max buy-in rulings (FL capped buy-in)

[franknagaijr]

FL poker, max buy-in at the 2/5 is $100. (No, that's not a typo, one-hundred dollars maximum.) Player A sits down and folds two hands, then puts it all in the middle on a flush draw. Except Player A puts in about $200. Player B with the large pocket pair matches the bet, A hits flush draw and now has a stack of $400. There were two house rulings worth sharing.

1) If anybody said anything during the hand, A would have been obliged to scale back to $100 max, and betting beyond that amount involving A would be void. After the hand was awarded, they would not strip A of the excess winnings.

2) Player A had to take the excess winnings off of the table, as opposed to quickly having a $400 stack, he had $200 on the table, and $200 in his pocket.

These both sound pretty standard to me.

[psandman]

[ QUOTE ]
FL poker, max buy-in at the 2/5 is $100. (No, that's not a typo, one-hundred dollars maximum.) Player A sits down and folds two hands, then puts it all in the middle on a flush draw. Except Player A puts in about $200. Player B with the large pocket pair matches the bet, A hits flush draw and now has a stack of $400. There were two house rulings worth sharing.

1) If anybody said anything during the hand, A would have been obliged to scale back to $100 max, and betting beyond that amount involving A would be void. After the hand was awarded, they would not strip A of the excess winnings.

2) Player A had to take the excess winnings off of the table, as opposed to quickly having a $400 stack, he had $200 on the table, and $200 in his pocket.

These both sound pretty standard to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

These may sound standard to you,

but from a poker stand point I don't see how you can have it both ways -- the money plays but gets taken off the table.

From a legal standpoint this is problematic for the house. They run the risk of legal issues if they allow players to exceed the legal buy-in limit, and in making the player remove the excess money the house is essentially admitting knowledge of the fact that the player exceeded the legal buy-in.

[franknagaijr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FL poker...

[/ QUOTE ]

These may sound standard to you,

but from a poker stand point I don't see how you can have it both ways -- the money plays but gets taken off the table.


[/ QUOTE ]

I see what you mean about the legality. However, from a poker and ethics standpoint, it seems like a reasonable compromise for an unpleasant situation. In the hand itself, the player with a legit stack had no qualms with the money behind, so it was risked before the dealer caught on. (dealer was SO embarrassed.) It would have been a really sick angle shoot if the loser to the flush draw had said something just as the pot was being awarded, but would have kept quiet if the pair had held up. The guy who lost the pot did not make a big deal about any of this, by the way.

Concerning chips staying on the table, that seems unfair to the rest of the table, all of whom had to come in for $100 and build their stacks from there, if johnny-come-lately can graduate to a $400 stack by virtue of a dealer error.

[psandman]

[ QUOTE ]
Concerning chips staying on the table, that seems unfair to the rest of the table, all of whom had to come in for $100 and build their stacks from there, if johnny-come-lately can graduate to a $400 stack by virtue of a dealer error.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never considered it a disadvantage to have another player put more money on the table.

But this wasn't just dealer error. It appears to be deliberate action by the player to circumvent the rules. I'm not going to reward him by letting him both get the pot and get to rathole money.

If its unfair for the player to keep the money on the table (which is a bizarre notion to me) then i gues sthe solution is that the money leaves the table along with the player.

[youtalkfunny]

When was it noticed that Player A had more money on the table than allowed? Who pointed it out?

And you guys are all nuts if you think the dealer is responsible to constantly monitor everyone's stack size. The players need to police the game, when it comes to things like that.

If you want the house to responsible for this stuff, just volunteer to pay extra rake, and I'm sure the house will provide a chair umpire, like in tennis, to sit high above the table and watch everything.

[Bossman9]

Are you sure that Player A did not just tranfer from another table??? If you request a table change, you can bring your stack to the new table regardless of size....

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
And you guys are all nuts if you think the dealer is responsible to constantly monitor everyone's stack size. The players need to police the game, when it comes to things like that.

If you want the house to responsible for this stuff, just volunteer to pay extra rake, and I'm sure the house will provide a chair umpire, like in tennis, to sit high above the table and watch everything.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree 99.8% [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

~ Rick

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
I've never considered it a disadvantage to have another player put more money on the table.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree here. If I have weak opponents with deepish to deep stacks I certainly don't want a skilled player to be able to come in and cover these weak opponents. In other words, after I work my way up to a deep stack I want first shot at their money. And making it a little harder for a better player to take the less skilled newbies money is key to to keeping the smaller blind no limit games good in LA.

~ Rick

[psandman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've never considered it a disadvantage to have another player put more money on the table.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree here. If I have weak opponents with deepish to deep stacks I certainly don't want a skilled player to be able to come in and cover these weak opponents. In other words, after I work my way up to a deep stack I want first shot at their money. And making it a little harder for a better player to take the less skilled newbies money is key to to keeping the smaller blind no limit games good in LA.

~ Rick

[/ QUOTE ]

Well that may be an issue for you, but since I'm the worst player at the table and simply relying on blind luck to help me suck out with an a 1 outer on the river, the more players with big stacks the better.fter all who wants to use up their luck sucking out against the small stack.