Facing a bet, player throws last chip in silently: Call or All-In?

[ShaneP15]

The small blind is 100, the big blind is 200, next player to act throws in a 500 dollar chip. It's his last chip. Doesn't say anything, doesn't manipulate, doesn't show any signs, all he did was just throw in his last chip that happens to be 500, is that a 200 call or an all in 500?

[MikeB]

Hi Shane:
Thanks for the great question. I believe there was a similar thread on this issue not long ago, perhaps someone can link to it.
IMO the player tosses out an overchip when facing a bet... I would rule it a call. Just doesn't seem to be enough benefit to justify changing the overchip rule for the last remaining chip.

[Nick C]

Absolutely a call...I agree with Mike.

[ShaneP15]

Yeah, I keep having floormans and a director telling me it's an All-In. I have a couple floormans told me it's a call. And all the players that spoke up said it's an All-In, and the players that does it say it's an All-In. But that was a long time ago, it seems like now they're going with call. It happens in California Casinos in LA.

[BillM16]

.... Just doesn't seem to be enough benefit to justify changing the overchip rule for the last remaining chip.

How about an enhancement?

45:  Oversized Chip Betting
When facing a bet or blind, pushing out a single oversized chip is a call if raise isn't first declared, even when it's your last chip.

[Nick C]

BillM16,

That would cover it.

[Dave Miller]

... even when it's your last chip.

While that would cover the last chip scenario, it might lead to ambiguity as I suggested in the other thread. I.E. A player with a mountain of small chips who puts in an oversize chip seems like a raise.

How about even when the player's remaining stack would lead to an assumption that a raise was intended.

[BillM16]

How about even when the player's remaining stack would lead to an assumption that a raise was intended.

The issue in this thread was the last chip.

Can you provide the link to your other thread?  I don't recall.  How could rule #45 be improved based upon an analysis of the players stack, the sizes of those chips relative to the oversized chip tossed, or any such analysis leading one TD or another to an assumption of what the player's intended action could have been?  Whew!   Rules and rulings should not be made based upon assumption, conjecture, or speculation.

[Nick C]

Dave,

I don't think what you're suggesting is necessary. We can not assume, or should we ever, that just because a player has smaller denomination chips he is raising because he places a large denomination chip in the pot. That is the purpose of the original rule. An oversize chip, without declaration of a raise, is a call...that's it! Bill's suggestion would negate the ridiculous assumption that a single last chip is an automatic raise, or all-in. There is little argument that would support an intended all-in without simply saying...all-in.

[BillM16]

Let it be known to all that today, Sunday, November 27, 2016, Nick and Bill finally agreed 100% on an issue.     Christmas is early this year.

[Nick C]

Yeah, Bill...one down and about 40 to go! I knew you'd see it my way... someday! 

[Dave Miller]

Can you provide the link to your other thread?  I don't recall.

It wasn't my thread, just my post, part way down the page.
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=1350.0

Dave,

I don't think what you're suggesting is necessary. We can not assume, or should we ever, that just because a player has smaller denomination chips he is raising because he places a large denomination chip in the pot. That is the purpose of the original rule. An oversize chip, without declaration of a raise, is a call...that's it! Bill's suggestion would negate the ridiculous assumption that a single last chip is an automatic raise, or all-in. There is little argument that would support an intended all-in without simply saying...all-in.

My point is that it shouldn't require the additional wording at all. But once you put in wording specific for the last chip, some idiot somewhere will attempt to angle-shoot and use the lack of any other alternate wording to mean that an oversize chip is a raise.

[ShaneP15]

.... Just doesn't seem to be enough benefit to justify changing the overchip rule for the last remaining chip.

How about an enhancement?

45:  Oversized Chip Betting
When facing a bet or blind, pushing out a single oversized chip is a call if raise isn't first declared, even when it's your last chip.

Where do you see, "even when it's your last chip."?

I'm reading it right now, and I can't find it. In fact, I did control find and type that in and nothing came up. Here's the copy and paste for rule 45 from my side.

45: Oversized Chip Betting

When facing a bet or blind, pushing out a single oversized chip is a call if raise isn't first declared. To raise with an oversized chip, raise must be declared before the chip hits the table surface. If raise is declared but no amount, the raise is the maximum allowable for the chip. When not facing a bet, pushing out an oversized chip without declaration is a bet of the maximum for the chip.

Nothing about the last chip.

[Steff0111]

It was a suggestion of BillM16!

[BillM16]

Thanks Steff and sorry for the confusion Shane.  I'll try to make these suggestions more apparent in the future.

When facing a bet or blind, pushing out a single oversized chip is a call if raise isn't first declared, even when it's your last chip.