I would prefer a simple rule that could be understood by all. That would require removing many of the variables that were discussed (number of chips, change due, chip manipulation, etc.) from consideration when determining the players action with chips left in the pot. Perhaps not so coincidentally, that is what seems to of happened to #44 before publishing the new rule. As I have said before, when one takes the first sentence of #44 literally, it seems to be quite clear to me as it doesn't make exceptions for any of the variables outlined in the summit discussion. However, as you folks have made clear to me, the literal interpretation is not REALLY the intention. Instead, it was simply pointing out yet another warning to the players that without verbal declarations their actions could be determined by the complicated issues by silently adding chips to prior chips.
Put another way, I would prefer:
When a player is facing a raise the FULL AMOUNT of all previous chips left behind from a prior bet are ALWAYS included to any chips SILENTLY added to the pot. The multiple-chip rule then applies.
I think it is quite rational that even a single chip being added to a previous bet to be treated as a multiple-chip bet totaling the full amount of those chips. This might also be one of the best training aids for players to realize the importance of verbal declarations.
Bill: great option to include in the discussion at the Summit. It certainly does address everything: whatever you add to chips in front of you, BOTH the original chips and the chip(s) you add will be counted as one total bet.
One
problem with this approach, however, is that IMO almost everyone (dealers, TD's, and players) have come to consider prior bet chips as a prior bet (whether or not change is due) and a silent overchip as a call of the raise amount. To change that and say that in this circumstance an overchip is part of previously bet chips unless the player declares call first may be considered to much of a change, we'll see.
.... So, in line with your idea, I'll throw this version out for discussion:
in lieu of a call or any other obvious interpretation, the TD may interpret the combination of chips as one total bet. From one POV I know that's kind of obvious, however it says either it's a call, or all chips in the pile constitute the total bet. Not that I think that necessarily would be adopted, but it's good for the debate process.
A couple years ago Dave Lamb proposed something along the lines of this decision algorithm:
A) Consider the amount needed for the player to call;
B) If the new chip(s) put out BY THEMSELVES would constitute a raise, then the raise amount is the total of all chips, including any change due from the initial bet;
C) Otherwise it's a call.
The key in B is that we don't deduct the change due from the initial bet in calculating how much extra it is for the player to call. Example: 150-300, the BB has a 500 posted (200 change due)... Player C raises to 900 total... so it's 600 more for the BB to call (he's committed to 300 from his prior bet of the BB, and he's facing 900 total). If the BB puts out a new amount of chips, either mixed or single, that does not constitute a raise of a bet of 600, then it's a call (the 200 change is not taken into consideration). However, if the BB puts out a new amount of chips that by itself is a raise above 600, then the total pile, including the new chips and the prior bet (including the 200 change) is now the total bet.
Now with this (or any other decision tree) we're back to whether the average dealer can remember that and calculate it accurately. Hence the certain language of Rule 44: a player is advised to declare his action prior to putting out new chips.
Many thanks for raising this important issue...