Author Topic: Hidden chips in a bet: award them or take out of play. Windfall threshold?  (Read 1614 times)

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
K-Lo raises a question in the 13th post of the first page of the following thread that is applicable to 2013 TDA Rule 54:
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=940.msg8386#msg8386

The question pertains to situations where a significant amount of a bet is uncounted (example: via hidden chip(s)). TDA Rule 54 permits awarding such hidden chip(s) to a calling player, even if the player is not required to pay them off. Is there a point at which this becomes a significant windfall that should be limited in some way?

K-Lo

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 869
  • @AskTheTD on Twitter
    • Ask the Tournament Director
Just to be clear, I am not advocating for a "windfall" exception per se.  If giving one player the extra chips would seem grossly unfair, then I think you could just apply Rule 1 and do something like take them out of play.

Personally though, I don't like taking chips out of play and there are very few situations where I would think doing so is justified,

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Right, and unless and until there is a specified windfall threshold then it is up to each house, based on it's sense of what are conscionable poker payoffs, to determine when a payoff becomes an unconscionable windfall.  Agreed that's well within Rule 1 and doesn't have to be specifically written into the rule....

So, can any progress be made towards a common standard, or is that about as good as it's going to get?
« Last Edit: October 25, 2013, 12:24:19 AM by MikeB »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
I would have no problem insisting that any discrepancy in the wagered amount, be satisfied (within a percentage of the unmatched wagers e.g. 10%). As with any rule, each incident must be evaluated and governed by how the misunderstanding originated. For example; a player who insta-calls a wager will have no recourse if the wagered amount was misunderstood. Other situations, should offer some protection for a player that was misinformed, or in the case of a gross misunderstanding.

I do believe that a player going all-in that loses the pot, and is covered by the opponent, should never be allowed to play the next hand. The question then becomes; what happens to the extra chips? Small amount, within 10%...give to the winner. Larger amount, hmm...? I'm not quite sure, but I don't believe the loser (who's bet would have been covered by the opposing player) should be allowed to continue playing, unless there were a re-buy situation. The only remaining option would be to remove the chips from play.