DTD Ruling??

[Derbylad]

From the years i've played at DTD i've never experienced any problems until this one....

The villain in question is a reg and should be well aware of the rules.
Hero is dealt KK with a stack size of 320 playing 50/1
Villain who is 4 hands in after moving from a different table is dealt AA.

all in pre flop, the hands play themselves and obviously i brick.

When assuming i'm handing over 200 i'm then told i'm covered and the villain is playing around 400 (2 pink chips among his stack).
I ask for the floor to be called considering the player shouldn't be sat down with anymore then the table max of 200. The ruling isn't overturned and instead of being left with 120 im stacked off.

The argument given to me was that players should be aware of other players stack sizes at all times.
If i'd won the pot i wouldn't be complaining

Counter arguments:

• the player should only have ever been sat down with the table maximum... between 50-200.
• Whether id won the pot is irrelevant based on stack sizes as i'm assuming he was only playing 200 anyway
• the dealer should regulate play and should have made other players aware of a larger stack size if the other table was legitimately broken (which it wasn't).

While i've obviously assumed he's playing 200 and wasn't aware he'd brought more to the table, should the ruling still stand regardless of the strict guidelines in place of table maximums. In my opinion all this has done is  promote to players that you can sit with over the max as long as nobody notices.

[scotty77]

If he moved from another 50/1 table then his stack will be valid.

If he moved from 1/2 then it wouldn't be.

In other rooms this is the case....def in the Vic and Luton G.

[ChristieEllis]

IMO...


It is the dealers job to check and make sure the players are not sitting below the min and above the max -  some players are very sneeky and will add more chips if they think the dealer is 'weak,new' and use this to their advantage as they are unlikey to pipe up about it. I doubt this was the case in this instance but the dealers should check stacks when players sit down regardless.
It is also sometimes hard for dealers to regulate stacks as they get moved from table to table , dealers wont always know when a new player has joined the table if they wasnt there when it happend.


I also think that when playing poker it is important for players to note what stacks they are playing among as this is highly important when starting the hand.
Assuming will only get players into trouble.

As the hand has played out , I agree with the ruling that was given because ;

1- Nothing was said to the player when he/she sat down by the players/dealer - he/she was in for four hands prior this and still nobody noticed.
2- Players should really know what they are calling when facing an all in bet

Its very unlucky about the situation and overall ... IMO.. a booboo on both the dealers part and yours.

[cambridgealex]

IMO...


It is the dealers job to check and make sure the players are not sitting below the min and above the max -  some players are very sneeky and will add more chips if they think the dealer is 'weak,new' and use this to their advantage as they are unlikey to pipe up about it. I doubt this was the case in this instance but the dealers should check stacks when players sit down regardless.
It is also sometimes hard for dealers to regulate stacks as they get moved from table to table , dealers wont always know when a new player has joined the table if they wasnt there when it happend.


I also think that when playing poker it is important for players to note what stacks they are playing among as this is highly important when starting the hand.
Assuming will only get players into trouble.

As the hand has played out , I agree with the ruling that was given because ;

1- Nothing was said to the player when he/she sat down by the players/dealer - he/she was in for four hands prior this and still nobody noticed.
2- Players should really know what they are calling when facing an all in bet

Its very unlucky about the situation and overall ... IMO.. a booboo on both the dealers part and yours.

Christies summed it up perfect.

Name and shame the reg Gary?

[Derbylad]

Agree with what your saying from a dealers perspective, it was more the having faith in the guidelines that are already in place, 99.9% of the time the player would have been told 200 max. Not sure on his name mate, seen him there plenty though, he did apologize to me after i spoke to the desk but it doesn't really mean much.

[polaroid83]

As far as I'm aware if a player moves from a50/1 table to another he is allowed to bring all of his chips over. I'm surprised they sat there for 4 hands and nobody asked how much they were playing. Also I would of asked for a total amount of the all in bet rather than assume it's a certain amount. An unfortunate incident IMO.

[Derbylad]

As far as I'm aware if a player moves from a50/1 table to another he is allowed to bring all of his chips over. I'm surprised they sat there for 4 hands and nobody asked how much they were playing. Also I would of asked for a total amount of the all in bet rather than assume it's a certain amount. An unfortunate incident IMO.

The ruling at DTD as far as i'm aware....
is that a player is able to bring a full stack size over, i.e. one that is over the table maximum of 200 if the table is legitimately broken by the house e.g. if it goes down to 2 handed etc...
The table in question wasn't legitimately broken so i was under the assumption the player would only be playing 200 hence the assumption on stack size

[gatso]

Also I would of asked for a total amount of the all in bet rather than assume it's a certain amount. An unfortunate incident IMO.

really? you're sat with AA and you're asking how much an allin is before calling? doubt it

[AndrewT]

As far as I'm aware if a player moves from a50/1 table to another he is allowed to bring all of his chips over. I'm surprised they sat there for 4 hands and nobody asked how much they were playing. Also I would of asked for a total amount of the all in bet rather than assume it's a certain amount. An unfortunate incident IMO.

The ruling at DTD as far as i'm aware....
is that a player is able to bring a full stack size over, i.e. one that is over the table maximum of 200 if the table is legitimately broken by the house e.g. if it goes down to 2 handed etc...
The table in question wasn't legitimately broken so i was under the assumption the player would only be playing 200 hence the assumption on stack size

Does this mean that at DTD, if I've run my £200 up to £1000, but fancy taking my profits but continue to play, I can just ask for a table change, stick £800 in my pocket and carry on playing?

That can't be right.

[polaroid83]

Obv if you have aa the amount doesn't mater just ment in general players normally ask how much is it. If they are holding something other than aces

[Derbylad]

Does this mean that at DTD, if I've run my £200 up to £1000, but fancy taking my profits but continue to play, I can just ask for a table change, stick £800 in my pocket and carry on playing?

That can't be right.

This is the same scenario as online

[giveyourcash]

As far as I'm aware if a player moves from a50/1 table to another he is allowed to bring all of his chips over. I'm surprised they sat there for 4 hands and nobody asked how much they were playing. Also I would of asked for a total amount of the all in bet rather than assume it's a certain amount. An unfortunate incident IMO.

The ruling at DTD as far as i'm aware....
is that a player is able to bring a full stack size over, i.e. one that is over the table maximum of 200 if the table is legitimately broken by the house e.g. if it goes down to 2 handed etc...
The table in question wasn't legitimately broken so i was under the assumption the player would only be playing 200 hence the assumption on stack size

Does this mean that at DTD, if I've run my £200 up to £1000, but fancy taking my profits but continue to play, I can just ask for a table change, stick £800 in my pocket and carry on playing?

That can't be right.

And yet it is.

[cambridgealex]

Yeh that is 100% the ruling

[redsimon]

As far as I'm aware if a player moves from a50/1 table to another he is allowed to bring all of his chips over. I'm surprised they sat there for 4 hands and nobody asked how much they were playing. Also I would of asked for a total amount of the all in bet rather than assume it's a certain amount. An unfortunate incident IMO.

The ruling at DTD as far as i'm aware....
is that a player is able to bring a full stack size over, i.e. one that is over the table maximum of 200 if the table is legitimately broken by the house e.g. if it goes down to 2 handed etc...
The table in question wasn't legitimately broken so i was under the assumption the player would only be playing 200 hence the assumption on stack size

Does this mean that at DTD, if I've run my £200 up to £1000, but fancy taking my profits but continue to play, I can just ask for a table change, stick £800 in my pocket and carry on playing?

That can't be right.

And yet it is.

Yeah I ran 200 up to 500 (thin brag yeah) a few weeks ago and moved to what I thought was better table after some good regs joined mine. Was a bit flummoxed when dealer said I had to weed 300 off into my pocket!

[redsimon]

and Id rather have kept my 500 stack tbh