PokerTDA

POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Non-TDA Tournament and General Poker Rules Discussion => Topic started by: pastor on September 08, 2014, 06:15:44 AM

Title: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: pastor on September 08, 2014, 06:15:44 AM
THNL; heads up

Post flop:
Play. A: bet xx (announce)
Dealer: repeat bet xx
Play. B: push all-in xx +/- x (silent)
Dealer: didn't announce nothing
Play. A: didn't say nothing
Turn:
Dealer: open turn
Play. A: didn't say nothing
Play. B: didn't say nothing
River;
Dealer: open the river
Play. A: didn't say nothing
Play. B: didn't say nothing
Dealer: announce show down
Both play. exposed his cards
Dealer: starts counting the chips of play. B and "upsssss" here is xx + x

My decision was: pot is a wager of play. A + play. B call. (argument: 1.to many mistakes, 2. responsible of both play. to stop the action, 3. fair play)
Title: Re: Uncovered wager
Post by: Nick C on September 08, 2014, 08:51:14 AM
Paster, welcome to the Forum.

 Your situation occurs more frequently than we would expect. In my opinion, because the turn and river cards were on board, (two betting rounds) and showdown began before the "silent raise" was noticed, I would rather return the unnoticed over sized bet to the "silent raiser" than force the other player to match the bet.

 Why didn't the raiser speak out? Obviously, the dealer made a mistake and missed the raise but, players have a certain responsibility to assist the dealer whenever a mistake is about to occur. Think about it...if you raise, wouldn't you pay attention to see if the other player called?

 Enforcing a rule after multiple betting rounds have lapsed does not appeal to me. It's too late.

 Good question.
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: MikeB on September 08, 2014, 09:28:02 AM
Great example, Pastor and we may see this included in an "incorrect bets" discussion segment at the 2015 TDA Summit.

IMO you have three choices under Rule 1:

1: Back up the action to the flop, and remove the turn and river from the board. Ask A if he wants to call B's overage. If so, then you do a re-shuffle according to your pre-mature boardcard protocol, and then re-deal the new turn and river..

2: Leave the board as is, and call the total bet equal to what A pushed out.

3: Leave the board as is, and call the total bet equal to what B pushed out.

In the best interest of fairness I think Option 2 is best: B never enforced (or even recognized) that he over-bet, and if he did he didn't speak up. Sure the dealer and A have some obligation too, but when I add that the original turn and river have been dealt AND the hands exposed, I think more of this falls on B.

The best interest of the game is not quite as clear; you can make a case for each option: Getting bets straight and narrowly enforcing rules are generally in the best interest of the game over the long haul (hence Option 1). Also a strict interpretation of Accepted Action might have us at Option 3 if we decide to leave the board as is... HOWEVER, fairness can't be totally separated from the best interest of the game either. At the end of the day, the best reading for me here is that there were mistakes by all, but everyone acted as though they assumed B's bet didn't cover A. Even B himself acted that way. Both board cards and hands have been exposed... So for these reasons I favor Option 2.

Thanks for the great case! This is another twist on the "incorrect bets" topic that we are likely to see at the 2015 Summit. Here's a link to the discussion suggestion:
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=1056.msg9151#msg9151
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: pastor on September 09, 2014, 04:18:15 AM
Excellent guys,

I am satisfied with the answers and discussion. I wanted to tell you that this has happened on cash game because my opinion is, that solution must be exactly the same. The difference is only a momement of showdown (tournament – on the flop, cash – after the river). Intentionally I did not want discussion in bets value  because I want a more complex response on a  base of liability and facts.
In my case the fact is that until the end (chip count after the river) no one did not know that the silent all-in bet was higher than play. A bet and no one did not react.
Q.  Is play. B responsible to draw attention to an error?
My answer is YES. If the answer is NO, then he can required to play. A FOLD ???
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: MikeB on September 09, 2014, 11:46:33 AM
Great example, Pastor and we may see this included in an "incorrect bets" discussion segment at the 2015 TDA Summit.

IMO you have three choices under Rule 1:

1: Back up the action to the flop, and remove the turn and river from the board. Ask A if he wants to call B's overage. If so, then you do a re-shuffle according to your pre-mature boardcard protocol, and then re-deal the new turn and river..

2: Leave the board as is, and call the total bet equal to what A pushed out.

3: Leave the board as is, and call the total bet equal to what B pushed out.

In the best interest of fairness I think Option 2 is best: B never enforced (or even recognized) that he over-bet, and if he did he didn't speak up. Sure the dealer and A have some obligation too, but when I add that the original turn and river have been dealt AND the hands exposed, I think more of this falls on B.

The best interest of the game is not quite as clear; you can make a case for each option: Getting bets straight and narrowly enforcing rules are generally in the best interest of the game over the long haul (hence Option 1). Also a strict interpretation of Accepted Action might have us at Option 3 if we decide to leave the board as is... HOWEVER, fairness can't be totally separated from the best interest of the game either. At the end of the day, the best reading for me here is that there were mistakes by all, but everyone acted as though they assumed B's bet didn't cover A. Even B himself acted that way. Both board cards and hands have been exposed... So for these reasons I favor Option 2.

Thanks for the great case! This is another twist on the "incorrect bets" topic that we are likely to see at the 2015 Summit. Here's a link to the discussion suggestion:
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=1056.msg9151#msg9151

As a related issue, this case does raise the question of whether B did put himself all-in by pushing out all his chips. If that's the ruling, then it tends to favor Option 3. The logic here would be that A Accepted B's action, and even though there was no all-in declaration and the cards weren't exposed, betting proceeded as though both parties assumed B was all-in short.  

Arguing slightly against Option 3 and in favor of Option 2 is that A) the cards weren't immediately exposed as they should have been in an all-in; B) Player B didn't verbally declare all-in;  and C) in the absence of a definitive all-in B's bet could be seen as a multiple chip wager where the overage likely didn't equal 50% of a raise, hence it could be construed as a call.

So after sorting out the mistakes in procedure, a good case (perhaps best case) can be made for Option 3 here as well. The question under Option 3 is what amount A pays B if B wins. Most would award B's entire stack to A if A wins, but by his silence has A accepted B's overage here and must he pay off B the full amount if B wins?
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: Nick C on September 09, 2014, 01:34:07 PM
Mike,
 Do you think substantial action should override the mistake? Two betting rounds have passed. One other issue that concerns me...after Player A Bets and Player B calls, shouldn't the dealer have pushed both bets into the pot? If so, how would either player recognize that one player bet more than the other?

 The time to count the chips, or match the stacks, is before burning and turning the next board card. The situation should have been settled as soon as Player B pushed all-in, (silent or not).

 Like you said earlier, all parties involved were guilty. The raise should have been announced by Player B, especially an all-in raise. Player A should have paid attention (Accepted Action). And the dealer was just as guilty because he failed to notice the raise, and he failed to announce the all-in, and he left the bets somewhere on the layout when they should have been pushed into the pot.

 I'm convinced, that in the best interest of the game, the facts indicate that Player B is the most guilty (for lack of a better word), followed by the dealer and then Player A who thought he was in for the correct amount. Based on all of the evidence I will choose #2  Leave the board as is, and call the total bet equal to what A pushed out.
Keeps getting more interesting every time I read it. ;D
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: pastor on September 10, 2014, 12:01:21 AM
Quote
and C) in the absence of a definitive all-in B's bet could be seen as a multiple chip wager where the overage likely didn't equal 50% of a raise, hence it could be construed as a call.


Exactly this I asked my colleagues before I posted this discussion:
Q: Could be silent ''all-in'' without any confirmation treated as a CALL, BET or RAISE? Let's say that this table use ALL IN BUTTON. In this case button certainly not been placed in front of a player B.
If the answer is CALL, BET or RAISE then we can use 50% rule (simple solution).
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: Nick C on September 10, 2014, 07:00:21 AM
Pastor,

 I think there are times that the correct, by the book rules, can not be applied. This is one of those situations. There were multiple mistakes made by all...the bettor, the silent all-in raiser, and the dealer.
I also want to mention the use of the all-in button. I originally thought it was a great idea, and when used properly it is. However, in the situation you described, it is ineffective because the dealer was (obviously) unaware Player B was all-in. So the All-In Button would not have been used... Correct?

 I believe, in the best interest of the game, the proper board cards must remain and the uncalled portion returned to the silent all-in raiser. I said it before, and I'll say it again, there is no way to ask Player A (if he was the loser) to add more chips to the pot, or award him the "extra" all-in amount, if he were the winner. Too much action has transpired. The time to draw attention to any irregularity is certainly before substantial action has occurred. In your scenario, two betting rounds and the showdown commenced before the mistake were noticed.

 One other note: You mentioned using the 50% rule. That would certainly simplify things, wouldn't it? The problem that currently exists (because there is no % rule in NL or Pot Limit), the amount of the unnoticed all-in could be anything. It could require less than 10% or 10 times more than the the amount wagered. It shouldn't make a difference, under current rules, but we all know, it could make a huge difference in the outcome of the hand, and the tournament.

 
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: Tristan on September 10, 2014, 09:18:12 AM
Too many unanswered questions for me to say for sure.

Why did the dealer put out the turn and the river without either Player A or B saying anything?

Why did Player A and B not act on the turn and river?

The dealer putting out the turn and flop without Player A and B acting and Player A and B's silence implies to me that everyone thought it was an all-in, yet no one tabled cards.  This could be explained by it being a cash game...but if it was a tournament, they should have been flipped.

I guess the answers to those questions would make me rule that either Accepted Action occurred or that it didn't.  If it did, the full amount of B's bet has action.  If not, the additional portion of B's bet should be returned to him and there is no action on it.
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: MikeB on September 10, 2014, 02:12:10 PM
Mike,
 Do you think substantial action should override the mistake? Two betting rounds have passed.

Definitely. There's just been too many streets dealt and too much card exposure. The last thing I want to do here is change the board cards.... thus Option 1 is my least fave in this scenario.
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: K-Lo on September 11, 2014, 11:04:50 PM
I am also confused to the fact scenario, along the same lines as Tristan. Is this an all-in or not?  Or was the action check-check all the way? This is a tournament, yes?

If both players treated this as an all-in situation, then I think we should enforce this as an all-in situation and award the pot accordingly. Even if, for whatever reason, the cards were not tabled as they should be in an all-in situation.

If both players checked the action down after the initial bet, thus treating this as a bet-call-check-check-check-check situation, then I don't see a problem treating it as such.

No way am I rolling back those board cards.
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: MikeB on September 13, 2014, 09:03:02 AM

If both players treated this as an all-in situation, then I think we should enforce this as an all-in situation and award the pot accordingly.


Assuming you rule an all-in, then under these conditions what amount will you award to A if he wins? If B wins will A payoff his entire bet?
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: K-Lo on September 13, 2014, 01:25:26 PM

If both players treated this as an all-in situation, then I think we should enforce this as an all-in situation and award the pot accordingly.


Assuming you rule an all-in, then under these conditions what amount will you award to A if he wins? If B wins will A payoff his entire bet?

If I'm treating this as an "all-in" situation, as it seems like the players themselves did, then it should be as if both players moved all-in.

More specifically, if A thought B might have him covered, thus still giving him an option to call or fold, then IMO, he must say something to stop the action and get clarification before the remaining streets are dealt. On the other hand, if A thought B had fewer chips and allowed the action to proceed on that basis, then Accepted Action applies and he is bound to call the whole amount if B actually had more chips.  Conversely, since B pushed all of his chips in, he must be prepared to lose it all to A if the hand gets to showdown; if for some reason he thinks A still needs to decide to call or fold, then IMO, he must say something to stop the action before the remaining streets are dealt.

In summary, whenever two or more players allow the dealer to complete the deal of the hand as if someone was all-in and all others have called, then the simplest and most logical solution to me would be to treat the action as if everyone involved announced all-in, and then award the pot accordingly. So in this example, if B wins the pot, A must fully pay off B, and if A doesn't have enough chips to pay off B, A is out. If A wins, B must fully pay off A, and if B doesn't have enough chips to pay off A, B is out.

Edit:  My position on this is similar to the one we discussed previously at: http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=940.msg8386#msg8386.
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: Nick C on September 13, 2014, 03:40:04 PM
K-Lo,

 I can't agree with you on this one. Too many irregularities have taken place. How does the dealer burn and turn without asking the players to act? Either he knew Player B raised all-in or he thought both players were in for equal amounts. Neither player deserves to gain extra chips in this one. Think about it...Player B raises all-in, but somehow forgets to say he's all-in...and then forgets to tell the dealer and Player A that he raised. ::) If Player A failed to notice that Player B was all-in, why wasn't he given the option to bet after the turn? Instead, the dealer burns and turns two streets! If A wins, he only gets (from Player B), what he (Player A) wagered. This would create the most unusual situation when an all-in player loses, but continues to play with his uncalled chips. Likewise, if Player B wins, I could not expect Player A to match the extra chips from the silent raiser and the brain-dead dealer.
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: K-Lo on September 13, 2014, 09:01:16 PM
I'm not sure I follow your line of reasoning, but my main point is this: if A thought he was NOT all-in, then he should expect a) the dealer to ask him if he wants to call B's bet or not, b) to check or bet when the turn is dealt, c) to say something when the dealer attempts to deal the river.  Since A said nothing, he should be deemed to be all-in, as is B. Practically, that is the simplest solution, and in my view, the fairest. If both players allow the dealer to deal the hand as if one player went all-in and the other called, i.e. they both "accepted" those action, then that's how we should interpret the situation.

And, if player B wins and has more chips than A, why shouldn't A be held to match the extra chips? Yes, the dealer made mistakes here, but A should not be able to benefit by purposely remaining silent if the dealer is proceeding to deal the rest of the hand as if there was an all-in & call.
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: MikeB on September 14, 2014, 12:08:00 AM
Ken / Nick:

Thanks for the discourse; this is a great example of (at best) a "loose" all-in, and how current TDA Rules might apply, and what gaps we might have. The key question appears to be whether there is accepted action here or not. . We have precedent for this being the first matter of fact to establish as in Rule 54: "...the TD will determine if the chip behind is part of accepted action or not (Rule 46)".

While Rule 54 doesn't directly apply to this situation (the topic is chip(s) found behind later)... the idea that first establishing whether there's accepted action (or not) does apply.

If you rule that A accepted B's total action, then each is obligated to pay or win B's total chip push. If you rule that A did not accept anything beyond a call from B, based on the appearance of the action being an all-in undercall, then can the bet be anymore than A's total bet, with mistakes to go around after that?

Which brings us back to B's apparent shove of ALL his visible chips.... it's not yet in the TDA Rules, but probably should be considered, a set of "standard gestures", of which a shove of all chips is highly likely to be supported as tantamount to an all-in, which of course it unofficially is currently. Does anyone want a player remaining in the tournament if they lose after shoving every chip they have forward, regardless of whether they declared all-in?

Greatly appreciate this thread. See new suggestion thread "Official Gestures" here: http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=1058.msg9180#msg9180




Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: Nick C on September 14, 2014, 06:44:37 AM
Ken,

 I guess the easiest way for me to express my thoughts is to give the following example: Player A bets, Player B silently-and knowingly- pushes his wager forward with a buried extra 10,000 count chip. He is holding a powerful hand and expects that if he announced his raise, Player A might not call.

 You are leaning more in the direction of putting the blame on Player A (Accepted Action), which is probably why we disagree on this one. By the strict written rule, your decision is in compliance. However, this is a situation when I would rule against Accepted Action. Substantial action has taken place, two streets have been dealt, neither player brought any attention to the all-in or the raise, and the dealer was oblivious to everything because he failed to ask the players to table their hands. What about some blame falling on the silent raiser? Does Accepted Action over-ride making your intentions clear...and substantial action? Mike, also agreed that after two streets were dealt, it's too late.

  
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: Tristan on September 14, 2014, 10:59:53 AM
Lets simplify this a bit.

If A bets and B shoves (what looks like a similar stack) and A and B both table their cards and the dealer runs the board out.  What call do you make if B has slightly more chips Nick?

It seems like the only difference between this and what happened is that the players didn't table their hands. 
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: Nick C on September 14, 2014, 12:43:23 PM
Sorry Tristan,

 I don't think this one is that simple. If the players and dealer were aware of the all-in, of course they would have tabled their cards, and possibly might have missed the "slight difference" you referred to. Let's not forget that two betting rounds also transpired.

 If the situation were as simple as you described, with a slight difference, that could be much easier to settle but do we really want to start considering how close the actual call is? I don't... and many will argue the amount should have little to do with a ruling.

 I'd rather remove the extra chips of the uncalled raiser, if he loses, than force the opposing player to add more chips if the all-in were to win.
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: Tristan on September 14, 2014, 02:52:41 PM
Nick, I'm referring to this:

I wanted to tell you that this has happened on cash game because my opinion is, that solution must be exactly the same. The difference is only a momement of showdown (tournament – on the flop, cash – after the river).

I'm still not sure if it was tournament or cash based on what pastor said.  If it was cash they most likely would not have tabled their hands til the end and the situation described can happen on a regular basis on a cash game.

Unless I see an understandable reason for making another ruling, most times if it looks like an all-in and a call and it sounds like an all-in and a call, I'm going to rule it an all-in and a call.
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: K-Lo on September 16, 2014, 08:05:41 AM
What about some blame falling on the silent raiser?

I guess I just don't see why the raiser should be blamed here. He pushed all of his chips in and protected his cards.  There was no string bet, no hidden chips.  This is a binding wager.

The opponent has the option of asking for a count. He could have asked the dealer to verify that the all-in player was covered. He also has the option of stopping the action if he believed that there was still action to be had. My concern is that if you allow him to only be liable for the amount of chips he initially put forward in this situation in the case where the all-in wager is actually greater, you give him the incentive to not say anything, even if he knows for a fact that there is an irregularity. It becomes a win-win situation if he stays silent and plays ignorant because he can never lose more than he put forward even if he intends to call the all-in wager no matter what the count.
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: Nick C on September 17, 2014, 06:37:56 AM
Ken, I can't imagine you in that situation and reacting the way the silent raiser did.  After the flop, your opponent makes a bet, you push all-in. Wouldn't you expect the dealer, or the other player to recognize your all-in? Wouldn't you stop the action when it's obvious that the other player has not called your all-in raise? Furthermore, how could you not be puzzled by: the dealer not asking for the proper bettor to begin action? If the dealer did recognize the all-in (thinking both players had equal amounts in the pot), why didn't he insist that the cards be tabled before he burned and turned, not once but twice?

 There's too much wrong with the original post. I can't replay the described situation and believe that it could ever happen. I also can't believe that you would see no fault, or blame directed at the raiser.
Title: Re: Uncovered bet: does mistake stand or backup to the flop then redeal 4t & 5th st?
Post by: Brian Vickers on February 10, 2015, 02:15:39 PM
Just wanted to add my two cents, and it is to agree with what Tristan has said above: If it looks like an all-in, and both players have played the hand as if they are all-in, then I treat the outcome as an all-in and call.

Now, does this situation qualify, and would I take the same approach in cash and tournament? 

Had this been a tournament situation and had the two players tabled their hands prior to dealing the turn and river, I would have absoultely paid off the winner as if it had been an all-in situation, and I have done exactly this multiple times in the past.

Had this been a cash game situation, and the players had not tabled their hands (as is often the case with all-ins in cash games) then it becomes trickier.  Can we declare that an absence of action is accepted as action itself?  Let's look at the (albeit slightly limited) facts:
Player A made large bet, Player B pushed out the entire stack. 
Dealer put out the turn and river without further comment or action by either player. 
Players exposed their hands. 

Now, as a former dealer I can tell you that on a cash game if the bets looked close I would have counted down the stacks to make sure the call was less than the original bet, if it appeared “obvious” that Player B’s call was less than the original bet and was all-in, I would have announced “all-in and call” but would NOT have made the pot right before running out the board.  I want to get those hands out, and when two players are heads up and all-in, I will never make the pot right first.  As a manager and instructor I will instruct dealers to never make the pot right prior to running out the board in this situation either.  Again this is if it is clear that all bets are covered, but by not making pot right first you can push pot to the clearly large stack if he wins and save a lot of time or make pot right if smaller stack wins and take exactly same amount of time as if it was made right before running out board.  In this scenario, I believe the dealer assumed that B had a smaller stack size for whatever reason and did like he usually does, but where he failed was to announce the “all-in and call” and had he announced this then the players would have had an extra opportunity to correct the action.  Had he announced this and the players did not say anything and let the board be run out, then I definitely would have paid off the winner as if it was an all-in.

In the original poster’s scenario I am still leaning towards and accepted action and call simply because neither player said anything on either street and then turned over their cards at the showdown.  Why would they not check on turn or river if they weren’t under the impression that they were all-in?  Had one player spoken up prior to the showdown, I would be inclined to allow a bet and option to call on the river, but since the players entered showdown and one players entire stack was across the line, I would rule all-in and call in this scenario.