Tourney Question on all-in and call ruling (1 Viewer)

[jemfernandez]

This happened in my tourney last week. Down to three handed, Player A in in the SB announces he's All-in. Player B in the BB asked for a count. Player A counts out his chips and says "about 37,000 behind". Player B goes, "Ok, I call". Turns out player A actually has another 15,000 or so behind making his total about 52,000. Is player B's call binding? What should the ruling be?

For what it's worth, Player B eventually said it's ok and he still calls, but he was quite hesitant to do this.

 

[stocky]

A call is a call imo it's the BBs job to find out the exact amount here. He can ask for a proper count again.

 

[upNdown]

A call is a call imo it's the BBs job to find out the exact amount here. He can ask for a proper count again.

I agree, unless SB was hiding that extra 15k behind and under other chips.

 

[RainmanTrail]

It'd be binding in every tournament under any ruling standard.

It's not the player's responsibility to provide a count of their stack. They don't even have to respond when asked if they don't want to. The dealer is supposed to count the stack out if asked, not the player.

 

[jemfernandez]

Thanks! It was a self dealt game though. Can't recall who the dealer was in that hand.

 

[courage]

Clearly a call. How could it be otherwise?

 

[BGinGA]

Dealer is responsible for announcing the all-in raise amount (self-dealt is irrelevant). To not do so is a dealer error.

If Player B makes a verbal call based on incomplete information and for a grossly misrepresented amount, it is possible that the TD could rule that Player B may reconsider his action, if it were discovered prior to subsequent actions.

 

[Jambine]

Dealer is responsible for announcing the all-in raise amount (self-dealt is irrelevant). To not do so is a dealer error.

If Player B makes a verbal call based on incomplete information and for a grossly misrepresented amount, it is possible that the TD could rule that Player B may reconsider his action, if it were discovered prior to subsequent actions.

^That^
It's up to player B to determine the correct amount. He can ask that it be brought in, that the dealer run it down, but in the end its player B's responsibility

 

[brains613]

Dealer is responsible for announcing the all-in raise amount (self-dealt is irrelevant). To not do so is a dealer error.

If Player B makes a verbal call based on incomplete information and for a grossly misrepresented amount, it is possible that the TD could rule that Player B may reconsider his action, if it were discovered prior to subsequent actions.

Agree with all.

Question, not for the sake of the ruling, but I think it gives us a clearer picture; What's the situation here in the tourney? Current blinds? Starting stacks? Players remaining?

 

[Poker Zombie]

Unfortunately it's a call. It is the biggest reason that we strongly enforce the "big chips on top, out front" rule. In a self-dealt game, the dealer in the 3-seat cannot reasonably be expected to count the chips of the player in the 8-seat. Even so, if the dealer miscounts the call would still stand.

It would be difficult, if not impossible to "hide" 15,000 behind a stack of 37,000 if the bigger chips are all on top of the stacks and closest to the betting line. If they were not, and this contributed to the call, the call would have to stand, but I would sit the player out at least an orbit.

I was knocked out of a $500 tournament in Vegas because a short-stack (~T5000 in chips) had a single T25,000 chip in hid 2nd row, at the bottom of a stack. I am no longer capable of being a nice guy when someone violates this rule.

 

[upNdown]

I was knocked out of a $500 tournament in Vegas because a short-stack (~T5000 in chips) had a single T25,000 chip in hid 2nd row, at the bottom of a stack. I am no longer capable of being a nice guy when someone violates this rule.

That's crap. Was there some intervening or subsequent action? Or did you not even complain? I'd like to think you could take back your bet if you tried to do so immediately.

 

[BGinGA]

Unfortunately it's a call. .....if the dealer miscounts the call would still stand.

I'd argue strongly against such a ruling. RROP is quite clear on this matter:

Robert's Rules of Poker v11
SECTION 14 - NO LIMIT AND POT-LIMIT
NO-LIMIT RULES
12. 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.

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.

 

[Poker Zombie]

That's crap. Was there some intervening or subsequent action? Or did you not even complain? I'd like to think you could take back your bet if you tried to do so immediately.

I did protest. When the floor was called, the floor asked if I requested a count, and I did not. It seemed obvious to me that I was calling down a player with roughly 5 BB.

According to TDA:

49: Accepted Action Poker is a game of alert, continuous observation. It is the caller’s responsibility to determine the correct amount of an opponent’s bet before calling, regardless of what is stated by others. If a caller requests a count but receives incorrect information from a dealer or player, then pushes out that amount, the caller has accepted the full correct action & is subject to the correct wager or all-in amount. As with all situations, Rule 1 may apply at TD’s discretion.

So yes, I agree with BG's assessment that the call could be nullified by the TD. Unfortunately, as someone well versed in game rules, I know that "may" also means "may-not".

 

[WedgeRock]

I still think OP is a call. Thinking you are calling 37k and the stack ends up being 52k is not a gross misunderstanding of an amount.

OTOH, thinking you are calling ~5k and end up calling 30k very well could be a gross misunderstanding.

 

[BGinGA]

I still think OP is a call. Thinking you are calling 37k and the stack ends up being 52k is not a gross misunderstanding of an amount.

You may think so, but that thinking does not align with the published RROP and TDA rules.

15K is 29% of the total 52K stack, which is not a trivial amount. Or looking at it another way, his miscounted/uncounted 15K represents another 40.5% on top of his stated all-in bet. That's significant.

 

[pltrgyst]

what if player B says "Call 37000"?

 

[BGinGA]

lol, well, at some point, they're gonna figure out that player A actually has more than 37K in his all-in bet. RROP v11 has this to say:

SECTION 14 - NO LIMIT AND POT-LIMIT
NO-LIMIT RULES
8. If there is a discrepancy between a player's verbal statement and the amount put into the pot, the bet will be corrected to the verbal statement.

SECTION 15 - TOURNAMENTS
20. A player who declares all in and loses the pot, then discovers that one or more chips were hidden, is not entitled to benefit from this. That player is eliminated from the tournament if the opponent had sufficient chips to cover the hidden ones (A rebuy is okay if allowable by the rules of that event). If another deal has not yet started, the director may rule the chips belong to the opponent who won that pot, if that obviously would have happened with the chips out in plain view. If the next deal has started, the discovered chips are removed from the tournament.

26. Higher-denomination chips must be placed where they are easily visible to all other players.

27. All tournament chips must remain visible on the table throughout the event.

So it really depends on when the discrepancy is discovered (rule 8 above). The proper ruling has already been covered previously if the discrepancy is discovered before any further action or dealt cards (the TD may rule that Player B can reconsider his action).

If the hand plays out and then the discrepancy is discovered, then rule 20 applies: if player A loses and player B has sufficient chips to cover the all-in, then player A is eliminated and player B is awarded the extra chips. If player A wins the pot, he wins T37K from player B. Player A is not entitled to benefit from the miscount or misrepresentation of his stack size.


Noteworthy that if neither player had mentioned an amount (if the verbal exchange had been "All-in", "Call", for example), the actual amount of chips in either player's stack is irrelevant.

 

[WedgeRock]

500% > 29%, IMO.

But TD is always going to have great latitude to make a ruling, rightfully so because the details matter so much.

 

[BGinGA]

Best way I can describe it is let me slice off 29% of your starting stack (10K down to 7100) and let's see if you think it's substantial.