Just making sure

[Invigilator]

I have read the posts a few times, and I am not sure I understand. Does this mean I could find myself in a NLH situation where I would not be allowed to shove all my chips into the middle because of the action ahead of me?

[drewjax]

Yes, there are definately situations where this happens. Not often, but usually in important situations involving large pots, allin players etc. I thought I knew the rule, but apparently it is a bit of a gray area.

I looked up what I could find in 'Cookes rules of poker'.
There he states that my thinking is correct. As long as the allin raise is at least HALF the original bet, then you can reraise. But he talks/writes in terms of limit poker, not no limit. I am not sure if this changes things.

[Talking Poker]

Certainly: Say you bet and everyone behind you folds/calls. You're obviously not allowed to raise yourself and shove your chips in.

Seems like a silly example, but what this question boils down to is was her $19.50 bet considered a RAISE or a CALL?

That is of course assuming you acted first. If you mean: drewjax bets, some preggo chica goes all in for less than a full raise more, and THEN the action is on you for the first time - of course you can shove all your chips in. But that's obvious, so I don't think that's what you meant.


Back to the situation............ In my experience, the answer is: It depends. I've seen this treated differently in different situations (and places) - most notably, tourney play vs. cash game play. Let's check the to start:

(Damn, can't cut and paste)

Well, that seems pretty clear. But that is for TOURNAMENT play, which is often treated differently than CASH GAME play. For cash game rules, you'd need to check with each house. I believe the full raise thing is the standard, but I'm also pretty sure that an all in that raises the original bet/raise more than 50% is considered a raise SOMEWHERE.

Without having established this ahead of time for a home cash game, I'd stick with the 100% full raise rule.

[Invigilator]

Okay, the bit about "...to the payer who has already acted..." clears it up. So does the "depends" part.