Your hypothetical doesn't actually address standard procedures.

your imaginary scenario address a situation where the dealer did not follow any procedures properly.

Assuming this is preflop (because why would you tell us the blinds otherwise?)

When Player A put out what was obviously a raise the dealer should announce "RAISE"

When Player B put out his stack dealer should if it appeared to him to be a raise announce raise, or if its not clear that it is a raise should have counted the stacks to determine if it constituted a raise and then announced "Raise" accordingly. In your scenario Player B has made a raise but has shorted his bet by 25 so once the dealer has determined that he should have Player B add 25.

Player C says call. This is a no brainer he has called 2600. Why you thionk this is a trap or confusing is beyond me.

Lets suppose dealer simply announced the Raises. What does Player C think he is Calling? He can't think he is calling less than 2600 even if Player B only put 2575. he must know that Player B must make a minimum raise. So he can't object when after he announces call he is told it is 2600.

And remember Player C could easily ask for the bets to be counted ....

So what is your argument. That the dealer should cut out, count and announce all bets because a player who could have asked for it to be done might not do so and then might think he has call an bet of 2575 instead of 2600 even though the minimum raise by the proceeding player would have made the 2600?

BTW if there are large chips hidden in a bet I have no issue with a dealer making them visible (just like they must be kept visible in the players stack.



And one of the biggest reasons I don't want dealers counting and announcing stacks is that I want the dealer following the action not counting stacks. In your scenarion while Dealer is sorting and counting Player A's bet he isn;t watching Player B. Now when Player puts out his bet and Player C says --- Hey thats a string a bet ...... the Dealer has no idea because he was sorting and counting Player A's bet. (esp if player is in the 2 seat, player B is in the 8 seat and the dealer is right handed) and if you have players who do wait then the counting is slowing down the action unnecessarily. Player A bets .... Dealer counts bet and only after he finishes does Player B and Player C muck even though they were mucking to any bet......

I am a poker dealer at a casino in PA. We are not allowed to announce amounts in tournaments, just action. I don't really understand it. It slows down the game since people almost always are forced to ask how much, especially with multi-colored chips. It also makes me look bad. Can't tell you how many times a player has scolded me thinking Im just being lazy by not announcing the sizes, when Im just not allowed. Just figured I would chime in. So if you are in a tournament and a dealer isnt announcing sizes dont assume hes being lazy!

I disagree that it slows the game down. I know it seems that way when you hit the nitwit who will stare at the bet for a minute before asking ..... but think of all the times a bet gets made and everyone just folds. If dealers are all countig the bet and announcing then many of these players will witf or the delaer before folding.

I asked one of the known faces in wsop about this.
"Should a dealer announce bets and raises by amount or just announce bet/rais/all-in and only give amount if asked?"

This is the answer he gave me:
"Only in limit games, on tv tables and if asked"

So I guess that's that. Of course there are rooms with other rules but as for a standard in the wsop/ept, this is what dealers are told to do.

/case closed

Sorry, lots of shorthand here. I was assuming the dealer announced only "bet", "raise", etc, and I was trying to show where it becomes a liability to the game, which I strongly believe it does. The dealer announcements were deliberately omitted because they have a direct impact on the action -- which effectively means that the dealer (and the dealer's judgment of the stack sizes) becomes part of the action. This, imho, should never ever happen.

It was just a quick way of saying "small denomination chips are still in play". So when I talk about shoving out a stack of barber-striped chips, it's a grab-bag of everything, all mixed together. Whether the dealer breaks down the stack to get a correct count then becomes very clearly a judgment call -- and also a measure of the dealer's skill at visually counting a complex stack (which will vary a lot from dealer to dealer).

Or post-flop, "bet". Either way, not the key element of the hypothetical.

And with multiple mixed stacks in play, why should the action be dependent on the dealer's visual estimation? Count both down, always, and be correct in your announcements 100% of the time.

My bad here. I was trying to put it right on the edge between a raise and a call -- one more reason that posting and alcohol don't mix well I trust that you can see my point though -- if the dealer estimates correctly, then the action is announced correctly, and we're ok. But if the dealer estimates incorrectly, the action is announced incorrectly, and then we have to stop the game for a floor call and the error clearly will affect the action. Or, as is most often the case (especially with inexperienced staff, imho) the dealer will simply punt and wait for a player to ask for a count -- but then, whoops, C says "call" before anything else happens. So now we're into ambiguous territory -- what's the amount? Again, count the stacks, announce everything properly, and get it right 100% of the time.

Dealer announces "raise". Easy.

Dealer announces "call" (relying on a bad visual estimation). Not so easy.

Dealer announces nothing. Again, not so easy -- and yet also completely avoidable if bad procedures weren't being forced on the staff.

My argument is that it should never, ever, ever come down to the dealer's judgment-call on whether a random mixed stack "looks like" a raise or not. That's a worst-case scenario for me, because it automatically makes the dealer's visual judgment a part of the action, which should never happen.

Totally agree.

That assumes the dealer isn't properly watching and controlling the action -- which will never be an issue on any of my tables


q/q

If you actually see the scenario you will see it isn't that difficult.

But the key is that if the dealer can;t tell from looking whether ir not its a raise .... then the dealer simply counts the stacks, or counts enough to determine if its a raise. I acknowledge that there will be some times when a dealer has to do that..... but they are few and far between. The simple reality is that it is generally not that hard.

(now if you are in one of those insane rooms where they don;t acknowledge the 1 and a half times bet rule -- that is to say anything less than a full raise gets ruled down as a call .... well then maybe you have a point ..... rules and procedures interrelate and when a room screws around and gets rid of basic traditional rules they run the risk of screwing up everything .... but even in that case there will still be many times when there is no doubt its a raise so why should the dealer count during those times?)
Really you have a magical way to break down and count stacks especially those on your deck hand side without focusing your attention on that. Great for you. But quite honestly I need to pay attention when I breakdown and count chips ... sure its not that hard if we are talking about 4 chips. How about multiple stacks?

the dealers have to use common sense as well. if they dont have it they should be moved elsewhere. i personally like all bets and raises called and even called bets other than maybe limped bets pre.
players in the end seats cant see bets not brought in and have to wait to be told the action is on them or likely can make a fatal mistake.
if its easy to see the amount the dealer should call it if not then wait till asked.

in close decisions by the floor they should rule away from the player that raised without verbalizing . such as when he shoves out a min raise that needs to be brought up.

i only announce raise bet all in and if someone asks how much then i will tell them!!!!!!!!!

I was looking for standards. A dealer never choose how to do hes job on the topic, he is always told. If not its clearly a situation where there are no defined rules. A dealer obviously want to please the players, no doubt. The reason I dug a bit here was to find out whether you have coverage to just say that it is standard, now I know. It is standard in the series and ept cirkus and all dealers can easly say its standard and not suppose to not anounce betsizes exept in limit games, tv table and when asked.

Ps. If a player question why I am not anouncing or acting annoyed by it I do explain that we are not suppose to and it's always been end of that disscusion. Now I can toss a 'its standard' on top if it.

I played in your game once. Game was moving along nicely with the other dealers.

Then you sat down and started counting every bet and raise and everyone who
was acting quickly before was now waiting and watching you count stacks before acting.

If you are a dealer you should ask your supervisor instead of randoms on the internet, because a few people here have said that the standard at their place is to announce bets.

The dealer should always shout all in in decisive moments just to induce the players in error and make the game more fun.

simply, if it isnt clear the bet was a raise the dealer needs to stop the action and count it.

and if bets are put in so others may not see them or they can be confused with the pot then they have to be called out.

larger bets should not be counted down unless asked or the person is taking a long time to act and the dealer has the time. as if he doesnt and the person then asks the whole table has to wait even more.

I would advise against that. In my experience, anytime you say something like that, even about the most universally standard things (which this isn't), someone at the table wants to argue with you and tell you that they've never seen it done that way. The last thing you want to do is argue.

Misleading, I dont say it like that. I tell them house rules, not suppose to. Cant really remember anyone arguing over that other than the table breaks into talk about what they do in the EPT and so on. That is why I found it intresting to know what actually the standard is

Hi Crème,

Good question! As has been mentioned most rooms will have a house dealing procedure not a rule.

Our dealing procedure on EPT is in line with what the dealers in the thread have mentioned. Don't announce bet sizes unless the bettor has verbalized the amount or a player in the hand has asked in No Limit. In either scenario, the dealer breaks down the bet to verify the amount and then announces it. In Pot Limit they announce and verify all bets as players need that info to make their wagers. TV/Webcast tables usually have every action announced by a card caller or the dealer.

The not counting procedure is much more of an American procedure than an International procedure and most places in Europe actually train their staff to announce every single action from every player, including fold. It is one of the harder habits to break with EU staff. We prefer the procedure about not announcing in NL as it can have influence on the hand.

Oh, and dealers should never bring in called money unless a player in the hand has requested it. Doesn't matter game type or FL, PL, NL.

One final comment along these lines that should be common sense, but people can forget. Dealers, floors and card callers should also pick a betting term and stick with it, don't change it up. A bet of 40,000 cant be called 'forty' to one player, 'forty K' to another and 'forty thousand' to a third player. Sounds silly, but that is to protect the staff member from claims of bias when they tell one player the raise is 'four hundred thousand' which can psychologically influence a decision and another player that the raise is 'four' which can have the opposite impact. Same with bets like 6,400. It is either always 'sixty-four hundred' or always 'six thousand four hundred'.

Cheers,

Neil
PokerStars Live Events Specialist

What is the logic in announcing the amount of a bet/raise unless it is an all-in? How does being all-in change anything?

All in IS the bet amount.

In that case, "all of [the bet]" IS the amount of any bet. It would be pretty silly to announce that after every bet, no?

As I understand it, all bets and raises should be called out (and broken down/counted) by the dealer unless it's an all-in. An all-in should not be counted or announced (only say "he's all in!") unless a player requests a count (maybe she should touch it to separate an obvious dirty or rainbow stack).

Isn't this the norm usually?

I'm quoting what I have been told at multiple rooms...

This is the standard in the room that I work in, and the majority that I have played in.

My standard response to a bet is:

If amount is clearly obvious: quickly verify amount while watching action. Usually I don't have to look at the chips if single denomination to do this. If I don't have to handle the bet, I won't.

If amount is not obvious: announce "bet", count down and announce the amount.

If all in: announce bet as all in. Ensure entire bet is reasonably visible and across the line. This means big chips not hidden and the entirety of the bet can be approximated by a player. I will handle chips if necessary to do this, but prefer not to.

Overall I prefer to not handle the chips - but I am expected to announce my game with amounts, so I will have to. I'm careful to be consistent in everything that I do - unless specifically asked I only give a total bet amount for any bet or raise. Amounts are announced in the same tone of voice and with the same phrasing for all bets.

Tournaments we are instructed to say "bet" "raise" "all in" only. I frequently have to correct call amounts to match bets. Also, the syndrome of thinking first, then asking for a count, then thinking again is common, whereas in a cash game the first step does not occur. It is definitely less work to deal a tournament style hand than a cash hand, but I feel that my hands per hour is higher in the cash model.

At the end of the day, consistency is what really matters - within a given down the dealer should act the same towards all bets, regardless of who is in a hand and dealers at a particular casino should act the same or as close to the same as possible (we are people, there will be minor variation between us).

No it's not.

Sure, but he was asking about the logic of the practice, not its popularity.

Thank you for a wonderful response. Appreciated.

You are 100% mistaking someone else for me here.


q/q

on edit:

My NL game consistently runs at 22+ hands per down. Tournament, equal or faster. I have dealt in venues that have this "never announce amounts" rule, and at this point in my career I simply choose not to deal in places like that anymore because it's an absolutely awful rule (and yes, this includes the WSOP -- HORRIBLE practices!). My experience is that dealers who correctly announce action (including all bet and raise amounts) are greatly appreciated by the players, and dealers who don't do this constantly have to justify this (lack of) action by reference to (bad) house rules. Bet and raise amounts are standard information that are necessary to the play of the game. Withholding that information is what actually affects the action -- by allowing shady actors to get away with shady actions that would never fly in a properly run game.