All in split pot (1 Viewer)

[isthisevencreative]

I’m sure it’s been a set we’re before but can someone explain to me the basics of when people go all-in and another person don’t have the full amount I get so confused on who wins and how much and there’s two different pots etc.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

If I go all in with $100, and you call with $60, and someone else calls with the full $100? That means you can win everything but that extra $40. $100-60, the difference between them. So, for both players, there's $40 you can't win.

Main pot is $180, and the extra $80 is in a side pot that you can't win, because you ran outta money. You can't make more money than you bet.

 

[TheOffalo]

Alice has 50 chips
Bob has 75 chips
Craig has 100 chips

Alice goes all in, and Bob goes all in too, and Craig calls.

Main pot is Alice's 50 + Bob's 50 + Craig's 50, or 150 total. If Alice has the best hand, she takes all 150 but can't win more than that.

Bob's remaining 25 chips + Craig's 25 chip call goes into a side pot worth 50 chips. If Bob has the best hand out of all three players, he wins this 50 and the 150 in the main pot, but if Bob's hand isn't as good as Alice's but does beat Craig's, then Bob would win this 50 chip side pot only.

Craig's remaining 25 chips (after calling the all-ins) is safe and cannot be won by either Alice or Bob. If Craig has the best hand, he scoops the 150 main pot and 50 side pot. If Craig beats Bob but not Alice, then he gets only the 50 side pot chips.

(The example has the players in increasing chip stack, but it doesn't really matter the order. If Craig goes all-in for 100, even though neither Alice nor Bob can make a full call, if they call they are all in. 50 from each player makes the main pot, 25 each from Bob and Craig make the side pot, and Craig pulls back the excess 25.)

 

[glynn]

The above explanation is good. In case it's not clear, you want to get in the habit of resolving the pots in reverse order of their creation. Each pot should be gathered in the general area of the player who is all-in.

Craig and Bob are competing for the side pot. If Craig holds the better hand, then he wins the 50 chips and goes on to compete for the main pot with Alice. If Bob holds the better hand, then he goes on.

The first time you find yourself reconciling a main and four side pots, you will either be thankful that you followed this guidance or sorry that you didn't.

 

[BGinGA]

The above explanation is good. In case it's not clear, you want to get in the habit of resolving the pots in reverse order of their creation. Each pot should be gathered in the general area of the player who is all-in.

The first time you find yourself reconciling a main and four side pots, you will either be thankful that you followed this guidance or sorry that you didn't.

Place the main pot (which all players can win) in the normal pot location. Any side pot(s) are placed in front of the player(s) who cannot win it. In @TheOffalo's example above:
- Main pot of 150 is in normal pot location.
- First side pot of 50 is placed in front of Alice (because she cannot win it).

Pots are awarded in the reverse order they were created (and losing hands for each one are mucked by the dealer when awarding the pot to it's winner). In the above example, the first side pot (in front of Alice) is decided between Bob and Craig, with the loser's hand mucked by the dealer.

Winning hands remain tabled, as they will compete for subsequent pots (until they lose and are mucked). In this example, the first pot's winner's hand (either Craig or Bob) competes with Alice's hand for the main pot, with the loser's hand mucked before awarding the pot to the winner.

 

[glynn]

Any side pot(s) are placed in front of the player(s) who cannot win it.

Innnnteresting. I quickly glanced at some YouTube dealer instruction videos (which, who knows how good those are), and they suggest keeping the main pot in the usual spot and gathering each subsequent side pot in front of the all-in that caused it.

I have never seen it done the way you describe, though it serves the same purpose. Your method shifts the meaning of the placement from "you can win this and any previous pots" to "you cannot win this and any future pots". That would confuse me, but again maybe because I am so used to the other method.

Either way, having any system at all is better than having none.

 

[JJsizlr74]

Glad to see this posted…I’ve been meaning to start a thread like this to ask a similar question. Does anyone have a protocol for all-in situations where there is a split pot with a multi-way chop… Specifically, we had a circumstance of Omaha8 hi/lo not long ago were they were multiple all-ins,there was a low, and there was a three-way chop for the low. Took awhile to sort out and it would be great to have a more systematic process for that one. Do you basically do the same thing as far as where you put side pots, and then just go through each one and the same order, accounting for each qualifier?

 

[BGinGA]

Glad to see this posted…I’ve been meaning to start a thread like this to ask a similar question. Does anyone have a protocol for all-in situations where there is a split pot with a multi-way chop… Specifically, we had a circumstance of Omaha8 hi/lo not long ago were they were multiple all-ins,there was a low, and there was a three-way chop for the low. Took awhile to sort out and it would be great to have a more systematic process for that one.

Do you basically do the same thing as far as where you put side pots, and then just go through each one and the same order, accounting for each qualifier?

Exactly. The key is to muck the losing hand(s) at each awarded side pot, making subsequent side pots easier to determine.

For a hi-lo game, when a player loses one half in a side pot but is still eligible for the other half in a subsequent side pot(s), merely turn over the losing cards of that hand, only mucking the entire hand once it's lost both the high and low. Each side pot is awarded (even if split/shared) as it is evaluated.

Once you're done evaluating the last (main) pot, only the winning hand(s) for both high and/or low eligible for the main pot will be face-up, making it easy to determine how to divvy up the last of the chips.

 

[BGinGA]

Your method shifts the meaning of the placement from "you can win this and any previous pots" to "you cannot win this and any future pots". That would confuse me, but again maybe because I am so used to the other method.

Actually, the placement changes it to "you cannot win this but are eligible for all future pots."

Each side pot cannot be won by the player where it resides, making it easier to determine who's hand to ignore for that evaluation.

In the rare case where two (or more) players are all-in for the exact amount, instead place that side pot in front of the main pot, with chip markers pointing to each ineligible player.

 

[Machine]

Alice has 50 chips
Bob has 75 chips
Craig has 100 chips

Alice goes all in, and Bob goes all in too, and Craig calls.

Main pot is Alice's 50 + Bob's 50 + Craig's 50, or 150 total. If Alice has the best hand, she takes all 150 but can't win more than that.

Bob's remaining 25 chips + Craig's 25 chip call goes into a side pot worth 50 chips. If Bob has the best hand out of all three players, he wins this 50 and the 150 in the main pot, but if Bob's hand isn't as good as Alice's but does beat Craig's, then Bob would win this 50 chip side pot only.

Craig's remaining 25 chips (after calling the all-ins) is safe and cannot be won by either Alice or Bob. If Craig has the best hand, he scoops the 150 main pot and 50 side pot. If Craig beats Bob but not Alice, then he gets only the 50 side pot chips.

(The example has the players in increasing chip stack, but it doesn't really matter the order. If Craig goes all-in for 100, even though neither Alice nor Bob can make a full call, if they call they are all in. 50 from each player makes the main pot, 25 each from Bob and Craig make the side pot, and Craig pulls back the excess 25.)

Craig always calls!

 

[CraigT78]

Fun fact. Craig has no chips after calling.

 

[allforcharity]

Was dealing in a big charity tournament (15 tables) last week. There was a multi-way all-in at my table with a main pot and 3 side pots. Had to be real careful keeping track of things.

 

[Machine]

Here is some split pot pRon for ya from the middle of Sept...

The guy dealing did an awesome job, I've also seen where some dealers will carry tags 'main' and 'split' but meh I don't really think you need that

OBVIOUSLY this kind of action doesn't happen on a hold'em table, eat your heart out!