A misunderstanding call

[Alessandro 'Maverick' Galietta]

Hi guys, i need an advice. I'm very rigid in this situation and now i'm thinking that i could be more flexible.

The situation is the following:
Es. SB 200, BB 400, Player A raise 1.200, Player B raise 5.000, Player C raise 30.000 (allin i.e.),

A) BB moves his chips to call thinking of making call 5.000 and not 30.000 withouth a verbal declaration
B) BB declares call


Can i have a different decision if my dealers use the allin button?

ty

[Nick C]

Hello Maverick,

That's a great question. With the current TDA rules, mainly Accepted Action, the calling player could be liable to complete the bet to 30,000. I like the fact that you separate the action from the verbal because the difference could be substantial. Pushing 5000 forward, without saying anything, could save the calling player 25,000.
The floor could rule one of the following two options: The BB must complete the call or surrender his 5000. Or...After the verbal declaration of "call" the BB might be liable to complete the bet to 30,000 if a strict rule is in force.

There are many other factors that could be considered but, in my opinion, the above is what the current rules dictate.

As far as the use of an all-in button, I would say yes, it would make the all-in raise more clear, especially if the dealer controls the all-in button.

[Alessandro 'Maverick' Galietta]

Pushing 5000 forward, without saying anything, could save the calling player 25,000.

In this case the intention to call 5000 is clear, but if i.e. he puts only one chip to call and so the intention is not clear, the dealer announces call and the action proceeds ..
this is a situation of undercall and it's very difficult to save the player and the dealer must wait for the player to complete its call ...

right??

[Tristan]

If the intention to call 5,000 was very clear to you, I see nothing wrong with holding that player to the 5,000 with the option to call the rest or fold.

[Nick C]

I think I understand your question a little better than I did originally. If the dealer interprets the under call as a "full call" it could create a problem. If the dealer burns and turns the next card before the bet is pushed forward, and then the player says; "I called 5000 not 30,000!" This is why I encourage dealer's to confirm the action of any player whenever there is uncertainty.

I agree with Tristan but, it does put the player at the mercy of the floor. Tough one for sure.