One million!

[The Hitman]

Hello guys,

I have witnessed a strange ruling in a small Czech Republic casino as I was playing a tournament there.
So, we are on the 5th level of Day 1C, starting stack 25k, 30mn levels, action is heads-up and we are on the flop (blinds are 300/600 I think, but it's irrelevant).
Player 1 bets 5k with one chip, player 2 puts a 5k chip when action is on him saying "one million", there is a moment of surprise at the table, then player one looks at the dealer and is looking apparently to have a confirmation of this action. As nobody is saying anything I say "I think it's a call, but I am not in the hand and I don't want to interfere...", dealer now says: "This means all-in, as he announces an amount that is more than his actual stack, so it has to be all-in...". I can't help but disagreeing and ask for a floor opinion, who confirms what the dealer told me... 
I then ask the floor: "Is it a house rule?" and he anwers: "We do that everywhere sir!. Me:"Everywhere? In Czech Republic?, him:"everywhere in the world, it's an international TDA rule" and he runs away...
So, did I miss something here? lol
For me it's a call, as we have to assume the player's intention, and because he's using a vocabulary that opens an interpretation. This can als be a pure angle shoot in order to have some information.

Did I miss something here? lol

[BillM16]

Here are TDA 2017 Rules:

40:  Methods of Betting: Verbal and Chips
A: Bets are by verbal declaration and/or pushing out chips. If a player does both, whichever is first defines the bet. If simultaneous, a clear and reasonable verbal declaration takes precedence, otherwise the chips play. In unclear situations or where verbal and chips are contradictory, the TD will determine the bet based on the circumstances and Rule 1. See Illustration Addendum. See also Rule 57.

41: Acting in Turn
A: Players must act in turn verbally and/or by pushing out chips. Action in turn is binding and commits chips to the pot that stay in the pot.

57:  Non-Standard & Unclear Betting
Players use unofficial betting terms and gestures at their own risk. These may be interpreted to mean other than what the player intended.

If Player 2 made a verbal bet of 1,000,000 while putting in a 5k chip, he is all-in if he has 1,000,000 or anything less. 

[Nick C]

I will agree with Bill, with one condition. If the bettor pushed the amount before verbally announcing raise, it would only be a call. If the bettor announced 1,000,000. before pushing his (single) 5K chip forward it would be an all-in raise.

[Dave Miller]

Doesn’t this phrase apply?

...In unclear situations or where verbal and chips are contradictory...

I think it should be a call with a warning or penalty. After all, a million is way more than his chip stack.

On second thought, at what point do you say all in is acceptable because the chip stack is almost a million? Therefore, it probably should be all in regardless of the stack size. And still get a warning or penalty.

[The Hitman]

For

Doesn’t this phrase apply?

...In unclear situations or where verbal and chips are contradictory...

I think it should be a call with a warning or penalty. After all, a million is way more than his chip stack.

On second thought, at what point do you say all in is acceptable because the chip stack is almost a million? Therefore, it probably should be all in regardless of the stack size. And still get a warning or penalty.

I agree with your second thought: at what point do we decide that one million is a valid announcement?

However, I still think players are responsible for making their action clear, and using non-standard vocabulary is at their own risk. Why this player is announcing "one million"? He could have said all-in and and would have been understood by the whole table... Instead he opened the door to an interpretation of the rule. And according to his opponent reaction (and there was one), it opens the door for him to adjust his action. It opens the door to angle shooting...

In my humble opinion, TDs are here to rule actions non intentions. For me if it appears that there is a doubt about the action, and in that situation it's clearly the case, I'd rule this as an unclear bet and force the player to call.

[Dave Miller]

I'd rule this as an unclear bet and force the player to call.

Wait a sec, until that last sentence, you seemed to agree that it’s all in.

[The Hitman]

Sorry Dave, I haven't made myself really clear on the previous post...

When I was quoting you, I was just envisaging for one moment if it could be all-in, but the more I think about it the more I am sure that this specific situation has to be ruled as a call, on my point of view of course. I am really open to any arguments that could prove me I am going the wrong direction, so let's talk about it ;-)

[Dave Miller]

 The single chip rule is designed so that we don’t have to assume or think about what the player was intending. For example, a player facing a 2K bet who has a stack of 1K chips, but silently puts in a 5K or larger chip, is still making a call because we don’t want to assume anything about his intentions.

 Likewise, when this player says 1 million, we should not be forced to make any kind of conclusions or assumptions based on a chip stack size.  The fact that it is less than 1 million is irrelevant. Otherwise, you’re forced to ask, at what point does the stack size become relevant?

[BillM16]

The single chip rule is designed so that we don’t have to assume or think about what the player was intending. For example, a player facing a 2K bet who has a stack of 1K chips, but silently puts in a 5K or larger chip, is still making a call because we don’t want to assume anything about his intentions.

 Likewise, when this player says 1 million, we should not be forced to make any kind of conclusions or assumptions based on a chip stack size.  The fact that it is less than 1 million is irrelevant. Otherwise, you’re forced to ask, at what point does the stack size become relevant?

It is worth noting, (I believe) Dave is referring to TDA Rule #49:

49:  Oversized Chip Betting
If facing a bet or blind, pushing out a single oversized chip (including your last chip) is a call if raise isn’t first declared. To raise with an overchip you must declare raise before the chip hits the table surface. If raise is declared but no amount is stated, the raise is the maximum allowable for the chip. If not facing a bet, pushing out an overchip silently (no declaration) is a bet of the maximum for the chip.

Also, many clubs (in my area) do have a different single chip rule.. The house rule is that a single chip of any size is always a call unless raise is announced.  (It doesn't need be an oversized chip.)

However, as I read the OP, the bet amount was announced before or at the same time as the chip was bet.  Therefore, the verbal declaration stands.

[Dave Miller]

 Yes, I meant the oversize chip rule.

 My intent was to show how a similar situation is covered by a rule which removes the requirement of the TD to have to try to figure out a player’s thoughts and intentions.

 And frankly, if the 1 million player needs to have some sort of penalty, forcing him to be all in seems like enough of a penalty.

[MikeB]

If this guy clearly and unmistakably said "one million" before or simultaneous with his chip push, I have a hard time not holding him to a 1mm bet (or all-in if he has less). What other purpose could he have for uttering any number while betting other than to make that number his bet? Maybe he got nervous, confused by the currency or the language, who knows... but you have to have discipline in a tournament.

[Boris]

Hello folks,

I may be wrong on this, but it seems difficult to me that 1m raise in this situation could be angle shooting.
My definition of angle shooting is : Acting in a way which can lead you to seek some non-game related information to help you make a decision (again I can be wrong)

So if a player is All-in, no matter what kind of information he can get, it won't be usefull since all his chips are already in the pot.

I would also rule as a raise regarding to simultaneous verbal declaration. (Something like 99.9% of the players know that verbal stands)
Then apply a warning/penalty regarding to the facing bet and the stack size (under 85% stack size of the amount announced seems fair enough to declare a warning)

[Stuart Murray]

In it's simplest form, it sounds pretty clear cut to me.  The player announcing "one million" is indeed all-in.  I presume the 5K chip to just be covering the original bet of 5K and that his verbal declaration (albeit rather erroneous if he has nothing like that size of stack (and further given the pot size)) a veral raise on the 5K bet.  I think the floor was spot on with their ruling.