How should the Poker Room have handled this:

[MM_red33]

OP friend messed up. He should have never showed his As before he actually put money beyond the line. I have played tht many live hours as some of you but ive seen some crazy angles people throw, i throw them too against fishes all the time now.

Never much your hand out of turn and never show your cards until the action is sealed.

[NickMPK]

This should be an obvious call.

How often do players actually move their chips when calling an all-in on the river? Calling, and then moving your chips, and then showing down is more or less a slowroll. I think it is completely reasonable in this situation to believe the villain called even though he did not move his chips.

[aholthaus33]

[ QUOTE ]

This should be an obvious call.

How often do players actually move their chips when calling an all-in on the river? Calling, and then moving your chips, and then showing down is more or less a slowroll. I think it is completely reasonable in this situation to believe the villain called even though he did not move his chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this completely. I have played a lot of live poker and I would guess MAYBE half the time in this spot someone will actually move the chips in.
I wouldn't have moved them but I would have given my chips after he showed the winner.
I would not have called with JJ though either [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[elliot]

friend learned a relatively cheap lesson that real poker games arent like you see on WPT, dont turn up your hand until there are chips IN THE [censored] POT.

that being said, the floor SHOULD have ruled in favor of your friend.

[pfapfap]

[ QUOTE ]
ive seen some crazy angles people throw, i throw them too against fishes all the time now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop this. Immediately.

To those saying this "should" be a call and so forth and so on.

Yeah, well, you can't control the world. You can only control yourself. What's more +EV, showing your hand in these murky situations ("I have to call" is NOT "I call") and then arguing after the fact, or simply waiting for the dealer to ask you to showdown?

Dealer: Please show your cards.
You: Did he call?

This is such a typical CYA situation. Sure, maybe you have the moral high ground, but where's your stack of chips? PROTECT YOUR HAND, GOL-DANGIT!

[Al_Capone_Junior]

This exact situation occurred in a nevada casino last year.

Someone bet all-in on the river, about $400, a man says "call." Then th bettor shows his hand, a winner. Now the other guy claims he didn't say call. The dealer and another player say they heard him say call. No chips went over the line. He refuses to pay. Floor is new to the job, and is faced with a difficult situation. The man is not allowed to leave or cash out while this is getting settled, and the amount of the call is placed in a tray behind the counter, per the casino manager (who is a good guy but doesn't know poker).

I'm a little fuzzy now on how exactly all this went down, but this winds up going to gaming for a ruling. A gaming officer is summoned. He says that the amount was too small for gaming to get involved (I think it's $500), but he also gives this advice:


Although verbal bets are binding, you have to remember that the cameras can't hear. And since you can't physically take the $ from the player's stack, the solution is simple. Make them put the chips over the line. This makes any doubt disappear, and makes enforcement far simpler.

I make the players put their bets over the line. If I've got what I think is the winner (or the nuts) I don't show until chips are over the line (if it's for any real $ that is).

The casino manager gave the player the option of pay the bet, or keep the $ and be barred from all of [name of corporation withheld] casinos. He chose to pay.

Al

[Ruprecht]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ive seen some crazy angles people throw, i throw them too against fishes all the time now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop this. Immediately.

To those saying this "should" be a call and so forth and so on.

Yeah, well, you can't control the world. You can only control yourself. What's more +EV, showing your hand in these murky situations ("I have to call" is NOT "I call") and then arguing after the fact, or simply waiting for the dealer to ask you to showdown?

Dealer: Please show your cards.
You: Did he call?

This is such a typical CYA situation. Sure, maybe you have the moral high ground, but where's your stack of chips? PROTECT YOUR HAND, GOL-DANGIT!

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really disagreeing with any of your points, but the floorperson's decision was incorrect. Since the angle-player said "I have to call" in turn, the floorperson should have ruled that he does, indeed, "have to call".

[psandman]

The problem is that lots of times players do the "thinking out loud" routine and say "I have to call" context and tone are important here and don't come through in a second hand story posted on the internet.

Clearly "I have to call" could be said in a a way that indicates a call.

But it is also often said in a way that doesn't indicate a call.

[psandman]

[ QUOTE ]
This exact situation occurred in a nevada casino last year.

Someone bet all-in on the river, about $400, a man says "call." Then th bettor shows his hand, a winner. Now the other guy claims he didn't say call. The dealer and another player say they heard him say call. No chips went over the line. He refuses to pay. Floor is new to the job, and is faced with a difficult situation. The man is not allowed to leave or cash out while this is getting settled, and the amount of the call is placed in a tray behind the counter, per the casino manager (who is a good guy but doesn't know poker).

I'm a little fuzzy now on how exactly all this went down, but this winds up going to gaming for a ruling. A gaming officer is summoned. He says that the amount was too small for gaming to get involved (I think it's $500), but he also gives this advice:


Although verbal bets are binding, you have to remember that the cameras can't hear. And since you can't physically take the $ from the player's stack, the solution is simple. Make them put the chips over the line. This makes any doubt disappear, and makes enforcement far simpler.

I make the players put their bets over the line. If I've got what I think is the winner (or the nuts) I don't show until chips are over the line (if it's for any real $ that is).

The casino manager gave the player the option of pay the bet, or keep the $ and be barred from all of [name of corporation withheld] casinos. He chose to pay.

Al

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't the same situation. in your case the player announced a call and refused to pay. In this case the dealer says the player didn't announce a call.

As for the chips over the line thing. I hate this nonsense. A player with a large chip stack announcces all-in dealer says you have to put chips over the line for the cameras. Player puts out a partial stack of chips. NOW WHAT GOOD IS THAT? The camera now is only going to see $75 chips went over line not that the player said "all-in". it would make much more sense to require a hand motion such as a pushing motion. Also I know a few players who try to take advantage (especially of players wearing headphones) by announcing all-in in a the most barely audible manner and putting out small bets. When i hear an All-in I try to repeat it out loud but some dealers don't and some players instacall before a dealer ahas a chance to announce the all-in.

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem is that lots of times players do the "thinking out loud" routine and say "I have to call" context and tone are important here and don't come through in a second hand story posted on the internet.

Clearly "I have to call" could be said in a a way that indicates a call.

But it is also often said in a way that doesn't indicate a call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thinking out loud is one thing but saying "I have to call" AND tabling your hand is a call in every place that I have played. The intent to call was there in the tabling action and any good floor will rule this way.

Now, if he had first shown his cards for a reaction and then mused about "having to call" the intent would not be there and I'd say that the other player jumped the gun.