule is disfavored because it inhibits action.) In games with only two betting rounds (such as Draw and Lowball) betting is capped after a bet and six raises. (Alternate Rule. The same betting limits shall apply to draw and lowball as to other games. One reason to favor the alternate rule here is that permitting so many raises promotes collusion and partnerships.) In pot-limit and no-limit, there is no cap on raises.

Interesting... Cooke seeming said "Screw that" once he ditched Caro I want less action for my real poker rules.

 

[Machine]

9.15 BETTING CAPS.
In limit poker, all games allow a maximum of a bet and four raises in pots involving three or more players who are not all in. (Alternate Rule. A bet and three raises shall be allowed.) In head's up situations there is no limit on the number of raises. (Alternate rule. In head's up situations if the betting has been capped while the street was three handed or more, it cannot be uncapped when a player folding results in a head's up situation. This alternate rule is disfavored because it inhibits action.) In games with only two betting rounds (such as Draw and Lowball) betting is capped after a bet and six raises. (Alternate Rule. The same betting limits shall apply to draw and lowball as to other games. One reason to favor the alternate rule here is that permitting so many raises promotes collusion and partnerships.) In pot-limit and no-limit, there is no cap on raises.

Interesting... Cooke seeming said "Screw that" once he ditched Caro I want less action for my real poker rules.

Alright here's the contrast from Cooke's current rules

And the start of the convo from the other thread

 

[JustinInMN]

Adding some of my past comments for nuance:







TDA rules are referred to as "tournament rules" by the OP and first comment, but there is more to it than that. If you really look into it, you will find that your home game rules are more accurately and completely reflected by the applicable TDA rules.

The one thing I really appreciate about TDA is they are making the effort to keep it fresh every couple of years. I would surely concede the point that the rulesets I am sharing are "stale."

And yes, while many of the same procedures in TDA could be applicable to cash, there are two major issues that would keep me from saying TDA rules cover cash also in the games I host.

1) I have a strong preference for the forward moving button rule. I get this is not practical in tournaments for various reasons (chief among them the forced breaking of tables, whereas in cash all seat moves are voluntary.)

2) Discipline rules in tournament are just simply not applicable in cash. Orbit penalties are basically meaningless in cash. Basically in cash, all you can do is end a players night if he violates too many rules. In a tournament, that's an overcorrection.

So for the time being, I am going to be Robert's for cash games and TDA for tournaments.

I am pretty sure the reason I landed on Robert's is I required fewer corrections to suit my game than with Caro and Cooke's, but it would be interesting to go through that exercise again.

 

[JustinInMN]

This is a small thing since house rules ultimately control, but card rooms are trending away from RRoP and toward the applicable TDA rules as a base for their cash games. The TDA duties have evolved beyond the 'TD' in their name. You might be surprised to find how familiar the TDA rules are to how you are used to playing (and how foreign RRoP rules are).

I actually would like to know more about this @glynn . What rooms do you know of that are trending this way? Is there going to be an (even if it sounds odd) "TDA rules for cash games" ruleset in the future?

 

[BGinGA]

I am going to be Robert's for cash games and TDA for tournaments.

We wrote our local tournanent rules to comply with both the RRoP v11 and TDA rule sets (along with a few exceptions).

We use RRoP v11 for cash play.

 

[glynn]

All reasonable considerations, but lest I be misread: Near zero card rooms and cash home games use any one of the mentioned documents as their complete cash ruleset. Almost always, one document is used as a base and augmented with "house rules". For many years, the base was RRoP both due to its respectability and for lack of anything else to reach for.

Card rooms naturally find it to be way simpler and a better user experience to use a single, modern, living document and tweak it for cash games where necessary than to use a living document for one form of poker and a long-dead document for the other. The TDA understand this inevitability and have put a lot of thought into how their rules might translate to cash.

It is mostly clear where the tweaks could or should happen, and the two call-outs you made are great examples. The one mention of the moving button I see is under "Balancing Tables and Halting Play" (let me know if you see others), and the round penalties are meaningless in a cash context as you mentioned. I use TDA as the base for my games and don't subscribe to either of those parts. It's fine! That's how it should be.

I actually would like to know more about this @glynn . What rooms do you know of that are trending this way? Is there going to be an (even if it sounds odd) "TDA rules for cash games" ruleset in the future?

Honestly, most major card rooms have likely moved in that direction already whether they know it or not. A room manager might answer "RRoP" out of decades of habit, but their actual rules look like TDA. This forum has more industry folks and historians than PCF does, and the trend is often described there. I might look for specific posts later.

In my ideal world, the TDA would lift all of the common rules and procedures into a general document and publish an extension for each of the tourney and cash game forms. They would also change their name, but that horse is probably not coming back.

 

[ekricket]

All reasonable considerations, but lest I be misread: Near zero card rooms and cash games use any one of the mentioned documents as their complete cash ruleset. Almost always, one document is used as a base and augmented with "house rules". For many years, the base was RRoP both due to its respectability and for lack of anything else to reach for.

Card rooms naturally find it to be way simpler and a better user experience to use a single, modern, living document and tweak it for cash games where necessary than to use a living document for one form of poker and a long-dead document for the other. The TDA understand this inevitability and have put a lot of thought into how their rules might translate to cash.

It is mostly clear where the tweaks could or should happen, and the two call-outs you made are great examples. The one mention of the moving button I see is under "Balancing Tables and Halting Play" (let me know if you see others), and the round penalties are meaningless in a cash context as you mentioned. I use TDA as the base for my games and don't subscribe to either of those parts. It's fine! That's how it should be.



Honestly, most major card rooms have likely moved in that direction already whether they know it or not. A room manager might answer "RRoP" out of decades of habit, but their actual rules look like TDA. This forum has more industry folks and historians than this one, and the trend is often described there. I might look for specific posts later.

In my ideal world, the TDA would lift all of the common rules and procedures into a general document and publish an extension for each of the tourney and cash game forms. They would also change their name, but that horse is probably not coming back.

This sounds like we need some government regulation of this issue to protect innocent poker consumers.

 

[JustinInMN]

All reasonable considerations, but lest I be misread: Near zero card rooms and cash games use any one of the mentioned documents as their complete cash ruleset. Almost always, one document is used as a base and augmented with "house rules". For many years, the base was RRoP both due to its respectability and for lack of anything else to reach for.

Card rooms naturally find it to be way simpler and a better user experience to use a single, modern, living document and tweak it for cash games where necessary than to use a living document for one form of poker and a long-dead document for the other. The TDA understand this inevitability and have put a lot of thought into how their rules might translate to cash.

It is mostly clear where the tweaks could or should happen, and the two call-outs you made are great examples. The one mention of the moving button I see is under "Balancing Tables and Halting Play" (let me know if you see others), and the round penalties are meaningless in a cash context as you mentioned. I use TDA as the base for my games and don't subscribe to either of those parts. It's fine! That's how it should be.



Honestly, most major card rooms have likely moved in that direction already whether they know it or not. A room manager might answer "RRoP" out of decades of habit, but their actual rules look like TDA. This forum has more industry folks and historians than this one, and the trend is often described there. I might look for specific posts later.

In my ideal world, the TDA would lift all of the common rules and procedures into a general document and publish an extension for each of the tourney and cash game forms. They would also change their name, but that horse is probably not coming back.

thank you for this, now I have to see if I can remember by 2+2 credentials. I haven't been on there for a looooooong time . (I will look forward to particular threads of suggestion, none of the titles jumped out at me as being about rulesets on a quick glance.)

That said I absolutely understand these rulesets are almost never adopted on their own. Both rulesets are even designed to be subordinate to any house rules. And back on the main topic, I think it's important for home-game hosts to do the same thing, just so they are covered in the event of needing an unusual ruling.

 

[Machine]

Card rooms naturally find it to be way simpler and a better user experience to use a single, modern, living document and tweak it for cash games where necessary

A room manager might answer "RRoP" out of decades of habit, but their actual rules look like TDA.

I agree with the premise but often the implementation of it has issues.

The issue is when there is such an entity, I've seen where they get carried away believing they are the mecca and overstep.

Another aspect is there is an update, but the older rule persists because people are not diligent to validate the rules over time. A change log with an RSS Feed or something the like would be ideal.

I hope the TDA moves in the direction of offering a 'cash game' ruleset, I would also find it beneficial if they would explain why the rule was implemented specifically what problem it solves.

 

[ArielVer18]

RIP Bob Ciaffone. RRoP is universally respected. If you skim the 2022 WSOP Live-Action rules you can tell from the structure that it's based on Robert's rules.

TDA rules are referred to as "tournament rules" by the OP and first comment, but there is more to it than that. If you really look into it, you will find that your home game rules are more accurately and completely reflected by the applicable TDA rules.

I tried to change my house rules to be based on TDA instead of RRoP, but there's enough difference between cash games and tournament play that I gave up and simply added more sentences to my house rules to take precedence over RRoP: https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/tournament-vs-cash-poker-rules.96569/