Was I ripped off at the Venetian? - Page 3 - Poker Card Room

Babaloo1 · 07-08-2012, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AngusThermopyle

You didn't even know how your opponent got down to $85. Why do you think any of the other players are more attentive?

Shaq could be playing at your table for two hours, get up for a minute and Paris Hilton could sit down in his seat and nobody would notice the difference.

And the dealer was probably more interested in looking at the clock and praying that his down at the Omaha table ends soon.

Not sure what your point is here. The questions that I am posing are: Did the dealer do his job properly (since he did not hear the chip runner make an announcement, I do not see how he failed)? Did the chip runner do his job properly (no one knows...since no one heard him)? Did the floor person make the right decision (THAT is the heart of my inquiry).

You failed to answer any of those questions. You just offered a hostile off the wall response.

Babaloo1 · 07-08-2012, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickMPK

So what exactly was the floor's ruling with respect to the over-pot bet? In a head-up NL pot, I would certainly rule that "I put you all-in" is a binding bet of "all-in". But this is pot-limit. If the other player made it clear that he was accepting an obvious overbet, I can understand how this would be ruled as accepted action. But from what I can tell, you stopped the play before your opponent called, and as soon as you realized you had essentially overbet. I don't think saying "great" is a binding call unless you actually say call or put some chips in the middle. And I think for this to be ruled an accepted all-in, it need to be clear that both players intend to get all-in; that isn't true here. I would rule it a pot-size raised, with action on the villain.

Yes, this was an excellent point that was brought up by a previous poster. I think that was maybe my biggest mistake, in that his repot would only have been $120. The floor running the hand through, and then pushing my $300 in chips to him, I think was the biggest error. I was too flustered to think that through.

steamraise · 07-08-2012, 06:45 PM

I'm blaming the chip runner. He needs to make sure the dealer knows chips are on the way.

AngusThermopyle · 07-08-2012, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babaloo1

Did the dealer do his job properly (since he did not hear the chip runner make an announcement, I do not see how he failed)?

The dealer didn't notice the chip runner called to the table. The dealer did not notice the chip runner arrive. The dealer did not notice the player hand the chip runner $400. The dealer did not notice the chip runner declare "$400 behind".

I call that "failure"

Quote:

Did the chip runner do his job properly (no one knows...since no one heard him)?

Perhaps he did not announce it loud enough. But my point from my previous post still stands: The fact that nobody remembers hearing him means very little at a poker table.

Quote:

Did the floor person make the right decision (THAT is the heart of my inquiry).

I think he made a correct decision.

Babaloo1 · 07-08-2012, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youtalkfunny

First of all, answer this honestly: IF he had the chips and the hand played out normally, is there any way you weren't going all-in after flopping the nuts? If you concede that you would have been happy to get your chips in before he announced his hand, then this ruling is moot, imo.

But it's tough to be that honest, so let's discuss the ruling.

In that case, the $400 is in play. I can easily imagine everyone tuning out the chiprunner like background noise. All the chip runner can do is make the announcement--unfortunately, he has no way of MAKING people listen.

I had a guy just last night in the SB check the river. Two others check, the last guy in late position bets. I announce the bet (because this is a small, limit game, where absolutely nobody pays attention, not even the folks with cards, and I have to announce everything). The SB throws his cards in face up. I announce "Ace-King exposed, going down." I turn the cards face down, and wait a second or two before mucking them (giving the player a chance to stop me).

After I muck the AK, the other players fold, and I ship the pot to the bettor. As I'm shipping, SB finally snaps out of his stupor. "Wait, what did he have?"

Now it's clear that he didn't see the bet, and was tabling his hand because he thought it was showdown time. "I don't know what he had, nobody called his bet."

"He BET??? I didn't even know he was in the hand!"

"Yes, he bet, and nobody called."

"Why didn't you announce his bet?"

"I *did*. I announced his bet; I announced that I was mucking your AK before I did it; I even pointed out to you on the turn that he had a hand, as you acted out of turn behind him! Nobody has ever accused me of having a weak or timid voice, or has ever asked me to speak up. I did all the announcing I could, but you tuned me right out."

What I left unsaid was, "On top of that, HE PUT OUT A BET for everyone to see! Sorry this didn't work out for you, but don't look to blame others for this one."

But the point is, poker players tune out these announcements all the time. Just because nobody heard it means that it wasn't made loud and clear.

Now, the only thing left for the floor to decide in your case is whether or not you deserve any protection under the "gross misunderstanding" clause (a rule that suffers plenty of "gross misunderstanding" by floor staff everywhere outside of the B&M forum). But again, it's hard to imagine that you wanted to bet close to $100 with the nuts, but wouldn't want to bet $300 if you had the chance.

Given all of this, I agree with the floorman's ruling.

OK, honest answer: If I knew how much he had behind, I would have just called his bet. Swear. Not joking. Too often, in this particular game you flop the nuts, and it doesn't hold. I would not have gone all in for $300 with two spades on the board. Maybe that makes me a weak player. I don't know. But I do know, 100%, I would not have gone in for $300. I thought I only had an $85 risk at the top of the hand, and just a $15 additional risk, once he bet. That is my honest answer.

grunta0 · 07-08-2012, 07:52 PM

"I think he made a correct decision. "

Angus you are more experienced than I but how can it be a correct decision if this is PLO?

As pointed out Hero can not legally make that bet so how can the floor call it so?

mixgameADDict · 07-08-2012, 09:37 PM

For the record, IF the pot is heads up in PLO the "rule" at the V and at most other Vegas casinos is that a player is allowed to overbet the pot (eg. OP's all-in bet) and the other player has the option to call the full bet or the smaller pot sized bet.

I know this is a crazy rule but I've confirmed it with a floor at the V I'm friends with who has studied this stuff very closely. That said, many floor people do not know the rule and may make decisions to the contrary.

**Dynasty** · 07-08-2012, 10:05 PM

The $400 behind absolutely must play. Once he turns his money over to the chiprunner, it's as good as chips on the table.

The wording of the bet "put you all-in" is bad. However, it's clear the two players essentially agreed to get their stacks in (even though OP didn't understand his opponent's stack size). That's allowed in pot-limit games when play is heads-up. It's not necessary to go through a lengthier process of "Pot. Pot. Pot. etc."

If OP wasn't agreeing to get his stack all-in, he needed to say so at the time. He can't complain about it after the hand is over and the pot has been pushed.

Babaloo1,

You have absolutely no case at all. You got treated fairly and correctly.

If you've actually filed some type of complaint, you should drop it.

pfapfap · 07-08-2012, 10:22 PM

It sucks this happened, Babaloo, but at the end of the day it's up to you to verify your opponent's stack. In PLO especially, it's not uncommon at all to hear a player ask "Any bills or big chips behind?" or "How much are you playing?" before making a bet like this. It'd be a good idea for you to take up this practice. Lesson bought and paid for, hopefully learned.

I agree that the runner should verify that the dealer heard him, but I've rarely encountered a good chip-runner.

What I do know is what YTF and Angus said, that it doesn't matter what the dealer says because the players simply don't hear it. The players barely consider the dealer a human in some of these games, let alone someone with anything important to say.

psandman · 07-09-2012, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grunta0

"I think he made a correct decision. "

Angus you are more experienced than I but how can it be a correct decision if this is PLO?

As pointed out Hero can not legally make that bet so how can the floor call it so?

One thing you have to keep in mind is that when then Floor gets called over to the table with this issue ..... OP is arguing that he shouldn't be bound because he didn;t know about the $400 behind ...... The floor isn't being asked to rule on any other issue. Its very likely that the discussion with the floor was not laid out like the post here. The floor is being presented with this issue ..... which is not cut and dry ..... There are factual issues as well as rule issues he has to consider and ghis focus is going to be on those issues ..... so since OP never raised the issue about the overbet its actually probably not unreasonable that the floor is not addressing that issue.

steamraise · 07-09-2012, 01:01 AM

If the dealer doesn't know the chips are in transit he doesn't know if they
were ordered before the player looked at his hand. I don't see how the chips play.

The chip runner must makes sure the dealer knows so he can announce if they play or not.

As2s3s4s5s · 07-09-2012, 01:51 AM

Bad ruling... "I put you all in" is not a bet and even if the floor rules that the chips are in play (which he shouldn't IMO) you are only committed to the $120 at this point.

PokerProErik · 07-09-2012, 04:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TDMarathon86

You can put yourself all in, but putting someone else all in is not a valid bet. You can approximate his stack and use that as a ruling next time, and then the confusion would ensue when he says "I guess I'm all in...." and waits for the 400

WINNER.... you did not bet at all, thus the bet is not binding. You can NEVER put another player All In.

youtalkfunny · 07-09-2012, 04:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by browser2920

YTF- while I agree with your premise about people not paying attention, I'm wondering about the fact of the chip runner announcing the amount behind.

In the games I play in, a chip runner announcement would not be considered official/binding. It's up to the dealer to make the announcement. If the dealer didn't announce it, then it doesn't play. I'm guessing that's not the way it works at your place.

No, that's not how it works at my place...or any place I've ever worked....or any place I've ever played.

You guys need to keep in mind, the dealer is NOT there to protect you! He'll try, but he has no obligation, nor responsibility. I know you guys hate hearing that, and you prefer to think otherwise, but you're wrong when you do.

If dealers were held responsible for protecting you, they'd have to make it up out of pocket every time they screwed up. One mistake could cost them a week's pay, or more, and guess what? YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO FIND ANYONE TO DEAL YOUR GAME FOR YOU. So the house makes it clear to all the players, "Protect yourself at all times."

The chip runner isn't going to protect you. The dealer isn't, either. Again, they'll do their best for you, but if they fail, it's not their problem, it's yours.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babaloo1

Actually, no, I did not accuse the chip runner of lying. I was asked if I thought he lied, and I said I did not know.

...Not sure why I am being attacked here.

Well, I got news for you: the guy who asked you was asking rhetorically. His post was dripping with sarcasm. The fact that you took the question seriously and even allowed for the possibility that someone would lie in a spot like this is laughable, so I laughed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by grunta0

"I think he made a correct decision. "

Angus you are more experienced than I but how can it be a correct decision if this is PLO?

Quote:

Originally Posted by As2s3s4s5s

Bad ruling... "I put you all in" is not a bet and even if the floor rules that the chips are in play (which he shouldn't IMO) you are only committed to the $120 at this point.

To borrow an expression from Inherit the Wind, "It is one of the peculiar imbecilities of our time" that everyone knows two players heads-up in a limit game can go all-in if they want, but nobody can grasp why the exact same thing is permitted in pot-limit.

bav · 07-09-2012, 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youtalkfunny

To borrow an expression from Inherit the Wind, "It is one of the peculiar imbecilities of our time" that everyone knows two players heads-up in a limit game can go all-in if they want, but nobody can grasp why the exact same thing is permitted in pot-limit.

What YTF is saying, in his round-about way, is that it's traditional an a pot-limit game when heads-up for the gloves to be allowed to come off. A player can make an all-in wager. If his opponent doesn't like that, he can demand it be limited to a pot-size bet. Otherwise, he's welcome to call the all-in. If you say "call" after an "all-in", you don't get to go back and say "but wait, I only meant to call a pot bet".

Dunno what particular rules they may use at V in PLO games, though.