WSOP $1500 Limit Holdem tournament, the level is 2500-5000-10000

Player A says I have $3500 all-in on the flop, player B calls and both flip cards over and the board runs out. Player A wins the hand and the dealer counts the stack to see he actually has $7500. What should the ruling be for what player B should have to pay?

I will post the outcome of what happened after hearing your thoughts. Sorry if this isn't the right forum to post under

Player A said all in and B said call. B pays the full amount.

I think B should only owe 5,000 since that is the only amount A could bet and at no point did anyone else bet or raise. I also think A should receive a penalty. Technically, B could be given a penalty, but I think exposing his hand early can be excused since he was relying on what the other player said and the dealer didn't correct.

It's not like they were playing 500-1000 and the difference is a huge deal. They were playing 5k-10k, the difference is less than half a big bet. Surely 7500 needs to be paid and anything else would be absurd.

I'd go along with Player B owing $5000, but wouldn't penalize anyone if it seemed to be an honest mistake.

Why is the dealer not counting the chips though?

What should be the ruling if it turns out player A actually had 50k behind?

Context is important, but in most cases the call has to be for the full amount, because if he loses player A is losing his whole stack too. Player B can't freeroll for the overage.

50k makes things a little murkier. In that case I think you treat it as if it was just the 5000 bet and call.

Yes, there will be some floor discretion involved, but that's why they get paid the big bucks.

Note that in NL, according to TDA rules the caller is obligated to call the full amount regardless of the overage, but it is specifically called out as being something that is also subject to rule 1 if it would be grossly unfair to the caller.

Don't see how he can be all in for more than 5k

this. unless you want everyone in the future to try and angle this way.

fwiw, in the live game i play in, if it's hu, both players can agree to go all in for any amount. saw one guy agree to go all in for $940 into a $120 pot w/ a 6 hi flush on ktt4 (1st hand of a 20/40). he lost

Except the guy "angling" won the hand and effectively tricked his opponent into thinking he was calling less than one bet when he was calling more than one. He can't be made to call more than one bet if he only said call once in limit poker. Calling an all-in in limit can't imply "I will call all bets made until one of us is all-in".

Player B called one flop bet, he owes 5000 chips. Player A doesn't get to magically make a larger bet just because he said the words "all-in"

i never said he was angling

Goofy one.

I would accept either ruling and not bat an eye.

I think the pot should be played for the 3500 and the rest of the money is dead. I see how this opens up for angling but if anyone is paying attention (dealer, villain) at all - it should be caught right away on the flop.

Yeah but my point is that your ruling doesn't prevent angling. If you say it's the full all-in amount, people can angle by saying a small all-in when they flop the nuts. If you say it's the stated amount, people cal angle by calling a small amount when they flop a weak draw. Making the loser pay one small bet (5000) is fair and neutral, and reflects how the hand actually should have been played on that street.

I'm pretty sure if you bet and somebody says all in it would be treated as a raise; likewise if it's your turn to act and say all in should be treated as a bet.

So in this case there was a bet and a call; but I could really accept anything

So I was player B in this hand. Player A felt really embarrassed and I'm certain was not trying to angle, I think he was just nervous being all-in deep in the tournament. Player A only wanted $3500 because of his mistake, another player said it should be $5000 because that was the limit at the time, I agreed with that and paid the $5000. In my opinion this was the fairest ruling given the nature of it being a limit tournament. Everyone seemed happy and we proceeded on, but it was an interesting spot and was curious what the official ruling should be.

Two things that should have happened were the dealer should have counted the stack down when he gave the player the all-in button and the floor should've been called to make an official ruling, not just letting the players gentlemanly agree.

Good rulling.

The problem was not if all in was said or not imo.
Problem was that an amount was mention which was incorect .