61
Live Cash Game Rules Questions / Dealer error: do we force player to pay?
« Last post by MisterD on December 01, 2023, 12:01:59 PM »Interesting issue at a private game last night.
Action then folded back to Player A who insisted that the $100 should go into the pot. I was asked for a ruling.
--
On the one hand, I understand that, technically, the $100 belongs in the pot: there was forward motion and the chips crossed a clearly delineated betting line.
On the other hand, we are a private game and I honestly believe Player A: there was no angle-shot here; he honestly mis-heard the bet amount. I think it odd that he would call 100 and not 125, but that's his business. We generally have allowed players to withdraw bets under these circumstances, especially when no significant action has occurred behind them (which had not in this case).
Additionally, Player B's cards were mucked and not identifiable. If they were identifiable, I would have offered him the chance to pay the full bet amount and play his cards. Under the circumstances, forcing him to pay the $100 seemed only punitive, which I generally try to avoid.
Thoughts?
- Player A bets 100 on the flop.(Edited to add: this is a typo. The bet amount was 125. This error led to some confusion in the first response, below.)
- Dealer announces the bet as 125.
- Action folds around to Player B, who says "I call," and pushes out 100.
- Dealer corrects Player B, telling him the bet is 125. Player B says, "Oh, I thought it was only 100. I fold," and pulls back his chips and pushes out his cards.
- Dealer mucks Player B's hand.
Action then folded back to Player A who insisted that the $100 should go into the pot. I was asked for a ruling.
--
On the one hand, I understand that, technically, the $100 belongs in the pot: there was forward motion and the chips crossed a clearly delineated betting line.
On the other hand, we are a private game and I honestly believe Player A: there was no angle-shot here; he honestly mis-heard the bet amount. I think it odd that he would call 100 and not 125, but that's his business. We generally have allowed players to withdraw bets under these circumstances, especially when no significant action has occurred behind them (which had not in this case).
Additionally, Player B's cards were mucked and not identifiable. If they were identifiable, I would have offered him the chance to pay the full bet amount and play his cards. Under the circumstances, forcing him to pay the $100 seemed only punitive, which I generally try to avoid.
Thoughts?