Cash Game Is This Ruling Correct? (1 Viewer)

Anthony Martino

Anthony Martino

Royal Flush
Joined
Sep 26, 2015
Messages
12,594
Reaction score
24,666
Location
Round Rock, TX
Playing 2/2 PLO at Tampa Hard Rock

Raised pre, multiple callers. Three checks to me, I announce pot and put out $100

Guy behind me tosses in two green chips for 50

Everyone else folds, the dealer is talking to the guy (on his left, I can't hear) and then the guy pulls his bet back and folds

The dealer explains that he heard the player announce a bet of 50 before I made my action, so because the action changed he can pull it back

I explain that after I put out my bet there was a significant delay (like 5-10 seconds) before the guy put out the two green chips

Floor rules that because the guy made the verbal declaration first he can pull it back
 
Any verbal declaration should have started by saying "fold", "call", or "raise".
Any other statement should have been discarded by the dealer as nonsense and the player should have immediately been urged to follow the game.
I am a strong proponent of verbal declarations (even compulsory), provided they just start with any of the words above (or "check" in the absence of a bet), before referring to any numbers or player's feelings and related crap.
 
raynmanas said:
if the guy really made a verbal declaration before you bet, this is the correct ruling. i personally don't like it, but it falls within the rules.
Click to expand...
That was my initial thought, but I'm persuaded by @Coyote 's comment above.
Since the action wasn't on that guy, I think his verbal declaration should be meaningless.
So, having made a meaningless verbal declaration, his tossing in the $50 ten seconds later should represent a call. Unless we're going to make rulings based on intent, I think the ruling is wrong.
 
upNdown said:
That was my initial thought, but I'm persuaded by @Coyote 's comment above.
Since the action wasn't on that guy, I think his verbal declaration should be meaningless.
Click to expand...

there was a very similar thread recently, i'll see if i can find it. the long and short of it is, if someone bets out of turn, they can pull their bet back if the action changes before it actually gets back to them. if anthony had checked, he would have had to leave the bet in.
 
raynmanas said:
there was a very similar thread recently, i'll see if i can find it. the long and short of it is, if someone bets out of turn, they can pull their bet back if the action changes before it actually gets back to them. if anthony had checked, he would have had to leave the bet in.
Click to expand...
Right. But I'm not sure the guy can act out of turn, verbally. I think he cannot.
 
Coyote said:
Yes, I remember that thread.
IMHO, whatever Robert (Ciaffone) says in his rules, no out-of-turn betting should go totally un-punished.
Click to expand...

totally agree, i absolutely hate the rule. but i still think the dealer probably got it right.
 
upNdown said:
I'm not sure. It could be different. It should be different.
Click to expand...

this i disagree with. verbal bets are and should be binding.

being able to take the bet back because the action changed, that's what i have a problem with.
 
But here, if I get it right, we don't have a real out-of-turn bet; we have a person tossing chips in his actual turn, without even speaking, failing to call the bettor's bet, apparently (hopefully) because he didn't hear and see the bettor's bet before him.
Did I misunderstand something?
Reminds me of the poor psychopath in the Cuckoo bird film, who insisted on betting "a dime" even after the betting had gone higher.
 
Coyote said:
But here, if I get it right, we don't have a real out-of-turn bet; we have a person tossing chips in his actual turn, without even speaking, failing to call the bettor's bet, apparently (hopefully) because he didn't hear and see the bettor's bet before him.
Did I misunderstand something?
Click to expand...

maybe. this is the key to the ruling:

Anthony Martino said:
The dealer explains that he heard the player announce a bet of 50 before I made my action
Click to expand...
 
My issue is that I announced pot, reached out with a 100 chip plus some red and looked at the dealer and spoke with him and verified what the pot bet was, then dropped the 100 chip.

THEN there was a delay of about 5 seconds and two green chips were tossed in by the player on the dealers left (I was on the dealers right).

The dealer is saying the guy announced "50" before I announced pot. But given the amount of time I took announcing pot, putting my bet out, verifying with the dealer what the pot bet was, then putting the bet in, then waiting 5 seconds, THEN seeing the green chips tossed in, from my perspective it looks like there was a significant delay in time that it just doesn't make sense his bet didn't have to stand.

I'm supposed to believe he announced "50" before I bet, and then waited 10 seconds before he tossed in his bet? Like, wtf?
 
Dealer is incompetent. I hate the ruling of the floor. Dealer should have had better control of the action. If the player actually made a verbal declaration out of turn the dealer should have immediately corrected the player.

I think that $50 should have stayed in the pot and the player has either the option to fold and lose that $50 or put in $50 more to continue.
 
raynmanas said:
if someone bets out of turn, they can pull their bet back if the action changes before it actually gets back to them.
Click to expand...
This is absolutely true.

In this case, with the amount of time that went in between, I think the 2 green chips should count as a call (and force another 50 to be called).

The following is just a huge guess from my part: Since you didn't hear what they said, could it be that the villain after you bet went like "shit, what a dumbass I am, I said 50 out of turn. Ah well, then I owe 50" and tosses two green in. The dealer then says "You can fold for free if you want, the action changed". Exactly that has happened at a homegame of mine, with the difference that everyone heard everything so it was clear for all that the villain could take the chips back and fold.
 
The reason I'm guessing the above is because why would someone call half the bet then fold? What's the angle? He could just fold without a fuss!
 
I think the verbal declaration only saves villian here because it gives the floor enough to consider this a "gross misunderstanding" of the action and the rules afford the floor the opportunity to protect such players.

If I were deciding I would probably rule the same unless he's a repeat offender.

LATE EDIT, overlooked a key point here, that reverses my opinion.

Anthony Martino said:
Everyone else folds, the dealer is talking to the guy (on his left, I can't hear) and then the guy pulls his bet back and folds
Click to expand...

If players folded after the error and dealer didn't stop the action, he should be compelled to complete the call. Otherwise the floor has just damaged anyone acting that would have called Anthony as the bettor, but not overcall the villain.
 
Last edited:
I'm seat 8 to right of dealer, other player seat 1 to left

Action on me, I announce pot and hold a 100 chip and some $5 chips out, converse with dealer to confirm what the pot bet is, and put the 100 chip down

Takes about 5 seconds

Another 5 seconds pass before I see seat 1 fling two green chips forward

Everyone else folds, the dealer starts talking to seat 1 (I can't hear) and seat 1 pulls his bet back and folds

Dealer states seat 1 announced verbally a bet of 50, out of turn, before I announced my pot bet, and because action changed he can pull his bet back

I never heard the player announce the bet, the dealer never mentioned the out of turn bet while I was confirming what the pot sized bet is

In addition, the significant delay of roughly 10 seconds after I put my bet forward before Seat 1 put his chips in, made me doubt he announced "50" before my bet and then took that long to put them into the pot

Two floors told me he gets to take his bet back.

My being stuck 2500 at the time didn't help either lol
 
Anthony Martino said:
Dealer states seat 1 announced verbally a bet of 50, out of turn, before I announced my pot bet, and because action changed he can pull his bet back
Click to expand...
If the dealer stopped the action before anyone folded after player 1, I think the floor's ruling is defendable.

If not, players folded assuming seat 1 overcalled, which either damages you as the bettor or callers that folded to a bet that didn't exist.
 
Anthony Martino said:
I'm seat 8 to right of dealer, other player seat 1 to left

Action on me, I announce pot and hold a 100 chip and some $5 chips out, converse with dealer to confirm what the pot bet is, and put the 100 chip down

Takes about 5 seconds

Another 5 seconds pass before I see seat 1 fling two green chips forward

Everyone else folds, the dealer starts talking to seat 1 (I can't hear) and seat 1 pulls his bet back and folds

Dealer states seat 1 announced verbally a bet of 50, out of turn, before I announced my pot bet, and because action changed he can pull his bet back

I never heard the player announce the bet, the dealer never mentioned the out of turn bet while I was confirming what the pot sized bet is

In addition, the significant delay of roughly 10 seconds after I put my bet forward before Seat 1 put his chips in, made me doubt he announced "50" before my bet and then took that long to put them into the pot

Two floors told me he gets to take his bet back.

My being stuck 2500 at the time didn't help either lol
Click to expand...
Wait, if other people folded after he fired his two chips in, there's no way he can get those back.
I think.
 
Because the amount of a wager at big-bet poker has such a wide range, a player who has taken action based on a gross misunderstanding of the amount wagered may receive some protection by the decision-maker. A "call" or “raise” may be ruled not binding if it is obvious that the player grossly misunderstood the amount wagered, provided no damage has been caused by that action. Example: Player A bets $300, player B reraises to $1200, and Player C puts $300 into the pot and says, “call.” It is obvious that player C believes the bet to be only $300 and he should be allowed to withdraw his $300 and reconsider his wager. A bettor should not show down a hand until the amount put into the pot for a call seems reasonably correct, or it is obvious that the caller understands the amount wagered. The decision-maker is allowed considerable discretion in ruling on this type of situation. A possible rule-of-thumb is to disallow any claim of not understanding the amount wagered if the caller has put eighty percent or more of that amount into the pot.
Click to expand...
Robert's Rules of Poker, Chapter 14, item 12.
Seems to me that this is what they based the ruling on. As villain believed it was limped to him and wanted to raise, it's not an unreasonable ruling. I can understand that he needs to pay attention but it can be hard for seat 1 to see what seat 8 did. I guess it's even worse with all the plexiglass in between as well.
 
JustinInMN said:
If the dealer stopped the action before anyone folded after player 1, I think the floor's ruling is defendable.

If not, players folded assuming seat 1 overcalled, which either damages you as the bettor or callers that folded to a bet that didn't exist.
Click to expand...

I think there's a reason the dealer was so flustered and nervous, he knew he fucked up, but let the floor screw me instead
 
JustinInMN said:
If the dealer stopped the action before anyone folded after player 1, I think the floor's ruling is defendable.

If not, players folded assuming seat 1 overcalled, which either damages you as the bettor or callers that folded to a bet that didn't exist.
Click to expand...

upNdown said:
Wait, if other people folded after he fired his two chips in, there's no way he can get those back.
I think.
Click to expand...

The bet was 100, villain put in 50. Them folding is probably due to the 100, not the 50. :)
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

Mike Wells
Cash Game Weird situation in cash game
2
Replies
51
Views
1K
CraigT78
CraigT78
Headhunter13
Ruling in NLHE cash game
Replies
19
Views
483
CraigT78
CraigT78
S
Ruling Request!!
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
glynn
G
bsdunbar1
Is this verbal declaration binding?
Replies
21
Views
648
bsdunbar1
bsdunbar1
MemphisFats
Tourney Surprised by local casino raise ruling
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
LeLe
LeLe
Back
Top Bottom