# "Pot" size appears to be incorrect

Was in a tournament with antes, and the “pot” size shown at the top of the table did not appear to include the antes. For example, blinds of 300, antes 40, one player raised to 600, and it said 1050 next to pot (raise, bb, sb), but there were also 210 chips in antes in the middle, so the correct number would be 1260. Am I missing something? Showing the wrong number affects decision-making and messes up math.

Poker Operations Manager

1

Sep 8

Hi the antes are ‘part of the pot’ but for the purposes of betting A Pot-sized bet they are not counted until after the flop.

As Matchstk said the Pot sized bet would be quite a bit higher if the antes were included. Replay has defined antes in this way because we feel they are different to Blinds.

Antes are a forced contribution by all players, and not necessarily bets whereas Blinds are forced bets by specific players to initiate betting

Since this is No Limit, a player can raise any amount they like above the minimum, so they are not restricted to Replays interpretation of what is Pot size.

Thanks. I’d disagree with that logic. If the chips are in the pot to be won than they are part of the pot. If someone makes a “pot” sized bet and it’s smaller than the actual pot then the other players are getting better pot odds to continue. It definitely seems wrong. But if it’s already been addressed, oh well.

I agree with you. A pot size bet should be what is in the pot.

At least he has some logic behind his decisions, kinda like the live games I used to play \$2-\$5 plo where they count both blinds as \$5, so your original raise can be \$30(\$5+\$5+\$5+\$15(pot size)). It just makes it easier for players/dealers.

1 Like

“House rules” ALWAYS over-ride generally accepted practices. That’s why houses have them, and why it’s important for players to know them. Some of the local club games around here count the lowest low as the wheel–but, most count it as 6-4 in assorted suits (they’re counting straights and flushes as highs only, in other words, so the wheel doesn’t qualify as a low). Players need to remember where we’re playing at and adjust accordingly.

If this is the house rules, then this is what governs.

1 Like

Thanks, that is good to know.

It just seems funny when the game is based on math that the amount in the pot would be wrong on purpose. They have those high ante tournaments where I imagine the “pot” is 15 chips even though there are 515 chips in the actual pot. You can make a “pot” sized bet of 15 and price everybody into a call or an actual pot sized bet like in normal poker.

Players need to know how many chips they can win by betting/calling and making them count multiple virtual piles doesn’t seem like a great idea, especially for a distinction that is arbitrary (there’s no dealer counting the chips so who cares where they came from?). But house rules are what count. I don’t play tourneys much anymore anyway.

Quite a while ago in some places, some poker rooms used to consider straights and flushes could not be considered for low nor could the Ace. The best low was 2-3-4-5-7 .
I believe all state gaming commissions now, use the rules submitted for license application as the standing rules for that license. As an owner, I wrote my own rules for all games I spread or intended to ever spread, I had to post those house rules for public viewing in my cardrooms and those rules had to be followed. The house was subject to heavy fines by the gaming commission if caught violating stated rules.

1 Like

That makes sense, as those were house rules. I’m not quite sure how that applies in this situation, as the number given for the “pot” is incorrect. The house rule could be that the pot is always 2000 no matter how many chips are actually in play or the “pot” is always double the actual amount of chips. We would have to accept that it is the rule, but the number is incorrect.

The explanation seems to be “because we like it that way”. But poker is a game of math so it matters whether the number is correct. The bet size and calling range are dependent on that number. Providing a misleading version of the pot takes away from the game and makes it seem like Replay doesn’t care about the strategy involved. I accept that this is Replay’s decision but don’t accept that it makes sense. Oh well.