[RR]

[ QUOTE ]

Quote:
I had a similar situation at last year's WSOP, but was in your opponent's shoes. It was a significant pot and while I knew I was behind I thought I had the proper odds based on the dealer count. However, when it turned out he had significantly more chips (I think she said 10k and it was really 18k or something like that).

I called the floor over and he decided since I verbalized "call" and pushed out 10k, those chips would have to stay in the pot. He gave me the option of saving the extra 10k by folding, but I chose to call since it was now only another 10k or so. It sucked because I would have never called 20k...



This is actually how it's handled in most places, and IMO, the most fair way to do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well here is the rule that most places have some version of on the book.
[ QUOTE ]
12. Because the amount of a wager at big-bet poker has such a wide range, a player who has taken action based on a gross misunderstanding of the amount wagered may receive some protection by the decision-maker. A "call" or “raise” may be ruled not binding if it is obvious that the player grossly misunderstood the amount wagered, provided no damage has been caused by that action. Example: Player A bets $300, player B reraises to $1200, and Player C puts $300 into the pot and says, “call.” It is obvious that player C believes the bet to be only $300 and he should be allowed to withdraw his $300 and reconsider his wager. A bettor should not show down a hand until the amount put into the pot for a call seems reasonably correct, or it is obvious that the caller understands the amount wagered. The decision-maker is allowed considerable discretion in ruling on this type of situation. A possible rule-of-thumb is to disallow any claim of not understanding the amount wagered if the caller has put eighty percent or more of that amount into the pot.

Example: On the end, a player puts a $500 chip into the pot and says softly, “Four hundred.” The opponent puts a $100 chip into the pot and says, “Call.” The bettor immediately shows the hand. The dealer says, “He bet four hundred.” The caller says, “Oh, I thought he bet a hundred.” In this case, the recommended ruling normally is that the bettor had an obligation to not show the hand when the amount put into the pot was obviously short, and the “call” can be retracted. Note that the character of each player can be a factor. (Unfortunately, situations can arise at big-bet poker that are not so clear-cut as this.)

[/ QUOTE ]

I have never been in a room that had an experienced floor staff that didn't use some version of the above rule. Note: If you opened a poker room in 1994 with no experience and have never had someone that had worked in poker teach you about these things you still have almost no experience. The only reason I mention this is one of our competitors where I am now has been having poker tournaments for a long time, but they8 have been doing things wrong since the mid 90s and continue to do things wrong.