Allin with incorrect announce of stack amount

[demon31]

Hi,
 
I'm a french poker player and I manage a poker association.
 
During our last weekly tournament, we had a problem.
 
Player A verbally announces all-in preflop, and immediatly says his stack is 2900.
Player B calls the all-in, without asking player A to recount his stack, or doing it himself.
Player B doesn't request the dealer to count the stack of player A, so the dealer doesn't do it either.
The two players don't put their chips in the middle of the table, they keep it with them.
Player A wins the pot.
When player A counts his stack to be paid, he founds 3800 instead of the 2900 announced.
 
What do we do ?
 
- Player B pays 3800 because he calls without recounting, and so it's his responsability ?
- Player A will be just payed for 2900, the amount announced preflop ?
- Player B can ask for cancelling this hand because his call is on a bad announce of player A, and/or because the dealer hasn't recount ?
 
Thanks a lot for your answers.

[Nick C]

Welcome demon31,
 Player A will be just paid the 2900 because it was announced. That is the call I would make. If he said nothing and just pushed all-in, or said all-in whithout calling out an amount, then it would be different.

[demon31]

Player A said allin, and announced 2900 that is a wrong amount of his stack, instead of 3800.

[Stuart Murray]

We discussed this at length previously and came to a (kindof) consensus that where a count was incorrect the actual total would be honoured if it was "within a reasonable" amount of the count given, that is to say, if a gross error has been made during the count, by way of giving a count that is for example in your case is around 26% out, I would therefore consider that to be "gross"

We do however have a situation where player B has to make reasonable efforts in order to verify for his own settlement that the chip count he has been given is correct, after all, it is his responsibility to verify the count and when he announces call, he is "technically" calling the full stack (and not the announced amount)

If you are satisfied player b has made reaosnable efforts to satisfy the chip count then let the hand play out for 2900 total, instead of 3800, due to the gross difference in amounts, I you are not satisfied, let the hand play out for 3800 total.


Regards
Stuart

[Nick C]

demon31,
 Are you still confused about the correct answer. Your recent reply tells me that you think I did not understand your question. Please read my first reply again. If you do not agree, we can discuss it further.
 There is a brand new rule on the books that you might want to consider (Rule #89 WSOP 2011). I don't like it but, it could give a good argument for committing the player that called to the actual amount of 3800, no matter what was said. I feel that this new rule does not comply with rules of fairness and I don't believe that it will stay on the books, as written.

[Brian Vickers]

I think it might matter a little what level the blinds are, and what position players A and B are in.  For instance, if the blinds are 1000-2000 and player A is all in and B is in the Big blind then 900 more to call and 1800 more to call is a significant jump (100%), but if blinds are $25-50 then the difference between 2850 more and 3750 more isn't as big of a jump (24%).  

There's also something I don't like about a player saying all-in, miscalling the amount, getting called, having 900 refunded because of the error, then getting to continue in the tournament even if he loses an "all-in".  I would say if we are going to go with the gross misunderstanding before the cards are run out then player B should be allowed to reconsider action, not only call 2900.  If the official count is not made until after the cards are run out, then I side with the WSOP rule saying that players have assumed all action and the call is still 3800.

[demon31]

@Nick c.
During my first reading of your answer, I understood you talked about Player B instead of Player A.
So, effectively, I thank you didn't understand my question
But now, after reading again, I saw my mistake
In my defense, I'm not a natural english speaker.


In fact, with a mix of your answers and the rule of the WSOP, I think the TD must have an appreciation case by case, with a lot of informations on the hand, like to know if the player has requested a chip count, if the % between good and false amount is big, if considering the pocket cards and/or the stack of the caller, he'll call anyway even knowing the good stack amount...

Thanks a lot for your quick and documented answers.

[Nick C]

demon31,
 Your English is a heck of a lot better than my French, so no need to apologize. I am not a big fan of using a percent (%) to determine a gross misunderstanding on a bet. I also am not in favor of players saying they are all-in, without pushing the amount into the betting area. When players act that quick all kinds of bad things (misunderstandings) can occur. There was an incident that happened in a local casino about two months ago that I never heard of before. At the showdown Player A said all-in and while Player B was pushing his chips forward to call, Player A turned over his cards and Player B (who was going to call) refused to put his $600 in the pot. The floor was called and Player B was told if he did not honor his bet, he would be barred from playing there again.......Are you ready for this? He picked up his chips and walked out before security could stop him. As far as I know, Player A has never received his $600. There were quite a few mistakes by all participants. Player A should have waited until B called for certain. Player B was not the kind of person that any room needs, and the floor probably should not have made his threat seem more like an option. In any event, if the chips are pushed forward and/or clearly defined by the bettor, most of these problems would be elliminated.
 
 If a verbal bet is binding then which has presedence, the spoken amount or saying all-in? I also think when the boxed cards are recognized will have a huge impact on retracting a misunderstood bet. Easier to correct pre-flop, for example, as opposed to the showdown when it is too late.

[MikeB]

In general I think the trend in these rulings is towards holding the caller to a full call. This functionally makes alot of sense because it adds another set of eyeballs to get the bet right: a) the bettor; b) the dealer; and c) the caller... between the 3 of them looking at the chips pushed out in the stack it's much less likely to get the bet amount wrong. If the caller has any question whatsoever he can (within reason) ask to have the chips displayed in a manner to remove any doubt.  If we don't hold the caller to a full call then we can run into the untenable situation to where there's not a re-count of the chips at showdown and 3800 is pushed to him if he wins, but on the other hand there is a precise count if he loses and he only pays 2900 because the original bet wasn't counted right. This isn't a tenable situation, he should be at risk to lose what he stands to win and the only way to do that is to hold him to a full call. That's not to say that a ruling can't be made in the best interest of the game in the event of a gross misunderstanding or extenuating circumstances. But in this exact case, 900 on 2900 doesn't somehow seem gross to me as TD. Perhaps this should be explored at the June Summit to see if more precise language can be adopted.

[DCJ001]

Great points, Mike. But when you said:

 If the caller has any question whatsoever he can (within reason) ask to have the chips displayed in a manner to remove any doubt.

The player could or should ask the dealer for a count of the chips since this is a bet and not a player"s stack. If there is still a question about the amount, he could ask for the bet to be spread so that he could count it.

[Nick C]

Here we go again with another debatable rule. What happened to the good old days when a player made a bet, and the next player asked the dealer how much the bet was.....This game is getting too technical IMHO. What happened to the general rules of etiquette : Players should be certain that their bet is clear to all. If the first player acts with an incorrect amount, it should be corrected before others have acted. I will be real surprised if that new rule #89 (WSOP) is used after this year.

I agree with DCJ001 when he said; the Player could or should ask the dealer for a count of the chips since this is a bet and not a players stack.

Mike brought up some real interesting scenarios, too. At some point the amount should be counted and confirmed, so if the dealer counts it in front of everyone, it should be correct. Right?

[Guillaume Gleize]

For me player B should pay the 3800.

For Nick: with respect for you, I saw you saveral times using the general rules of etiquette "Players should be certain that their bet is clear to all" but IMHO you "over-use" it. I say this becuse I read so many calls thoses time who REPSONSABILISE THE FOLLOWING PLAYERS MUCH MORE THAN THE INITIAL BETTOR! The rules are not mathematicaly exact and that's why we are payd for: to judge! For judging and when no texts to help me, I use what is called in french laws the "jurisprudence": it means the habits of the MAJORITY of the other TDs & managers.

The big majority of the answers they gave me in general responsabilize the FOLLOWING players! I remember the case of player A moving very very slightly a finger ... dealer announcing "check" ... so player B announcing "check" too ... then player A stopping the action saying he never checked ... calling the floor ... the dealer saying to the floor that HE (the dealer) ACTUALLY WAS WRONG and made a wrong announce because player A's finger move was certainly a reflex etc  ... Floor going back to player A action and let him bet free while player B screaming that he (himself) reveiled weakness because of the dealer error ... etc ... most of the gentlemen on this forum agreed with the floor RESPONSABILISING PLAYER B!

So ... I WOULD HAVE ALSO RESPONSABILISED HERE PLAYER B: he made no effort enought to check the amount (asking for the dealer to count, asking for the chips to be pushed and compared etc ...)!

In My So Arrogant Opinion (but knowing that one of the two players will allways think our call is arrogant ... aren't we paid for that?)!

 

[Nick C]

Guillaume,
 When the dealer and three players get the bet wrong, to me that is an unclear bet. Your other example of the player lightly moving his finger and the dealer thinking he checked, should have been backed-up and corrected. That is the purpose of substantial action.
 Yes, you are also correct when you say that I blame players for unclear bets.  Perhaps if more TD's and floorpersons  "over-used" this rule of etiquette they would have a lot less headaches in tournaments. What is so difficult about announcing what your bet is, or when a player goes all-in, get a proper count?

[WSOPMcGee]

Here we go again with another debatable rule. What happened to the good old days when a player made a bet, and the next player asked the dealer how much the bet was.....This game is getting too technical IMHO. What happened to the general rules of etiquette : Players should be certain that their bet is clear to all. If the first player acts with an incorrect amount, it should be corrected before others have acted. I will be real surprised if that new rule #89 (WSOP) is used after this year.

Going to chime in here because I think the terms "Accepting the action" and "Gross misunderstanding" are not being utilized correctly and are getting somewhat distorted. You're the guinea pig here Nick

Almost everyone who replied to this thread is under the impression that Player A's bet is unclear because he stated an amount of 2900. His bet is not unclear. His bet is "All-in".
After you announce "All-in", the amount is a mute point.

Then Player B announces "Calls the all-in". This is where the rule #89 comes from.
Player B is accepting Player A's action of "All-in" regardless of the amount. That's why we use the term "Accepting the Action".

Now, did Player A misrepresent his chips? Maybe.... maybe he miscounted. Still his bet was "All-in" and Player B did not ask for a count and his bet was "Call".

Therefore, there's no need for the TD to ask themselves if there was a gross misunderstanding of the bet. There clearly was not. The bets were "All-in" and "Call".

Now what constitutes a "Gross misunderstanding"? This happens when a player pushes forward a bet and it is miscounted, misstated, or otherwise unclear and subsequent action behind the unclear bet is not equal to the actual amount bet. Long sentence for a simple problem. Here's a simple example that happened recently where I made this ruling.

Example 1: Player A bet 1600 (3 $500 chips and 1 $100 chip). Player B asks the dealer how much the bet is and the dealer says "$400". Player B announces call and puts 400 into the pot (4 $100 chips). Player A corrects the dealer that the bet is 1600. Player B immediately grabs his chips back and wants to fold. Dealer calls for floor. I let Player B take his chips back and fold. The bet was both unclear and a gross misunderstanding 400 vs 1600.

Example 2: Player A bets a couple of dirty stacks of $100 chips that appear to be  25 high. Player B asks how much? Player A states $5,000. Player B says call. Player A wins. The dealer breaks down the stacks to verify. The dealer finds 2 $5,000 chips mixed within the stacks of $100 chips. The bet turns out to be $14,800. That is a gross misunderstanding, 5,000 vs 14,800.

As for Rule #89 of the WSOP rule book it is certainly going to be used for a very long time. It's been in use ever since I've been working for the WSOP and that's 6 yrs now. The only difference is the WSOP began publishing it's rulebook online for all to view and mostly became necessary as a back-up for major decisions that have happened in recent years. Most notably the cell phone ruling involving David Singer. This incident changed a lot things rules wise and was one that prompted them post the rules online as well as the Brandon Cantu incident.

That's my 2 cents on this one.

[DCJ001]

wsopmcgee:

When quoting someone's post, it's best to put your reply outside of the quoted (purple) area so that the quoted post and your reply are easily distinguishable.

Just a helpful hint.