Tourney "I'm gonna put you all in" (1 Viewer)

[upNdown]

In a tournament at a well-run establishment, at he table behind me, a guy said "I'm gonna put you all in." Opponent snap called and tabled the winning hand. I'm not sure what exactly the weasel said to get out of it.. But the floor's ruling was loud and clear - I'm gonna put you all in is meaningless, it's not a bet, but he got an orbit penalty for inducing somebody to act out of turn.
I mentioned this in another thread an the immediate reactions were bad. I think it was the right ruling to a tough situation.

 

[ekricket]

In a tournament at a well-run establishment, at he table behind me, a guy said "I'm gonna put you all in." Opponent snap called and tabled the winning hand. I'm not sure what exactly the weasel said to get out of it.. But the floor's ruling was loud and clear - I'm gonna put you all in is meaningless, it's not a bet, but he got an orbit penalty for inducing somebody to act out of turn.
I mentioned this in another thread an the immediate reactions were bad. I think it was the right ruling to a tough situation.

I agree, it’s an angle and not a bet. If you are being bet into you should always be clear what you are calling. Not assume, but be very sure. Otherwise you open yourself up to angles, like above.
You may think you know what the better meant, and he may have meant that, but you don’t know, and more importantly the dealer and the floor don’t know, so they don’t recognize this kitchen table talk.

 

[Himewad]

In a tournament at a well-run establishment, at he table behind me, a guy said "I'm gonna put you all in." Opponent snap called and tabled the winning hand. I'm not sure what exactly the weasel said to get out of it.. But the floor's ruling was loud and clear - I'm gonna put you all in is meaningless, it's not a bet, but he got an orbit penalty for inducing somebody to act out of turn.
I mentioned this in another thread an the immediate reactions were bad. I think it was the right ruling to a tough situation.

Even if the action is on just two players? Clearly, the implication of saying that is that the bet size would be the stack of their opponent.

Is it the "I'm gonna" that is the problem? As opposed to "I will"?

What's the logic behind that being a meaningless comment?

 

[Himewad]

I have only played in casinos a handful of times. At my home games, if someone says that, it's a bet.

 

[Beakertwang]

Even if the action is on just two players? Clearly, the implication of saying that is that the bet size would be the stack of their opponent.

Is it the "I'm gonna" that is the problem? As opposed to "I will"?

What's the logic behind that being a meaningless comment?

I can only bet my chips, not yours. I can say “I’m all in”, or bet a specific amount, and if I cover you, your call would put you all in. But that is different.

 

[DrStrange]

Not in my house . . . . I see some "magic words" in that statement. No one should utter words like "call" "raise" or "all-in" without some concern for how they will be interpreted. The speaker's intention is clear. The bet is "all in".

The floor's ruling is an invitation to future trouble, both in this event and in every cash game & tournament spread in their building. Perhaps the ruling is consistent with house rules, but all that means is the house rules needs some work.

 

[ekricket]

I can only bet my chips, not yours. I can say “I’m all in”, or bet a specific amount, and if I cover you, your call would put you all in. But that is different.

This is how it should be. “You” can’t make decisions about my chips. “You” can’t put me all in, only I can make that decision. So your statement is meaningless when you say “I will put you all in” or any variation of it.

 

[Grandmasturkey]

I don't think you can make a bet by talking about someone else's stack without an accompanying action.

People will ask how much you have behind and there are implications in that as well but that also doesn't count as a bet.

I think you can only bet by saying things about your own stack, for example "I'm all in" or asking how much the player has and getting a rough estimate and then betting that amount either by saying "three-fifty" or putting the chips past the betting line. I think saying "im going to put you all in" without making an action or signaling to the dealer that you yourself is all in is definitely an angle and speculative action, but not a bet.

Just my thoughts!

 

[yone]

Tricky, when a player in my game says, ‘I’m going to put you all in’ the dealer/floor always had said, ‘you have to say all in.’ Luckily, it has never been used as an angle shoot, and the player always complied with the technicalities.

 

[AH77]

As wrong as angling is, people need to adopt a policy of “protect yourself at all times” especially when playing for serious money. Instead of snap calling and shoving your chips in like you just won your first 25 cent pot against your grandma on the kitchen table, allow a moment for the dealer to confirm the action before acting yourself. Sometimes people speak under their breath and aren’t even trying to angle necessarily. If you are unsure, ask before acting.

 

[Frogzilla]

Some rules have this exact phrase as explicitly not a bet. The player should have given the dealer time to clarify the action before calling. Tough lesson. Orbit penalty for the other player was absolutely warranted.

 

[ekricket]

But I saw them do this in an old western, so maybe this is where it comes from.....

 

[Himewad]

Clearly, my home game is much more relaxed about our rules. We are there to have fun. We play low stakes and just like to play poker.

I guess if we were playing for hundreds or thousands of dollars we might have people who try to play angles and induce others into action. But we get along. If someone was consistently trying to game the system, they would just fail to receive future invitations.

 

[Irish]

I'll repeat my comment from the other thread - gross.

I really dislike this statement in general, it's either an angle shoot or intimidation attempt. I used to respond with "if you can put me all-in, then I can fold your hand....". But now I typically just respond with "so you're all in then?" - I've found this sometimes will get you enough of an unexpected reaction that you can get a read on which angle the opponent is taking.

To me, you're playing with fire when you make ridiculous/misleading statements like this. And sometimes when you play with fire, you get burned. I get that technically this isn't a proper bet (no "raise" or amount noted), but as phrased (and assuming heads up), because he included "all-in" - I'd rule this an all-in and call.

If he got by on the technicality of "I'm gonna..." - replace "put you all-in" with "bet 1000" and see how that sounds....

I haven't found a clear rule that prescribes the "proper" decision on this, but in my house, unless the dealer is quick enough to clarify the intent (I am often dealing and always do this), I'd point out that "Making statements or taking action that could unfairly influence the course of play, whether or not the offender is involved in the pot" under RROP Poker Etiquette, and it'd be an all-in and a call.

To award this decision to the angle shooter with only an orbit penalty is asking for trouble in the future.

 

[Frogzilla]

Even “I’m gonna call” or “I’m gonna fold” isn’t the clearest. I would wait til they say “I call”, “I fold” or better yet put some cards or chips beyond that line before I’d even think about turning my hand over or mucking it.

 

[ekricket]

Clearly, my home game is much more relaxed about our rules. We are there to have fun. We play low stakes and just like to play poker.

I guess if we were playing for hundreds or thousands of dollars we might have people who try to play angles and induce others into action. But we get along. If someone was consistently trying to game the system, they would just fail to receive future invitations.

it’s not about relaxing or worry free play, it’s more about playing with strangers in diverse environments all over the world. You have to have consistent clear rules for so many people from different home games to come together and it not be a cluster fuck, calling the floor every hand cause one guy thinks saying “bazooka” is acceptable for calling a bet.

 

[Saoliver]

In a tournament at a well-run establishment, at he table behind me, a guy said "I'm gonna put you all in." Opponent snap called and tabled the winning hand. I'm not sure what exactly the weasel said to get out of it.. But the floor's ruling was loud and clear - I'm gonna put you all in is meaningless, it's not a bet, but he got an orbit penalty for inducing somebody to act out of turn.
I mentioned this in another thread an the immediate reactions were bad. I think it was the right ruling to a tough situation.

I have had this happen to me in both cash games and tournaments. Each time, I turn to the dealer and ask, "Was that a bet?"

As many have said, it is an angle but not a bet. But on a couple of occasions, the dealer has said that it was a bet and the player didn't complain.

 

[markleteenie]

I believe we all understand that "I will put you all in" is shortened way to say some variation of "I will [bet the amount that is the total of your current chip stack and thus will] put you all in [if you want to continue in this current hand]."
No one is actually meaning something different, such as I will put you all in [to a 5 star hotel on my dime, congrats!].

I guess the safe move is to only have our lawyers place bets for us. @Hornet is better at poker than I am anyway, so +EV.

Edit: I completely agree in a casino that you need to protect yourself and make certain of the action prior to your own action.

 

[Hornet]

I believe we all understand that "I will put you all in" is shortened way to say some variation of "I will [bet the amount that is the total of your current chip stack and thus will] put you all in [if you want to continue in this current hand]."
No one is actually meaning something different, such as I will put you all in [to a 5 star hotel on my dime, congrats!].

I guess the safe move is to only have our lawyers place bets for us. @Hornet is better at poker than I am anyway, so +EV.

Edit: I completely agree in a casino that you need to protect yourself and make certain of the action prior to your own action.

@markleteenie makes a very cogent and well reasoned argument. I would just add that the well known legal principle of contra proferentem should apply.

 

[ekricket]

I believe we all understand that "I will put you all in" is shortened way to say some variation of "I will [bet the amount that is the total of your current chip stack and thus will] put you all in [if you want to continue in this current hand]."
No one is actually meaning something different, such as I will put you all in [to a 5 star hotel on my dime, congrats!].

I guess the safe move is to only have our lawyers place bets for us. @Hornet is better at poker than I am anyway, so +EV.

So if a guy with his mouthful of hot dog makes a pushing motion with his hands over his chips and cards without speaking is he going all in or folding? Maybe in your house that means all in, maybe in my house it means min bet, maybe in someone else’s it means fold, and in another home game it means check. How the hell do you interpret that without asking the dealer or floor? Gonna call a lawyer?

 

[arch3r]

If "I'm gonna put you all in." is unacceptable, would "I'm gonna bet enough to put you all in." be acceptable?

 

[Himewad]

So if a guy with his mouthful of hot dog makes a pushing motion with his hands over his chips and cards without speaking is he going all in or folding? Maybe in your house that means all in, maybe in my house it means min bet, maybe in someone else’s it means fold, and in another home game it means check. How the hell do you interpret that without asking the dealer or floor? Gonna call a lawyer?

Personally, if nothing is actually said (other than mucking or checking), I would - and do - ask this person if they are all in.

In the OP, however, this is a totally different situation, because a verbal "all in" was communicated.

That's how I see it, anyway.

 

[ekricket]

p

Personally, if nothing is actually said (other than mucking or checking), I would - and do - ask this person if they are all in.

In the OP, however, this is a totally different situation, because a verbal "all in" was communicated.

That's how I see it, anyway.

Read the floor ruling. I don’t think an all in was communicated, and neither did the floor. Otherwise they would have ruled differently. The better certainly did not move all in.

 

[ekricket]

Personally, if nothing is actually said (other than mucking or checking), I would - and do - ask this person if they are all in.

In the OP, however, this is a totally different situation, because a verbal "all in" was communicated.

That's how I see it, anyway.

so you would clarify an ambiguous statement that did not use and words such as bet or raise, and didn’t specify an amount? I think that’s all we are saying here.

 

[Hornet]

so you would clarify an ambiguous statement that did not use and words such as bet or raise, and didn’t specify an amount? I think that’s all we are saying here.

I think it’s always better to clarify. The real question to me is how an ambiguous verbal declaration should be interpreted. I would interpret it against the person uttering the words and who is, in my mind, clearly attempting to shoot an angle.

 

[ekricket]

If your the chip leader and first to act, can you say stuff like “I’m putting anyone who calls me all in” and it be a binding bet? Now you have a variable amount being bet to each person.

 

[Himewad]

so you would clarify an ambiguous statement that did not use and words such as bet or raise, and didn’t specify an amount? I think that’s all we are saying here.

I see no need to clarify a statement that uses the words "all in" when the amount of that "all in" can clearly be determined.

 

[Himewad]

If your the chip leader and first to act, can you say stuff like “I’m putting anyone who calls me all in” and it be a binding bet? Now you have a variable amount being bet to each person.

This a completely different situation. In my first response, I said if the "I'm putting you all in" was made in a heads up situation, then it's an all-in. Period. If it's more than two players involved, then you need to clarify.

 

[DoubleEagle]

Clearly, my home game is much more relaxed about our rules. We are there to have fun. We play low stakes and just like to play poker.

I guess if we were playing for hundreds or thousands of dollars we might have people who try to play angles and induce others into action. But we get along. If someone was consistently trying to game the system, they would just fail to receive future invitations.

Relaxed home game or not, people need to learn how to make a proper bet. It can be embarrassing if they go play in a local casino tournament and get called out.

 

[markleteenie]

@markleteenie makes a very cogent and well reasoned argument. I would just add that the well known legal principle of contra proferentem should apply.

Wow, that's an interesting and elegantly fair concept. And I thought I wasn't going to learn anything today.