Rule #22

[CoreySilver]

Hi Everyone!

This situation happened the other day and I was wondering if I could get some input.

Player A raised utg, Player B went all in, action folded around to Player A who asked for a count.

Player B, who pushed his chips out in clear view, not in stacks of 20, refused to have the dealer count/touch his chips. The floor was called over and asked Player B to stack their chips in multiples of 20 so Player A could determine how many chips were needed to call.

The question is, when a player is all in and refuses to count their chips or have the dealer touch their chips, does tda rule 22 apply to this situation? " Players are entitled to a reasonable estimation of an opponent's chip count; thus chips should be kept in countable stacks." Or does Player B have to give an exact chip count because he has bet all in?

Can a player refuse a dealer to touch or handle their chips at any time?

Thanks for your help everyone!

[Stuart Murray]

Interesting post, I would say, if I was called that because the player failed to keep a clean stack the dealer shall count the stack fully.  I checked Nick's recommended procedures and there is no mention of when a dealer may count an all-in, I know it has been discussed previously, but the dealer has usually counted the all-in when asked to.

I generally teach that a dealer must not count an all-in until they are asked to by a player in turn, there is nothing that precludes a dealer from counting an all-in when asked to and rule 22 does not prevent a player or dealer counting those chips. 

I would also warn or penalise the player for delaying the game by having a dirty stack and stalling action by preventing a chip count of his stack.

Regards
Stuart

[DCJ001]

Rule 22 applies to players keeping their chips in arranged stacks so that other players can estimate the amount of chips in their stacks.

But, in CoreySilver's example, player B pushed all in. The chips in question were no longer a part of player B's stack; they were part of the pot. Player B was in no position to say or do anything with regard to his all in bet. When another player asked how much the bet was, the dealer had a responsibility to count the all in bet.

As soon as player B instructed the dealer to not count the bet, the floor should have been called. Player B should not have been instructed to make stacks of the chips because the chips were no longer in his possession. The dealer had a responsibility to stack the chips and count the all in bet.

[Nick C]

I agree with Stuart. What is Player B trying to Accomplish by his action? Does he want to play poker, or not? I will also debate as to whether a bet is part of the pot until it is called or raised. Some players should stop wasting time and just play the game. It's poker, not a game of deception with smoke and mirrors.

[Spence]

Let's not forget to give this joker a penalty as well. I would prefer to have it be a little on the harsh side as well. Intentionally slowing the game as well as preventing the dealer from doing his job seems like at least 2 rounds.

[mooredog]

Player A has a right to know how much the all-in is and if the player won't count it the dealer will. End of story.

[mooredog]

If player A asks for a count

[Nick C]

I am in agreement with all that say the dealer should count the bet if asked by the calling player. However, would that action be in compliance with TDA rule #42 ?

[DCJ001]

I am in agreement with all that say the dealer should count the bet if asked by the calling player. However, would that action be in compliance with TDA rule #42 ?

Yes.

[chet]

Nick:  Rule 42 doesn't say anything about whether the pot should be counted.  Rule 42 only applies IF there is an error or discrepancy in the "original" count and in the "final" count.

Chet

[Nick C]

Gentlemen:

TDA rule #42 in part: If a player requests a count...
Chet, I said nothing about counting the pot, I referred to counting the bet, and yes rule 42 does specifically address this subject.
The problem with the rule is; if given the wrong information, it's too bad, the caller is still responsible...ridiculous.

Going back to CoreySilver's original question: The dealer not being allowed to touch a players chips!...That's ridiculous, too!
What really baffles me about Rule 42 is the fact that the chips will have to be counted at some point, so why not before a mistake is made?

[DCJ001]

Instead of interjecting thoughts about rule 42 in unrelated threads, it may be better to isolate rants about rule 42 in one thread that focuses about rule 42.

[Nick C]

DCJ001,
I'm sorry, I'll try to do better on my next post.

[Brian Vickers]

Rule 22 applies to players keeping their chips in arranged stacks so that other players can estimate the amount of chips in their stacks.

But, in CoreySilver's example, player B pushed all in. The chips in question were no longer a part of player B's stack; they were part of the pot. Player B was in no position to say or do anything with regard to his all in bet. When another player asked how much the bet was, the dealer had a responsibility to count the all in bet.

As soon as player B instructed the dealer to not count the bet, the floor should have been called. Player B should not have been instructed to make stacks of the chips because the chips were no longer in his possession. The dealer had a responsibility to stack the chips and count the all in bet.

100% AGREED.  22 applies to stacks in front of players, not bets that have been made.  If I'm facing a bet, I am entitled to know exactly what amount I am facing.  The player who bet should not be allowed to count or touch those chips, once he's bet them they are part of the pot and ONLY the dealer is allowed to touch them.  If player continues to argue, he gets a "delay of game" (disrupting behavior) penalty after the hand, every time.