Rules query

I think he can call (1000 of course), but not raise.

As it looks like a 3 way pot, Player C should be able to raise, assuming Player D is still in the pot.

Are you sure? There is definitely a spot where raising is not allowed (and that is of course not raising out someone already all in). I never got the hang of that rule (whatever it is) and its rationale.

It might be this: You are first to act. You check. Next is a micro-stack. He moves in, and a third player calls. Now you can't raise. The rationale would be that the micro-stacks all in counts as a check, and the third players call just counts as a check-behind. Consequently, you can't check-raise because no one really bet! Yes, I think this is it. (But it doesn't answer the OP.)

I now think the OP's and Lazza61's interpretation is correct.

Yeh Player C can raise but Player D cannot raise that raise.

Player D can certainly reraise if C raises.

From Wikipedia:

Incomplete bet or raise[edit]

If a player goes all in with a bet or raise rather than a call, another special rule comes into play. There are two options in common use: pot-limit and no-limit games usually use what is called the full bet rule, while fixed-limit and spread-limit games may use either the full bet rule or the half bet rule. The full bet rule states that if the amount of an all-in bet is less than the minimum bet, or if the amount of an all-in raise is less than the full amount of the previous raise, it does not constitute a "real" raise, and therefore does not reopen the betting action. The half bet rule states that if an all-in bet or raise is equal to or larger than half the minimum amount, it does constitute a raise and reopens the action.

For example, with the full bet rule in effect, a player opens the betting round for $20, and the next player has a total stake of $30. He may raise to $30, declaring himself all in, but this does not constitute a "real" raise, in the following sense: if a third player now calls the $30, and the first player's turn to act comes up, he may now call the additional $10, but he does not have the right to re-raise further. The all-in player's pseudo-raise was really just a call with some extra money, and the third player's call was just a call, so the initial opener's bet was simply called by both remaining players, closing the betting round (even though he must still equalize the money by putting in the additional $10). If the half bet rule were being used, then that raise would count as a genuine raise and the first player would be entitled to re-raise if he chose to (creating a side pot for the amount of his re-raise and the third player's call, if any).

With other players in the hand any player with more than 1 BB left can never place a bet for less than 1BB. Therefore the min is to "bet" 1BB. He can never "call" < 1BB

I believe the situation Yohan is referring to, is when you make a bet, and then the short stack goes all in on top, but not large enough to constitute a raise, player in the middle calls, you are now only able to call and not shove now, which can feel irksome when it happens.
:-)

Thanks for the responses so far. It seems this is not as clear as I believed.

Just to confirm : 3 players postflop, blinds 3000/6000. 1st player bets all in for 1000, what are the options for the 2nd player with a player behind still to act?

Can the player call a bet(?) for less than a BB?

Cheers all.

Can the player call a bet(?) for less than a BB?

NO

I believe Minerva is correct, the all in is best described as an incomplete raise, player 2 cannot take advantage and just call for 1000

Like to add, when playing scrabble or canasta, its always good to have a copy of official rules nearby.

Originally posted by GoOnCal1
I believe the situation Yohan is referring to, is when you make a bet, and then the short stack goes all in on top, but not large enough to constitute a raise, player in the middle calls, you are now only able to call and not shove now, which can feel irksome when it happens.
:-)

It happens quite often in tourneys, but not often enough to burn that spot into my brain yet. Short-stack after you? Don't let him micro-bet or micro-raise if you have a monster. Conversely, with a yucky hand, check and hope he moves in.

I agree GoOnCal1 that having a copy of the rules handy is a good idea.

I take my rules from Poker TDA and the following rule seems to contradict what Mineriva is saying :

Poker TDA

Rule 41:
Re-opening the bet.
Example 2
Short all-in, 2 scenarios.
NLHE, Blinds 2000-4000. Pre-flop A calls the BB and puts out 4000. B folds and C pushes all-in for 7500 total (an increment of 3500 above the 4000 BB). It’s folded around to the SB who also folds.
Example 2 - A.
It’s 3500 more to the BB who has not yet acted on his option. The BB can fold, smooth call the 3500, or raise by at least 4000 for a total of 11,500. The BB smooth calls and it’s 3500 more to A. A has already acted and is facing 3500 which is not a full raise. Therefore A can only fold or call the 3500, he cannot raise because it is not “at least a full bet when the action returns to him”.
Example 2 - B.
The BB raises the minimum (4000), for a total of 11500. It is now 7500 to A and because 7500 is more than a full minimum raise, betting is now re-opened for A who can fold, call, or re-raise.

Poker Tournament Directors Association
Longform
2013 Rules Version 1.1, Released Aug. 11 2013
Illustration Addendum to 2013 TDA Rules and Procedures Version 1.0

I would be interested to know what rulebooks others use for live play?