[Garland]

Here's a not-so-far fetched situation:

Player A, B and C are in a no-limit game and everyone is kind of learning. It's not their 1st session, but everyone has played only a handful of times.

Hand #1. It gets heads up on the river between Player A and Player B. Player A checks, Player B bets $75, Player A says too much. Ok, Player B pulls back $50, Player A calls the $25, and Player B wins. No one says anything at the table, because it's nobody else's business and everyone is happy, right?

Hand #2. It gets 3 ways to the river. Player A checks, Player B checks, Player C bets $75. Player A folds, Player B hems and haws, Player C learning what happened in Hand #1 and wanting a call tries to pull back $50 and now Player A cries foul and Player C is wondering what the heck is going on when he is forced to put his $50 back on the table. As he is explained that heads-up players have special "privileges", he asks to see that in the rules (which obviously isn't there).

Seems to me you're opening up a can of worms flexing the rules leaving interpretation problems for other players (especially newer ones) at the table. If it's going to be acceptable practice to allow players heads up to take partial bets back, I say put it in the rule books.

Garland