|
|
|
|
#1
11-27-2007, 03:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Weird situation at Caesars
I was playing at the 1/2 table at Caesar's in AC when I saw this situation happen.
On the river of a hand, villian bets approximately 1/3 of his remaining chips. The other player in the hand begins contemplating. Villian says "Come on I need to get out of here, fold already" and proceeds to put the rest of his stack in his pocket. The other player thinks another minute or two and proceeds to fold. The dealer says nothing about villian putting the chips in his pocket. My question is: what would happen if the other player raised the villian's bet after he took those chips off the table and put them in his pocket? Would he be treated as all in? Would he be allowed to call the raise with the chips in his pockets? What if before he didn't have that much on the table but had enough in his pockets to call? Does anyone have any experience with this kind of situation? I wish this had actually happened so that the villian would have been reprimanded for doing that, he was pretty much a drunk jerk anyway. Thanks for any clarification you can offer. 
|
|
#5
11-27-2007, 11:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Weird situation at Caesars
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] He has to play the chips that were on the table when the hand started. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, which is why the dealer is unacceptably negligent here. [/ QUOTE ] Little harsh on the dealer aren't we?
|
|
#6
11-27-2007, 11:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Weird situation at Caesars
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] He has to play the chips that were on the table when the hand started. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, which is why the dealer is unacceptably negligent here. [/ QUOTE ] Little harsh on the dealer aren't we? [/ QUOTE ] Maybe the tone and word selection was harsh, but that doesn't make it less true. It is entirely possible that if the other player had raised, the dealer would have required the villain to put his chips back on the table if he wanted to call.
|
|
#7
11-27-2007, 11:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Weird situation at Caesars
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] He has to play the chips that were on the table when the hand started. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, which is why the dealer is unacceptably negligent here. [/ QUOTE ] Little harsh on the dealer aren't we? [/ QUOTE ] Maybe the tone and word selection was harsh, but that doesn't make it less true. It is entirely possible that if the other player had raised, the dealer would have required the villain to put his chips back on the table if he wanted to call. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, but it that such a big deal? If he gets raised, he either puts his chips back in play or folds. I don't see any reason for the dealer to panic because the chips came off the table. Obviously it would be better if the chips stayed on the table but negligent is way too harsh a term.
|
|
#8
11-27-2007, 04:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Weird situation at Caesars
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] He has to play the chips that were on the table when the hand started. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, which is why the dealer is unacceptably negligent here. [/ QUOTE ] Little harsh on the dealer aren't we? [/ QUOTE ] I didn't mean for it to be harsh, just straightforward. I just meant that the dealer should be on top of this. There are worse things dealers can do, but it's important to keep the cash on the table. I don't think the dealer should be fired or anything.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
