Author Topic: Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in  (Read 643 times)

Boris

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in
« on: February 22, 2020, 02:54:00 AM »
Hello folks,

Preflop Situation
Blinds 1000/2000
Everyone folds to SB
SB : "Raise 5000"
BB : "38000 and All-in" (while pushing one stack of chips, then the other one)

Fact is BB has 46000

How do we handle this ? =)

« Last Edit: February 22, 2020, 04:59:15 AM by MikeB »

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1151
Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in
« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2020, 04:57:57 AM »
I'd rule it 38,000 total bet.  Sequence matters the guy first says "38 thousand". If he'd first declared "all in" or first shoved entire stack(s) I rule all-in. Also when unclear, if a player declares an amt larger than the amt to call, the declaration is the total bet, not the increase amt: so I wouldn't allow a total raise to 43k here either. Great question!
« Last Edit: February 22, 2020, 05:03:00 AM by MikeB »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3269
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in
« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2020, 09:02:06 AM »
I agree with Mike. Especially sequence matters. The problem arises when the verbal and action are close. If players continue to make unclear bets and raises, they will have to suffer the consequences. 38000 it is!

Dave Miller

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
  • Lead dealer / rules guru for World Free Poker
    • Poker For Roulette
Re: Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in
« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2020, 09:43:47 AM »
I also agree.

I would add that if the player had said “I’ve got 38000, I’m all in,” then I would rule it all in for 46000 since the first part was an irrelevant statement.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown.
But how much does it cost to knock on wood?

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 545
Re: Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in
« Reply #4 on: February 23, 2020, 07:08:12 AM »
I disagree.


40:  Methods of Betting: Verbal and Chips
A: 1) Bets are by verbal declaration and/or pushing out chips. 2) If a player does both, whichever is first defines the bet. 3) If simultaneous, a clear and reasonable verbal declaration takes precedence, otherwise the chips play. 4) In unclear situations or where verbal and chips are contradictory, the TD will determine the bet based on the circumstances and Rule 1.


The individual phrases of rule #40 describes your scenario. 1)  The player bet "38,000 and all-in" that is as simultaneous as humanly possible especially when taken literally with the use of the word "and."  In other words, this is a single declaration, not two in sequence.  In phrase 2), the player does both simultaneously (declare and push), not one after the other. Therefore, ... 3) the simultaneous declaration and push is not clear.  It is unclear because the single declaration of "38,000 and all-in" is contradictory to the actual all-in chip amount, so according to the rule - the chips play.  Which, brings us to phrase 4). It is an unclear situation - part of the verbal declaration (38000) contradicts and part (all-in) corroborates with the actual chips bet simultaneously.  I'm ruling that the player is all-in according to Rule #40-A, phrases 3 & 4.

The above opinions expressed by MikeB, Nick, and Dave Miller, all rely on interpreting "38000 and all-in" as two sequential declarations.  In fact, if the phrase was "all-in and 38000" they would rule differently.  Or, as Dave said, "I've got 38000" would change his ruling.  The player did not make two separate declarations such as "I bet 38,000, I'm all-in."  They stated a single declaration - a "38000 and all-in" bet -  which, was inaccurate as indeed it was 46,000 and all-in.  Their intention was clear and pushing 46,000 all-in confirms their bet.

Note, that Rule #40 A - phrase 2) DOES address the importance of sequence.  But, THAT importance is upon the sequence of a verbal declaration and a pushing of chips.  It does not give importance to the sequence of words in a single declarative phrase.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2020, 10:15:42 AM by BillM16 »

Dave Miller

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
  • Lead dealer / rules guru for World Free Poker
    • Poker For Roulette
Re: Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in
« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2020, 08:15:10 PM »
Using the word Ďandí makes it a string bet.

It doesnít get any simpler than that.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown.
But how much does it cost to knock on wood?

Boris

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in
« Reply #6 on: February 24, 2020, 05:59:42 PM »
I disagree.


40:  Methods of Betting: Verbal and Chips
A: 1) Bets are by verbal declaration and/or pushing out chips. 2) If a player does both, whichever is first defines the bet. 3) If simultaneous, a clear and reasonable verbal declaration takes precedence, otherwise the chips play. 4) In unclear situations or where verbal and chips are contradictory, the TD will determine the bet based on the circumstances and Rule 1.


The individual phrases of rule #40 describes your scenario. 1)  The player bet "38,000 and all-in" that is as simultaneous as humanly possible especially when taken literally with the use of the word "and."  In other words, this is a single declaration, not two in sequence.  In phrase 2), the player does both simultaneously (declare and push), not one after the other. Therefore, ... 3) the simultaneous declaration and push is not clear.  It is unclear because the single declaration of "38,000 and all-in" is contradictory to the actual all-in chip amount, so according to the rule - the chips play.  Which, brings us to phrase 4). It is an unclear situation - part of the verbal declaration (38000) contradicts and part (all-in) corroborates with the actual chips bet simultaneously.  I'm ruling that the player is all-in according to Rule #40-A, phrases 3 & 4.

The above opinions expressed by MikeB, Nick, and Dave Miller, all rely on interpreting "38000 and all-in" as two sequential declarations.  In fact, if the phrase was "all-in and 38000" they would rule differently.  Or, as Dave said, "I've got 38000" would change his ruling.  The player did not make two separate declarations such as "I bet 38,000, I'm all-in."  They stated a single declaration - a "38000 and all-in" bet -  which, was inaccurate as indeed it was 46,000 and all-in.  Their intention was clear and pushing 46,000 all-in confirms their bet.

Note, that Rule #40 A - phrase 2) DOES address the importance of sequence.  But, THAT importance is upon the sequence of a verbal declaration and a pushing of chips.  It does not give importance to the sequence of words in a single declarative phrase.


Hello Bill,

I really like this approach of not sequencing but it does not fully fit the scenario since the player pushed only one stack of chips simultaneously to verbal declaration and then push a second stack of chips (I made this on purpose to create a confusion on which Rule #40 is under effect)
If the player had push their entire stack, I also would rule as an all-in bet.



Here are my next-step options : (which could help us how to find something accurate because honestly I dont have a 100% straight answer to this)

1. Opponent player with a larger stack instantly calls and table their hand
  • Accepted all-in action (Rule 49) or game continues with a live exposed hand  (Rule 65b)?
2. First stack of chips pushed is exactly 38.000
3. First stack of chips pushed is more than 38.000
4. Stack amount is 46.000 but 8x 1K chips are hidden
5. Stack amount is 38.500
6. Stack amount is 38.400 including 4x 100 chips which have not been raced previously (forgotten chips)
7. Stack amount is 146.000 (with a single 100k chip added)

« Last Edit: February 24, 2020, 06:02:34 PM by Boris »

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 545
Re: Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in
« Reply #7 on: February 24, 2020, 08:55:52 PM »
At what point was the miscounted all-in bet realized?

Did this actually happen or is it contrived for debate purposes? (Ok, but better if known.)

Was the all-in player attempting to angle shoot for an advantage or was their opponents angling the technicalities of TDA rules for an advantage?

Once all-in is announced there is no requirement to shove all chips at once.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2020, 09:35:21 PM by BillM16 »

Boris

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in
« Reply #8 on: February 25, 2020, 05:14:45 AM »
This one is a fictional case, but I saw this happening sometimes.

Here, we can't be 100% sure that all-in player is angle shooting or exploiting a rule.
Miscounted is discovered before opponent player action (except for options 1 and 4 in my previous post)

« Last Edit: February 25, 2020, 05:34:54 AM by Boris »

Dave Miller

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
  • Lead dealer / rules guru for World Free Poker
    • Poker For Roulette
Re: Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in
« Reply #9 on: February 25, 2020, 08:01:48 AM »
I'm sorry, but 'and' doesn't combine two thoughts into one. It connects them, but doesn't combine them.

Quote from: Merriam-Webster
And
Used as a function word to indicate connection or addition especially of items within the same class or type - used to join sentence elements of the same grammatical rank or function.

I stand by my statement that it's a string bet.


For what it's worth, I always advise new players that on TV shows or movies that have a poker scene, often a player will announce, "I see your bet and..." The scene was written by someone that doesn't know the rules. There's no 'and'. Once a player calls, that's it. they're done.

I continue to say that equally as often, when there's a raise (whether or not it's a sting bet), the amount of the raise is frequently less than the minimum required. Not only a different rule violation, by terrible strategy.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2020, 08:06:06 AM by Dave Miller »
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown.
But how much does it cost to knock on wood?

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 545
Re: Player declares underestimated bet amount then says all-in
« Reply #10 on: February 25, 2020, 08:57:36 AM »
I'm sorry, but 'and' doesn't combine two thoughts into one. It connects them, but doesn't combine them.

Quote from: Merriam-Webster
And
Used as a function word to indicate connection or addition especially of items within the same class or type - used to join sentence elements of the same grammatical rank or function.

I stand by my statement that it's a string bet.


For what it's worth, I always advise new players that on TV shows or movies that have a poker scene, often a player will announce, "I see your bet and..." The scene was written by someone that doesn't know the rules. There's no 'and'. Once a player calls, that's it. they're done.

I continue to say that equally as often, when there's a raise (whether or not it's a sting bet), the amount of the raise is frequently less than the minimum required. Not only a different rule violation, by terrible strategy.

As your Merriam-Webster quote says: "used to join sentence elements of the same grammatical rank or function."  That means that "38000 and all-in" is the same in the English language as saying "all-in and 38000." 

Also, note that TDA Rule 40-B states that a general term and an amount may BOTH be used.  It does not say that the general term or the amount must come in any particular order.

In my opinion, it is wrong to use technical linguistic hairsplitting of rules to overrule what is otherwise the clear intent of an honest player.  There is absolutely no reason to believe that the intent of the player was NOT all-in from their action.  The contrary arguments rely on misinterpretations of language and intent, they do not hold to the best interests or fairness of the game.  Again, my opinion.  You are of course entitled to yours.

« Last Edit: February 25, 2020, 08:59:34 AM by BillM16 »