I guess I don't understand what you're even arguing should happen. Are you saying that if it looks close, everybody should just table their hand assuming A will pay the extra amount? Because that's exactly how threads like this happen.

If it's not clear if B's stack is more or less than the bet they're facing, then yes, it should be counted.

Have you ever played poker? Almost every weekend warrior tables their hand that way.

No actually all that needs to happen is A could say "call" or the dealer could ask A "are you calling?" and then there is no issue. Not quite sure why you think the stacks would need to be counted in this situation. It's very common to hear my dealers say this: "in case that is more than your bet are you calling? I just want to be sure."

No, it would not be killed, but you could ask the dealer to clarify that she is calling before you show your hand to avoid any issues. Protect yourself because sometimes you may be the only one that will.

What I'm saying should happen is when B sticks in their stack they should say "all in" and when A flips their hand they should say "all in" or "call". But when that doesn't happen, in this situation, it is IMO obvious that both parties intended to play for stacks, and so that's what should happen with the money.

It's not clear that A is intending to play for stacks. It's very reasonable that A is unaware he owes more money. You could be folding and showing, you could be unaware your bet was raised. Simply tabling your hand does not indicate you are calling.

Come on. So why is A tabling his hand if he doesn't think he is playing for what B just put in? He's trying to get a read for the last $10 in a $500 pot with trips, ace kicker? He thought he put B all in with his checkraise (should have just said all in) and thought B shoving all his chips in was a call. If A tables best hand here no one counts anything, we just ship Bs stack to A.

If it wasn't clear, this did not happen in my room. So my rule of making it a fold doesn't matter. Even in my room if this were to happen where the bets are obviously close, my dealer would verify if the player is calling.

As for the bolded, you are correct that it is no action, but all we need to do is confirm with A that he is calling. We only need to count the stack if B is the winner. In that case though I would guess A would say they are not calling.

In this thread we learn that "OP tables his hand" equals "OP throws his cards in the middle like they are diseased and we go from there, even though it wasn't mentioned that OP did it that specific way anywhere".

We never said that. We just didn't assume it meant "OP tables his hand directly in front of him like a sane person".

I'm not sure what this has to do with the ruling anyway. It changes nothing. The ruling is the same whether he turned his cards over right where they originally laid or threw them all the way across the table face up. He has not yet acted.

so I guess 99.8% of players are idiots since pretty much no one protects their hand once it's tabled and it's a fold when he doesn't announce call or puts in the bet he is facing.

if apples equal oranges, than yes.

Always amazing how some threads grow legs.

I missed out on $5 last night on basically the same issue. Player bet River ($75), assumed to be what would put me all-in, and I put my 'stacks' in, which includes a bunch of whites. I knew I had sucked out on the River so when the player went to turn his cards over I quickly turned mine over first, not wanting to slow roll or make him show his hand if he didn't want to. Dealer counted things down and he was $5 short. Dealer then says "This is $5 short." Player says "So?" Dealer says "Do you call?" Player says "No" and dealer pushes the pot as is to me.

Most of these threads can get crazy since posters are referencing rules that apply to their room, but not necessarily how the OP should be handled in 'that' room. I love all the information but readily admit that the longer a thread gets the more important it is to rewind the thread to see which direction each poster is going.

Can we apply the term 'misunderstood action' here? If so, then we have Player A making actions assuming the hand is at showdown while not knowing the hand is not complete as of yet. I don't think it matters whether or not he can or can't expose his cards (or how). Player A thinks the hand is at showdown and it isn't. Since action hasn't 'passed' him (as it can happen PF) then the hand should 'back up' to the point of where it was misunderstood IMO.

Certainly Player B (for sure) and the Dealer could've done something to help Player A realize his error, but that didn't happen.

Obviously not being able to undo the exposing of the cards it's a pretty easy fold for Player A and he owes no more chips to the pot. I'm not sure if there's a post here addressing this or not, but in a room where players are not allowed to expose their hands before showdown I can't imagine 'the room' allow Player B to angle the pot away from Player A here if Player A had a better hand since his hand was pre-exposed. That's how I get back to misunderstood action and then we go from there. GL

I don't know, maybe I should go to the "default" and assume OP is ******ed.

Funny... After messing around in this thread yesterday, I went and was watching a 1/2NL game in my room and I swear in 20 minutes this happened twice. Both times it was after the river and the dealer successfully stopped the player and verified they were calling the rest "just in case it was more". I promise you the dealer taking an extra 3-5 seconds to do this saved a solid minute or more of figuring out what to do if it was indeed more.

Hey Kelvis $%&! You.

Not really looking to point fingers (well maybe a little) but as OP/Player A I believe this was actually not a call essentially based on answer20's point the fact is that there is still action pending. While all players are responsible for following the action it is the dealer who should be monitoring the action. 3AM, tired players, lackadaisical dealer, drunk villain but bottom line is dealer should be verifying bet amounts. Player A stated "raise to $160". Dealer verified "raise to $160". Player B shoved out an ambiguous stack of chips no verbalization, At this point it is incumbent on the dealer to determine if this action is a call, a call all-in for less or a raise. I am pretty sure NONE of the players or the dealer realized there was a raise. It seems clear to me player A is not committed to calling the additional "X" dollars.

Also I have seen many occasions where a player shoves out "all" his chips except for the one used as a the card protector with no verbalization and then attempts to toss it out after the fact but before the opponent acts. In my experience dealers almost never let the odd chip play, only the amount initially pushed forward even if the "intent" was obvious.

Thanks for all the feedback

AW

what

I'm the only one in this thread that makes the assumption that you didn't table your cards like an idiot and what do I get?

Everyone else here instantly assumes you smash your cards forward irretrievable like a spazmonkey or something like that and that 99,8% of players do that.

Kelvis - was responding to your "******ed" comment. My son has Down Syndrome and your comment offends me not your poker opinions.

AW

Calling somebody ******ed is offensive and uncalled for anyway. There's no place for that in LCP.

Many words spoken are not proper in their use. I assume everyone falls into that trap since a 'slang' definition can be used much more often than the 'real' definition.

Dumb .. Real - Lack the ability to speak .. Slang - Equal to stupid on most levels.

Personally I separate the two in my use of them. Dumb is the lack of knowledge or ability to process the knowledge needed for 'whatever'. Stupid is knowing 'better' and choosing to so anyway. I'm sure there are plenty of other words we toss around incorrectly even though they are readily accepted in speech.

My 2nd grader is pretty dumb when it comes to Algebra, but sometimes she makes a stupid mistake and says that 2 + 3 is 6 ... especially when she is working on her multiplication.

I made a dumb mistake in Chicago one time when I missed my freeway exit. Others make the stupid mistake of skipping toll booths thinking that they will get away with it.

When someone wants to learn poker you dumb it down for them so hopefully they don't make any (what we would consider) stupid mistakes. It's a matter of perspective and experience for me.

******ed is a term that the medical folks have left in the dust since they now have figured out many different ways a person may 'be' ******ed. But rather than retire the word so to speak society has it pop up in the offensive world as a pretty powerful insult.

I have a sister who is generally considered ******ed. She is basically stuck in 2nd/3rd grade for life. My kids think it's great that they have an extra 'playmate' when she's around but they are starting to figure out that they will quickly pass by her in ability. We all use our language in this forum to magnify our points .. I'm going to stick more to my 'quotes', bolds and underlines. GL