Question on raising/"one chip rule"

[Brettski]

At Crown Casino we have a tournament rule that states "if a player puts in two oversized chip which would constitute more than a call, but less than would constitute a raise, it shall be a call."

In short, it's a call.

It's a way of further clarifying the single oversized chip rule to include situations where a player puts in more than one single oversized chip.

[NickMPK]

[ QUOTE ]
At Crown Casino we have a tournament rule that states "if a player puts in two oversized chip which would constitute more than a call, but less than would constitute a raise, it shall be a call."

In short, it's a call.

It's a way of further clarifying the single oversized chip rule to include situations where a player puts in more than one single oversized chip.

[/ QUOTE ]

I absolutely agree that if the two chips are not enough to make a raise, it would be a call.

The question is: what if the two chips are enough to make a legal raise? If player 1 raises from 2 to 6, player 2 could raise from 6 to 10 if he wanted.

[NickMPK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

1/2 NL game:
First player raises to $6
Second player throws out two red ($5) chips without saying anything.
Is this a call or a raise to $10?

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont see how this is a call. 1/2 blinds, first raise is 4 more to 6 total. Player throws out 10 which is 4 more (the minimum raise allowable). Dealer should announce "raise to 10" and if the player says "no, it's just a call" before any action takes place, then it's a call. Otherwise, the bet is 100% correct for the minimum raise. It's not 1 chip and the 1 chip rule has virtually nothing to do with 2 chips being thrown in at the same time.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing about this rule is that the bet should never be unclear to the table. You should never have to ask a player if he is raising or calling unless he mumbles something and you are unclear on what he said. Throwing two five dollar chips out makes it unclear and as a poster said before, you go with the least aggressive action.

However, if you throw out a red, and five white you have a raise every time. Because you are making it crystal clear that you are intending to make it ten dollars straight.

[/ QUOTE ]

The weird thing is, I think the "one chip rule" makes things less clear. If you wanted to make sure every bet was clear, you would just have a rule that every bet had to be exactly the size intended, and that a player should get change from the dealer before making the bet if necessary. The one chip rule is intended for speed, not clarity. So I don't see how applying the rule in this case makes the bet more clear.

[bav]

[ QUOTE ]
The weird thing is, I think the "one chip rule" makes things less clear.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's crystal clear. If there CAN be ambiguity, it's not a raise.

If you're facing a bet of $6 after a raise from $2, a single $10 chip or two $5 chips are effectively the same thing. They are the correct chips to put in to call the $6. They are also the correct amount to be a raise. If you don't speak up, it's a call. It makes no sense at all to say a single $10 is a call while two $5's is a raise. Just doesn't seem like this is difficult or fuzzy.

[NickMPK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The weird thing is, I think the "one chip rule" makes things less clear.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's crystal clear. If there CAN be ambiguity, it's not a raise.

If you're facing a bet of $6 after a raise from $2, a single $10 chip or two $5 chips are effectively the same thing. They are the correct chips to put in to call the $6. They are also the correct amount to be a raise. If you don't speak up, it's a call. It makes no sense at all to say a single $10 is a call while two $5's is a raise. Just doesn't seem like this is difficult or fuzzy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then why does it may sense that if the bet is $2, a single $10 chip would be a call but two $5's would be a raise? A raise to $10 is legal in both cases.

If you are looking for clarity, isn't the easiest answer to assume that the person intended to bet what he actually bet, unless he verbally specified something different?

[PantsOnFire]

[ QUOTE ]
Nope... again the dealer should not have to guess what the players intentions are, no matter what kind of color is in a players stack.

[/ QUOTE ]
So if I put out two chips and those two chips add up to a raise, then it's not a raise because it looks like a call?

[QuadsOverQuads]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont see how this is a call. 1/2 blinds, first raise is 4 more to 6 total. Player throws out 10 which is 4 more (the minimum raise allowable). Dealer should announce "raise to 10" and if the player says "no, it's just a call" before any action takes place, then it's a call. Otherwise, the bet is 100% correct for the minimum raise. It's not 1 chip and the 1 chip rule has virtually nothing to do with 2 chips being thrown in at the same time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Action is as follows:

SB : $1
BB : $2
P1 : $6 (+$4) (1st raise)
P2 : $10 (+$4) (2nd raise) (multiple chips, no verbal declaration)

Unless verbally declared as a call, P2's action is a binding raise.


q/q

[HOWMANY]

It's a minraise. Everyone that says it is a call is wrong.

[GiantBuddha]

Call. I've seen the rule implemented with two red chips in the $1/2 game, and with two green chips in a $5/10 after a $30 raise. In both situations it was a call and the player received change. In fact, I've never seen anyone make this ambiguous bet and mean for it to be a raise without saying "raise". Simply by that empirical evidence, I'd rule it a call.

[GiantBuddha]

[ QUOTE ]
It's a minraise. Everyone that says it is a call is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you ever seen it intended and ruled this way without a verbal declaration?