i need a disagreement settled

[simpleman79]

I can't find any written rule on WSOP website so I've turned here. This came up the other night in a home game (for the sake of arguement). If a person is all-in and can not cover the big blind, are they entitled to all of the big blind or just the amount equal to what they put in? If anyone can find some written text on the matter I would appreciate the link. This friend of mine thinks that if the blinds are 400-800 and he goes all-in for 320 he has a right to the whole 800.

[SplawnDarts]

Your friend is wrong. If him and both blinds end up in the main pot, the main pot will be 960 - 320 from each blind + his 320.

[Elandriel]

Yes, he is wrong. Splawn is right.

[coolio4433]

Try this from homepokertourney.com

What happens when a player can't cover a blind? (All-in on a Blind)

If a player in the big blind position does not have enough chips to post a full big blind, he must go all-in with all his remaining chips. Even though this all-in bet is less than the full big blind, the 'bring-in' (minimum bet) is not lowered for the other players. If the blinds are 100-200 and the big blind goes all-in with 125 chips - the other players must still post 200 to remain in the pot. The 'bring-in' remains at 200 and the small blind must post 100 additional chips to call (assuming no raises). The big blind player all-in for 125 may only win 125 from each other player in the hand, he cannot win the full 200 big blind from each player.

Here's the full link
http://www.homepokertourney.com/allin_examples.htm

[simpleman79]

thought so, i was emphatic about it. this guy started unloading on me about my personality because of. Telling me I act like I know everything. This time I did.

[UATrewqaz]

I had this happen at a bar tourney (for free/fun/house cash, no big deal)

A guy had just taken a very bad beat (I caught a gutshot straight on the river to beat his set of aces) and was pretty frustrated by it and only had a few chips left, say like 600.

The blinds were like 500/1000 and he's UTG and goes all in, everyone folds but the BB (obviously) and the shortstack ends up winning the all in. He claims he wins the full 1,000 from the BB because it was already "in the pot" or some BS.

Every single person at the table tells him he's wrong and he begins yelling, the "floor" guy comes over and also tells him he's wrong and he still is screaming about it, so finally the BB guy is liek "fine whatever"

Needless to say, if you put in on a single hand X you can only win X from each individual player on that hand.