Well my tips go in my pocket so this can;t happen this way to me. If player gave me his whole stack in this situation I would simply not take it during the hand and leave it in play. I would not create a situation where his opponent can win his whole stack without risking the equivalent amount ... that is not reasonable to me.

So a player dumps his stack in your tip cup ... how do you know how much it was. Obviously if you know the exact stack size or the colors of the chips are ones you don;t have already you cazn restructure it but suppose he has a bunch of $1s in his stack as well. And you had some redbirds already ?

As another issue. years ago I was written up for not accpeting a tip..... Should I give back a tip evn though I could face disciplinary action?

He is gaining an advantage. From this moment on, everybody at the table knows there's a real chance they don't have any implied odds against him in future hands because he just might give his stack up again during a hand.

If you have to call $50 on the turn with your flush draw to win another $200 on average if you hit, you'll probably do it. But if you have to add a 20% chance that the player removes his money from the table as soon as the flush cards hits, you're only winning $160 on average if you make your flush. That means you should fold on the turn.

He is also possibly putting other players on tilt by doing stuff like that, which might be another advantage to gain. If something like that happened at my table, I'd be so pissed that I would leave immediately. There's a very high chance my spot gets taken by an inferior player, if we talk about your random 1/2 game..

Come on sandman, you are not going to get disciplinary action for not accepting this particular tip. You should get disciplinary action if you DO accept it during the hand. Now you are just reaching in the dark.

You can clearly see the collective thoughts of the posters here, including some of the more respected ones, and they are in complete disagreement with the way you have viewed this situation. You are allowed to be wrong every now and then .

Yes but if you're worried about being written up you should call the floor over

If you have $130 stack facing a $200 bet for the rest of your chips, anything besides calling with $130 should be considered a fold, since your only two options are to call or to fold.

In my opinion, This includes taking 95% of your stack and :
1. Giving it to the dealer as a tip
2. Purchasing your neighbors Iphone
3. Melting the chips and hiding the plastic statue in a body cavity
4. Anything that isn't calling $130.

He is essentially checking down the river for free. His discretionary spending (which includes gratuity to the dealer, or paying off personal loans with his casino chips to his buddy standing behind him) should not be involved in the pot. When he forfeits his chip stack to the dealer or any other party that isn't the pot, it has to be considered a fold/muck.

Just my opinion.

I'd gain a lot of respect for any floor who ruled that the pre-tip stood if the caller won but didn't if he lost

This gets done in a spot where the player would be folding. If he thought he might win he wouldn't do this. Players should think of this as though the player would be folding.


how do you win $200 more when your opponent folds to your bet?

If you look at this properly you should laugh instead of getting pissed.

Once a bet is made against an entire stack the only thing that should be allowed with that stack is a call or fold. Once your stack has faced action you don't get to decide alternative ways to spend that money. It is committed to the hand. Anything else is going south during a hand.

There are obvious exceptions to going south during a hand to allow the convenience of services at a table. This isn't what happened, and its pretty clear when the difference occurs. Not saying the dealer didn't deserve $150, just saying it wasn't available to be made from the stack at that time.

Why would players "think of this as if the player is folding" when he won the pot? He doesn't have claim to the pot if he folded. He essentially got to check the river down instead of having to call the rest of his stack. The fact that the dealer got his stack, or he paid his buddy's car note with his stack, or he obliterates his stack with a laser gun shouldn't give him rights to winning the pot. Only putting $130 for a call should allow him any claim to the pot. Just my opinion.

There is no "call 5% of bet and give 95% of bet to dealer" option in poker. Only call or fold. He never called and should never win any of the pot ever imo.

So basically you would do what I would do as the floor, except doing it your way, you make sure you get that tip if he wins. Shady.

You're saying people shouldn't assume the player is doing some shady business with the dealer, because nothing in the OP indicated that. Therefore you shouldn't assume the player would be folding, because nothing in the OP indicated that. We have no clue if he is acting rational or not.

I clearly stated "on average".

I don't think anything about this is funny at all. In my opinion, the dealer's behaviour is unacceptable to a degree where I might not feel comfortable to play at his table again.

Dealers deserve every tip they get, but anything larger than a BB should come out of the players pocket and not from his stack.

AND HE STILL GAINED NO ADVANTAGE!!!!!!! and suffered the disadvantage of not winning more and not having the money he gave away.

WHY DO YOU THINK HE GAINED SOMETHING!!!!!

He won the ****ing pot. That isn't gaining something? Writing in caps doesn't make you more correct.

How much was in the pot before the river? Have any idea? Maybe the player wanted the pot badly enough but maybe he had a busted draw or bottom pair. Now, he essentially will have NO way of winning what was ALREADY in the pot because now it only costs this guy $5 to keep him honest.

Maybe you should stop thinking of this in terms where the reg doesn't gain anything but more in terms where/how the other player(remember him?) can easily be screwed from all different directions:

1- He loses that additional ~$150 that he toked the dealer with when he has the better hand.

2- He loses all chance to take the pot down on a bluff, and again, if the pot had $100, $200 prior to the river?...then the other guy is just gonna get screwed! If you're faced with a $150 bet(the remainder of your stack) opposed to a $5 bet and you're not really confident in your holding, then what are you more likely to do? Call or fold? Of course the answer is, fold. And if I'm betting into you with air, do you think I want you to call or to fold? The answer, again, is fold. But he's depriving him of that!

But you still seem to be ok with that reg winning that money even though he went south mid hand. Psand, you're not gonna put your blinders on too(like the dealer did) and act as if this is totally ok for players to tip off like 95% of their stack when they're facing in all in bet, are you?

Are you?


The player was BEYOND "out of line" and the dealer was WAY out of line for accepting a tip like that in this particular situation. Shame on that dealer for closing his eyes to all of this because his "self entitled little ass" got the best of him again.

Psand,


Exactly. Except he gets to fold AND HAVE A CLAIM TO THE POT IF HE HAS THE BEST HAND.

P,


He gained the advantage of having a claim to the pot if he has the best hand.

You are so completely off base here I'm starting to think you're just trolling.

P,

Think of this scenario. On the river, I have the following choices facing an all-in bet:

1) call
2) fold
3) donate all but $1 to my favorite charity and call for $1.

Do I have an advantage over other players?

Will you ever bluff me on the river?

I was starting to think he's the dealer in question here..

Cmon Psandman. As a dealer can you honestly say players that tip you $150 don't get some benefit from it? Perhaps a benefit of the doubt later on? At the very least your appreciation for the tip?

It would be interesting for you to explain how there is no benefit to tipping a dealer.

If dealers are supposed to be bad at poker, then it's not a stretch that psandman doesn't see the advantage of getting to choose which bet to call

Also something to gain is irrelevant. Money wasn't his to give the dealer. It was committed to the pot (or a fold) once action was made on it.

He won a smaller pot than if he just called .... plus no longer has the money he gave the dealer .... he has less money than if he soimply called and you say he gained something? the caps don;yt make me correct.... they express my frustration at your inability to see the most simple of facts.

whether you think he should be able to do this or not ... he gained nothing. He stood to to gain nothing.

Lets try spelling it

You have $155 in this situation.
your opponent bets $155. There is $150 in the post from previous streets.

Scenario 1: You have the winning hand and you call the bet.
result: you now have $460

Scenario 2: You have the losing hand and call the bet
result: you have $0

Scenario 3: You have the winning hand. You tip the dealer $150 and call all-in for $5.
result: you now have $160

Scenario 4: You have the losing hand. You tip the dealer $150 and call all-in for $5.
result you now have $0.

So the players situation is he can be in a spot where he at the end of the hand he can have $460 or $0. Or he can be in a spot where at the end of the hand he has either $160 or $0. His chances of winning are the same either way so that ios not a factor.

You are saying that the player gains an advantage by selecting the second position where he can have $160 if he wins.

Clearly that position is erroneous. He is disadvantaged by doing this.

He has no claim to the pot and wins the pot yet you don't think he gains something? You can't destroy your chip stack and call a lesser amount because reasons. Call $130 or fold are the only two options. There is no other option. He didn't call $130 therefore it is a fold and he has no claim to any of the pot. Since he was awarded the pot he gained something. Not sure why this is hard for you.

Psandman, you need to seriously consider bowing out from this thread.

Psandman, you should stop looking at it from the regs side, and instead look at it from the opponents side.

I see no way you can argue his opponent hasn't been disadvantaged here.

Actually I don't think he can call. His opponent set the price for having the right to see showdown and possibly win the pot and that price was not $5. He should not be allowed to see showdown for only $5 at this point in the hand. Thus he should have his $5 returned to him and his hand mucked.

Anyway, I'd like to see you reply to Rush17 post, I'm interested to see what you have to say.