I do not have a link but if you look up version 4 of roberts rules it is in section 14 titled no limt and pot limit holdem I believe and it is rule number 3 of that section
Printable View
I do not have a link but if you look up version 4 of roberts rules it is in section 14 titled no limt and pot limit holdem I believe and it is rule number 3 of that section
Thanks Lorcat ... I found it now (I was looking in the "betting/raising" section rather than NL/PL section).
Here's what I found:
3. All raises must be equal to or greater than the size of the previous bet or raise on that betting round, except for an all-in wager. Example: Player A bets 100 and player B raises to 200. Player C wishing to raise must raise at least 100 more, making the total bet at least 300. A player who has already acted and is not facing a fullsize wager may not subsequently raise an all-in bet that is less than the minimum bet or less than the full size of the last bet or raise. (The half-the-size rule for reopening the betting is for limit poker only.) (emphasis added by me)
Under the OP's scenario, this rule does not apply because UTG IS facing a full-size wager -- from the $30 bet. UTG is c/r the $30 wager, not the $31 all-in. He does not forfeit his right to c/r just because he checks, there is a bet and a small shove.
I still couldn't find Fear's example in RRoP where he gives an example of someone who actually checked and then wanted to raise.
Yes, UTG can re-raise whatever he wants.
This situation has come up online a lot, and the player who was first to act and checked can indeed re-pop as much as he wants. If he only calls though, the original bettor can only call, and not re-open the action.