blonde poker forum

Thought this was an interesting dilemma that came up at the Broadway yesterday...

It was a double chance freezeout. A player takes their seat quite late (start to mid level 2 or something). He makes a standard raise pf, someone shoves, and he calls. He loses the pot, and asks for his 2nd lot of chips. Upon recieving his new 4k in chips, he and the players around him realise he was all-in on the previous hand for 3k and the stack he had been given previously was 1k short.

What should happen to this 1k?...

his blinds would have been taken from the initial 4k for 1 1/2 level;s though

Good point, Maybe he wasn't quite as late as I'm saying, might have only been mid level 1. Fran was at the table need her to clarify!! Perhaps it was more like he was all in for 2.6k or something....

The tournament director was called and action was taken, so I'm hoping it wasn't that he had been blinded off!

At DTD if someone buys in late, don't they only give up 1 bb and 1 sb? Maybe that explains that bit?

can you clarify, did he take his seat late so his chips were at the table from the start or did he buy in late so he and his chips only just arrived?

I'm assuming he was joining late here, and sat at the table with a 3k stack (which should have been 4k). He's paid his 1SB+1BB penalty, but we kept it in front of him and along with the rest of his chips the total is 3k.

In this situation, as long as  the other player had 4k covered I would give the extra 1k to the other player. If he had 3.5k I'd give him 500 of it.

I've tried to pick a rule out to justify this and the closest I could find is:

20. A player who declares all in and loses the pot, then discovers that one or more chips were hidden, is not entitled to benefit from this. That player is eliminated from the tournament if the opponent had sufficient chips to cover the hidden ones (A rebuy is okay if allowable by the rules of that event). If another deal has not yet started, the director may rule the chips belong to the opponent who won that pot, if that obviously would have happened with the chips out in plain view. If the next deal has started, the discovered chips are removed from the tournament.

Considering the chips "hidden from view" seems a fair assesment of what has happened here.

What should happen to this 1k?...

It should be taken out of the players pocket and given to the winner of the pot!!

 rotflmfao

this is actually the reason I asked the question above. if they've just walked over with their chips then this is a distinct possibility, if they've always been at the table then it's unlikely

I'm pretty sure it's the latter now I think about it...

he was an alternate and lost 1 blind before he sat down..he had played 1 pot but when moved all in it was for 2.6k which should have been 3.6k.

it was only when he got his 2nd chance stack that he said he only got 3k the first time round.one of the T.Ds was called over and she found his other 1k in the tray so it was deffinatly a mistake.

imo the way he played his 2nd lot of chips he still would have been all in with 3.6k chips so i think the correct rulling should have been to give the player that won the pot the extra 1k.he had him well covered in chips

was a very strange rulling to give the player that lost the pot the 1k chip

if they found the 1k then I'd have thought it should go to his oppo as long as he has him covered. he's called an ai and should've been aware of what his starting stack is supposed to be.

it all becomes more interesting if they don't find the missing 1k

Hard one to make a fair ruling on imo.
Imagine if the short stack had won the pot he would have equally been punished by not having recieving an extra 1k (if he had original starting stack of 4k).
Because he was an alternate it is a part error on the dealer in not giving him the correct amount,I also agree  with the arguement you  should know your starting stack too, this is why its hard, lots of variables in this case.
  I feel it is quite difficult in making a fair ruling.
Also imagine he had gone down to 200 chips and then gone all in and then discovered the error at the time of his rebuy, who gets the 1k now.
If this is a genuine mistake awarding the chips in play at the time is the fairest ruling imo.

You can't make a ruling on the basis that a player is shite!


I think the floor did the right thing under the circumstances, although I can see a case for removing the 1k chip from play.

Just had a think   :blonde:

If he called the all-in, and no further hands have taken place, the 1k chip should prolly go to his opponent.

But would he have for sure if he had 3.6k. who knows only the player I guess.
Good argument for both sides in this case

Is that not irrelevant?

His chip stack is 3.6k, just in two different locations, and he has called the all-in (of >3.6k).
It shouldn't really be ruled in his favour because he didn't keep track of his chips. (counting starting stack would be part of that responsibility)

All that is if there has been no hands played in the meantime obv.

Like i said there are instances in this case. he was an alternate apparently, maybe unaware of starting stack due to coming late I dont know I wasnt there but I also agree with you its the players responsibility to know these facts

 Dealer was involved in giving chips ffs even they didnt know how many to give out to the alternates lol . because of this I personally think the fairest ruling was given this time ,reasons given in earlier post



pls explain this:His chip stack is 3.6k, just in two different locations,

the guy that won the pot noticed straight away that the pot was not right so there were no hands played and the floor was called straight over.

He's only got 2.6k sitting in front of him, but this doesn't change that his official stack size is still 3.6k.
If the other 1k chip had been under a cocktail napkin instead of in the chip tray how would we rule?

Being an alternate and perhaps being unaware of stack size due to coming late is also irrelevant imo. Still his responsibility to know and check these details.

He has 2.6k sitting in front of him because he thought that was his official stack size. It was what was given to him by TD/Dealer.Maybe if he had the 3.6k he may have acted differently.

In reference to the chip under the napkin: Jack Strauss (chip & a chair) this exact scenario, he was allowed to play on and went on to win the WSOP Main event. He didnt forfeit the chip.
You cannot use the napkin scenario as that would have solely been his fault for missplacing his 1k chip, in this instance the person responsible for handing out chips is equally to blame.

 ;hattip;

thats some top quality detective work

here you go, solve this one....................

http://www.mysterynet.com/see/

LOL Bolt
That was 1 of those useless bits of info that I carry around in my brain. Tank probably already knew this info too.
I hang around with the ole boys who know 1st hand of some of the famous vegas tales/strokes. These infamous stories fascinate me lol

Pretty simple really, you cannot bet what you do not have in front of you.

My understanding was that Jack Strauss made a bet and was called.
Totally different set of circumstances than if another player had been all-in and he called them.