NLHE - Requesting a Chip Count - Page 2

RR · #11 09-30-2007, 08:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Say hero asks for a count, and villian is silent. $300 is visible, but unbeknownst to hero, villian has five blacks either under a stack or behind the stack. If the five blacks are not visible, do they still play? If they do not play, this could lead hero to shoot an angle in which he claims the five blacks are not visible if they are even slightly hidden. Hence in order to avoid angle shots by either hero or villian, it would seem that requiring chip counts when asked would be prudent.

[/ QUOTE ]

They are required to display the $100 chips. If they are hidden they don't play. If someone notices them partially hidden they shoudl be told to display them. This is why chips that are overly large (say $100 in a 1-2 game) should not play period.

Ghazban · #12 09-30-2007, 10:44 PM

What about places where cash plays? It's hard to estimate how much is in a stack of hundos.

StevieG · #13 09-30-2007, 10:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
What about places where cash plays? It's hard to estimate how much is in a stack of hundos.

[/ QUOTE ]

That may be, but the idea is not to disguise that they are there.

You might not know exactly how many hundreds are there, but you're aware of them and know to ask.

Al_Capone_Junior · #14 09-30-2007, 11:15 PM

A player cannot refuse in any way to make it clear how many chips they have. This includes an exact count, whether provided by the player or the dealer. If anyone refused to provide this information by any means such as refusing to count, stacking them in an uncountable manner or in any way being generally uncooperative, they should be forced to provide the information anyway and then be penalized after the hand.

In general I am not tolerant of anyone who is uncooperative when asked to provide information that another player is entitled to receive.

Cash sucks. Period. Scumbags like cash so they can try to hide their true stake, and they can quick count and try to short each other. I have never seen or been offered an arguement that showed me why cash on the table is in any way good.

RR · #15 09-30-2007, 11:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Cash sucks. Period. Scumbags like cash so they can try to hide their true stake, and they can quick count and try to short each other. I have never seen or been offered an arguement that showed me why cash on the table is in any way good.

[/ QUOTE ]

In high limit games cash playing keeps the poker room from doing an incredible amount of Title 31 paperwork.

mikech · #16 09-30-2007, 11:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I have never seen or been offered an arguement that showed me why cash on the table is in any way good.

[/ QUOTE ]
in bigger games it's a pain to buy (and later cash out) tens of thousands of dollars worth of chips.

edit: RR beat me to it. i was only thinking from the player's perspective, hadn't considered that it's a hassle for the cardroom too, but it makes sense.

Ghazban · #17 09-30-2007, 11:35 PM

I've never had a problem with anybody telling me how much paper they're playing but if they wouldn't speak and just showed the stack of bills clearly, I doubt I'd be able to make a good estimate.

RR · #18 10-01-2007, 01:04 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I've never had a problem with anybody telling me how much paper they're playing but if they wouldn't speak and just showed the stack of bills clearly, I doubt I'd be able to make a good estimate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say you need to spread out the bills. When I say you aren't entitled to an exact count I mean if you are playing 5-10 NL it doesn't make a lot of difference if someone is $5500 or $5600 behind as long as you have a clear view of their chips and bills.

mikech · #19 10-01-2007, 01:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I would say you need to spread out the bills. When I say you aren't entitled to an exact count I mean if you are playing 5-10 NL it doesn't make a lot of difference if someone is $5500 or $5600 behind as long as you have a clear view of their chips and bills.

[/ QUOTE ]
don't mean to be flippant here, but you gotta be kidding me. where on the table is there enough room to "spread out" 50-some-odd bills? what if i'm playing 25-50 and my opponent's got 20k or more behind, he just has to "spread out" his 200+ bills? and i'm supposed to be able to eyeball it? you can't be serious. a player should absolutely be entitled to an exact count of how much his opponent is playing.

edit to add: some players sit with neatly organized 5k or 10k bundles on the table, but i've also seen plenty of guys play with loose 6-inch-high stacks of cash in front, so this is not just a hypothetical situation that never actually comes into play.

redfisher · #20 10-01-2007, 01:54 AM

FWIW, the policy at Binion's during the 2007 WSOP was that chips are visible, cash must be counted. If I had 4500 in chips stacked properly with $20K in cash, I had to give a specific count of the cash in play but just show the chips.

In theory, if chips were hidden they didn't play or played as the assumed denomination.

I didn't see any issues with this policy, but it seems to me that a chip count if requested would cut down on the floor decisions. Apparently the Binion's floor didn't feel they were too busy.