You make the ruling: Do the big chips play in this "all-in" push?

[Rick Nebiolo]

The following incident occurred in a a medium size NL game in a LA card club. Sorry about the DOS style graphics but they should be good enough to give you guys the idea of what the situation looked like. The dashed lines represent the rail and the X's and Y's represent stacks in front of the two involved players.


1. Each "X" below represents a stack of twenty $5 chips ($100). The "Y" stack in front of Player A consists of six $100 chips on the bottom and fourteen $5 chips on top. The bottom of the "Y" stack is not clearly visible to Player B as he is on the end seat where the table curves away (can't do curved lines in DOS [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]). These chips would barely be visible to someone standing behind as the rail blocks the bottom chips in the stack.

There is already a substantial pot. On the turn/river (doesn't matter) Player A pushes all-in. Player B calls. At the showdown Player A has the best hand. Player B starts to cut off seven of his ten stacks to pay off Player A. Player A then shows that he covers Player B with his $100 white chips (in LA white chips are the big chips). A huge argument erupts attracting the attention of the floorman. Player B claims he thought he was only calling a $700 bet. Player A says his white $100 chips have been in that spot for the last hour or so and they clearly play. Also note that Player B never asked for a count before calling.

[NOTE: Periods in graphics below had to be added after preview of post to maintain spacing.]


XXX.................XXXXX
XYXX................XXXXX
----------------------------------
Table Rail is actually curved here so
the Y stack is out of view of Player B
----------------------------------
Player A............Player B
Seat 4..............Seat 3


You are the floor. What is your decision?



2. Let me change the way the stacks are arranged just a little as follows:

XXX.................XXXXX
YXXX................XXXXX
----------------------------------
Table Rail is actually curved here so
the Y stack is out of view of Player B
----------------------------------
Player A............Player B
Seat 4..............Seat 3

Same situation as in 1. above. What is your decision now?



3. One more time. Let's add more stacks but the situation is essentially the same.


XXXX.................XXXXX
XYXX.................XXXXX
XXXX.................XXXXX
----------------------------------
Table Rail is actually curved here so
the Y stack is out of view of Player B
----------------------------------
Player A............Player B
Seat 4..............Seat 3


Same situation as in 1. above but with more stacks and now the $100 chips are completely out of view. What is your decision now?


Also appreciated are comments regarding the following:

What decision would you likely get in your home club or area?

What should be the fair decision if you wrote the rules?

~ Rick

PS Any interesting "chips/money" not in clear view stories also appreciated.

[Photoc]

I really have no idea wtf these graphics all mean, lol.

Btw, it's a players responsibility to know what is in play, also a dealer's responsibility to make sure all bigger denom. chips are visible at all times. Btw, when I'm playing, and I've seen this many times from other players, they will ask that others keep their chips visible.

On a side note: some cardrooms only allow nickles to play, some allow quarters and nickles, ect..

[Usagi_yo]

I'm not going through all the permutations but I'll simply tell you that Player B has a point. Do not stack high denomination chips below lower denomination chips. Even if you put them in the front row, as in this example, the people adjacent to you might not be able to see them.

As a general rule of thumb in poker, if something can be used as an excuse to angleshoot, somebody is going to shoot angles. Here, we don't know who the angle-shooter is, but to me, Player A has embedded high denomination chips in his low denomination stacks, and the edge goes to player B.

In my local Casino, thats what the ruling would be for most people from most floormen. There are a few people who would get a way with this from some floormen. Sorry, thats just the way it is.

Me? I'm going to know everybodies chip position at the start of the deal. It takes a few months to learn this habit, but if you play in B&M you better develop that habit. I've caught players removing large chips during the course of the hand (great tell BTW when they are on a weak hand), and I've seen them add large chips during the course of the hand.

My first catch was a player removing chips. I bet $225 against a player who should have had exactly $225 left, and he called all in with $150. I called the floor, felt like a cheeseball for doing that, but I knew he had a few more $500 buy-ins in his pocket. Had I not known that I wouldn't have said anything. Sure enough, he rebought after he lost that hand. That was a case of pure cheating for spite (he doesn't like me ... I play hard and rough and some fish just can't stand me.

I've seen players make big calls and inadvertantly hold on to the one or two white chips they had -- meaning making the complete call, but showing no chips on the felt. Generally it's a mistake due to the pressure, but it happens and all a sudden they wannt bet that $200 when their portion of the felt was clear ... makes the loser suspicious.

[2+2 wannabe]

player should know how much the other guy has

that being said, if I were writing the rules it would be specified that each individual denomination must be in its own stack

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
Do not stack high denomination chips below lower denomination chips. Even if you put them in the front row, as in this example, the people adjacent to you might not be able to see them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I interpret Rick's diagram to mean that the big chips were NOT in the front row, but buried in the back.

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
Btw, it's a players responsibility to know what is in play, also a dealer's responsibility to make sure all bigger denom. chips are visible at all times.

[/ QUOTE ]

How on earth can you expect a dealer to know there are higher chips hidden in the back of that guy's stack? You don't want dealers to inspect all stacks before dealing a hand, do you?

[kemystery]

Call stands for all the chips, that's how it would be ruled here

[goofball]

he should be forced to call $700 only IMO, and this kind of chip hiding is clearly angle shooting.

[jtr]

Player A seems to have worked hard to hide those white chips. Being stacked beneath reds and at the back is pretty damning (only thing more he could have done is paint the edges of the whites red). Looks like a clear angle-shoot to me. I've got no qualifications to be a floor, but fairness to me would dictate that the call is only for $700.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
Player B starts to cut off seven of his ten stacks to pay off Player A. Player A then shows that he covers Player B with his $100 white chips (in LA white chips are the big chips). A huge argument erupts attracting the attention of the floorman. Player B claims he thought he was only calling a $700 bet. Player A says his white $100 chips have been in that spot for the last hour or so and they clearly play. Also note that Player B never asked for a count before calling.

[/ QUOTE ]

When player A accepts the call without the chips being put in play he is putting himself in danger of this happening. He has a responsibility to not show his hand until this amount of the call is correct. The appropiate rule form Robert's Rules (something similiar may or may not appear in the rules depending on if they were written with NL in mind):
[ QUOTE ]
A bettor should not show down a hand until the amount put into the pot for a call seems reasonably correct, or it is obvious that the caller understands the amount wagered. The decision-maker is allowed considerable discretion in ruling on this type of situation. A possible rule-of-thumb is to disallow any claim of not understanding the amount wagered if the caller has put eighty percent or more of that amount into the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

As to how the actual decision should be made there are a couple of things to consider. Rick tried to draw us a picture of what the chips looked like, it depends on how easy or hard it might have been to see the white chips. It also depends on which white chips they were, if they were the oversized white I am far less inclined to believe that they were hidden.