Simple no-limit rules question

[youtalkfunny]

Player A puts in a preflop raise, for about half his chips. He cuts them out neatly, so that all the world can see how much he has bet.

Fold around to Player B, who has about as many chips as Player A. B asks A, "How many chips do you have left?"

Player A points to his last stack, and says, "That many."

B: How many is that? Count it.

A: No, sir. I have to keep all of my chips visible, but I do not have to count them for you.

B: Dealer, please count his remaining chips.

Player A gave the dealer a look that said, "Don't you touch my chips."

The dealer decided that he wanted nothing to do with this disagreement, and called the floor.

The floor was busy, and did not come over right away. Player A gave in, and counted down his stack for Player B.

After he was later eliminated, Player A asked the floorman what he would've ruled. Floor says, "If he wants a count, and you won't do it, the dealer will."

I think I side with A on this one. The rules say "All chips must be visible", or "Largest denomination chips must be visible." I can't think of any rule that says, "All chips must be counted down, upon request."

How do you rule this one, B&M?

[KingJackOff]

I agree with the floor. If the dealer was intimidated by the "look", then he is a terrible dealer.

[grdred944]

I totally agree with the floor as well but do not fault the dealer for calling the floor over. Why get involved in a pissing contest with the 1 out of 500 person who is going to be an asshat about letting his chips be counted?

[Lottery Larry]

Does the stack count rule only apply to tourneys and Player B was the ass, or was Player A being a dick?

Actually, Player B is at fault regardless- if you can't estimate his remaining chips closely enough, he shouldn't be playing poker.

[chesspain]

Player A is being a dick. Player B should neither have to trust Players A's claim "My chips are all visible" nor have to have good enough eyesight to count stacks from across the table.

Either Player A or the Dealer should count Player A's chips, and Player A should get a kick in the nuts.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with the floor. If the dealer was intimidated by the "look", then he is a terrible dealer.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incorrect. The dealer should never make a ruling. Even when t he outcome is obvious. Example, 20-40 game, player wants to bet $40 on the flop, the dealer says pushes back the extra $20 and says it is a $40 bet. That is normally the end of it, but if the player wants to argue and say the dealer is wrong that he can bet $40 whenever he wants this is now a matter for the floor. Once a dealer has explained the situation he should not srgue with the players. The dealer has no authority to make rulings. If a player doesnt' understand the game/the rules of the game it is the responsibility of the floor to explain these things to him.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I side with A on this one. The rules say "All chips must be visible", or "Largest denomination chips must be visible." I can't think of any rule that says, "All chips must be counted down, upon request."

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't think of a rule that says they should be counted on request, but that is how it has always been and probably will always be.

[BigBuffet]

(My reply cocnerns live NL tournaments only)

I've never counted my chips. I just keep them stacked by denomination and with the big colors very visible. I've seen TDA rules to this effect, but I haven't seen a rule that says I have to verbally tell the other guy how many.

Cards speak and so do the chips.

Normally we want to be consistent in our actions. But sometimes we can deviate to manipulate the other guy into calling or folding. When guys try to game you with a chip count question, game them right back.

Your post title said simple question, but this area can become a complicated strategy question in tournaments.

The simple answer is let the dealer count it.

The advanced question of whether to count it and verbally state the amount versus not doing so depends on...a lot. But it can be very profitable if you can read the opponent and decide which to do. This may not happen that often in any given tournament, but when it does it can be very profitable.

Recently at a couple of closely spaced tournaments I did each one with excellent results. At one I asked his chip count when I was heads-up on the flop. I had flopped a King hi straight. He was an older 30/60 player whom I knew would take the bait. After he told me his chip count, I just looked at him for a second trying to calculate what I thought he would call. He quickly stated: "It's common practice to bet when you ask a question like that". So I went all in. He called with top two and missed the boat. Yay.

At a different tournament I c-bet the flop big and the other guy (heads-up on the flop again) asked me how many I had left. I told him in a way that seemed like I didn't like a call. So he went all in with QQ to my AA [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Also, when the question is asked of me most of the time I am silent, but the way I remain silent is designed to elicit a call, raise or fold. Again that is something you have to experiment with.

So in essence I am suggesting that you could let the tournament dealers count your chips while you remain silent for the rest of your life and that would be okay. Or you could start using this chance to game your opponents. Your choice.

[PantsOnFire]

This is an etiquette question more than a rule question. Player A has no responsibility other than making sure his stack is in plain view and his big chips are visible.

In NL, chip stack is an important factor in decisions so that information should be available upon request. The events that went down as you described seem normal to me. Player A seems to have been a bit of a dick but a previous issue with Player B might have prompted it, who knows? Perhaps Player B has been asking chip counts every hand?

Nothing here seems out of the ordinary other than Player A should probably realize the floor will allow the dealer to count his stack so he is being somewhat belligerent and perhaps sending a message to Player B for whatever reason.

[MicroBob]

you're saying he wouldn't have called with top 2 or the other guy wouldn't have gone all-in with QQ if you hadn't somehow manipulated them into doing so?