2 scenarios - - -

1.
Player A bets.
Player B asks Player A, "How much do you have left?"
Player A slides stack forward so it is in plain view, but remains silent.
Player B asks again, "How much is that?"
Player A says nothing.
When asked, I rule that Player A has the right to remain silent.
Poker is a visual game.

2.
Player A bets.
Player B asks Player A, "How much do you have left?"
Player A slides stack forward so it is in plain view, but remains silent.
Player C, not in the hand, counts the stack out loud.
After the hand, I ask Player C not to do that again.
I used OPTAH as reasoning and stating that it is up to Player B to get his own information,
Player A has the right to remain silent.
Poker is a visual game.


I am comfortable with my rulings, but not sure if OPTAH is the correct rule that covers one
or both scenarios. Is there a more specific rule that covers this?
I scanned RRoP but missed it if it's there.

Thanks.

I believe you are 100% in scenario #1. I do believe that the person has the right to ask the dealer to count the stack if asked.

In scenario #2 I think it's more of an etiquette issue than a rule issue. I've played a ton of live poker in dozens of casinos and it happens all the time. I don't believe I've ever heard a dealer ask the player not in the hand to keep quiet.

I've also seen it done many times on the made for tv shows and no one seems to have a problem with it.

I'll be curious to see what the general consensus is from everyone else.

If you read the B&M forums, you'll see this described as a OPTAH situation. It is a skill to be acquired in live play.

But this (I assume) is a home game and as such, rules are usually relaxed (or at least bent the first time with an explanation as to the right way). I have no problem in 2 with C helping out and saying "looks to be around 30-40k" or "looks like you are covered". I do have a problem with C touching A chips. C should not be touching A chips unless they are in the pot. They are not in this case.

If the player won't give a count, it is up to the dealer to give it. In a Home Game, refusing to give a count amongst friends is a bit douchey.

Players need not give this information themselves.

...but the person who has to make a decision to call can generally ask the dealer to count the chips for him. [Hint: Blind people play poker too!] So it's not even remotely an etiquette issue for player-C to count the chips once a count has been requested, since you have no fixed dealer to do it for him.

...and I don't have an issue with the chips getting touched. Someone needs to cut and verify them for a count if player-A wants to invoke his right to remain silent.

Agree with it being douchey. The player asking has a right to a count, all you're arguing over is who is going to do the counting. IMO your ruling was incomplete if you didn't include "...but you can ask the dealer to count."

Which mean, if you don't want other players touching your chips, you're going to have to count your own chips for him.

This is pretty much my feeling.

Player A is under no obligation to answer the question as long as all his chips are visible, and I have no problem with OP ruling as such. But in a casual self-dealt home game, if I shove and Villain asks for a count, I think it's good poker etiquette to give it to him. Often, I'll make it easy by giving the count without being asked: "I'm all-in for 13,500."

As a general rule, though, I don't like it when players touch other players' chips. It's situational, and I'm not a hard-ass about it; for example, posting a blind for a player who is away from his seat is usually okay. But in situation #2, I would probably tell the table, "If a player doesn't want to give a count, ask the dealer. No one else should touch or count aloud a stack that doesn't belong to you."

People in this thread need to be careful about a very important distinction here.

Players AT ALL TIMES have a right to an exact figure of a BET. So if player A shoves all in, his stack absolutely must be counted if asked.

But that's not what OP was talking about. In his scenario, player A bet less than all in, and player B wanted to know how much player A had left AFTER the bet. In this case the rule is that all player A's chips must be visible, but he is under no obligation to respond.

In B&M games this happens very frequently. Whenever I am asked, I simply answer honestly. In my opinion this encourages a call and most of the time I am hoping to be called.

In a self-dealt game, it's also pretty douchy to ask the dealer to do much of anything because in my experience they generally can't be bothered to follow the action, keep track of the bets, know who's next to act, calculate side pots, etc. Getting a dealer in seat 3 to count a player's chips in seat 8 is really an over-the-top request at the home games I play in.

A player is well within their rights to not count their chips, but in a home game... c'mon.

I disagree. I believe that in No Limit a player should have the right to know what the stakes are. The room I deal in allows you to get a count. If the player won't do it then the dealer will. In a home game without a professional dealer i think the player should have to count there own stack if requested.

I would use the following caveat. In most cases (especially heads up) there is no need for an exact count. A player should be play with an estimate. So asking for a count is not being done to actually get the count but either to be a PITA or cause you are "tell hunting" neither of which are the reason the rule exists..... therefore I would not allow players to abuse this and if someone was constantly asking for counts in this scenario (unless they have poor vision, or the chips are not being stacked reasonably) I would suggest that person not be kept on the invite list.

Herp derp.

I misread the OP, and answered on the assumption that player A was all-in. In OP's case, I agree 100% with his rulings. Player A is only obligated to make his chips visible; neither he nor anyone else has to count out his remaining stack for Player B. Player C definitely needs to stay out of B's stack in this case.

Again, as an issue of etiquette in a home game, I'll almost always give a count (or at least an estimate) of my remaining stack if someone asks me. But if a player chooses not to do this, I don't see it as a big deal, even in a casual game.

Well, there's the world we aspire to, and then there's the real world. In Perfect Home Game World, the dealer is always paying attention and is perfectly capable of managing the current hand. In the real world, this isn't always true.

I try to set a good example when dealing, and I will prompt or needle dealers who aren't paying attention. It doesn't always work, but often players see how much better & faster the game runs when a dealer just pays attention and learns some basic skills, and they follow along.

Worst case, you'll be getting one well-dealt hand per orbit.

Stay off 4chan, you're too old.

As did I. Whewps. What I said above is true though...just not applicable.

This is correct. The size of his stack isn't anyone's job to count, and nobody should relay that information provided he has his chips showing. I'd expect his neighbor to say, "He's got a bunch of green behind those chips" or something if he did though.

FYP for rules 1 and 2.

Depends on how many chips he has left. If he has 7 uneven piles of chips of different colours then you have the right to get a chip count.

If he has three piles of 5 chips each, then your a dick asking for a chip count.

You have the right to get a good estimate of the chip count. And of course, if his chips do get counted and your told he has 876 chips in total, don t bet 876, go all in incase there is a mistake in the chip count.

Thanks for all of the replies.

Sorry I wasn’t more explicit in the OP - - -
At no point during either scenario was Player A all-in.

Player C never touched Player A’s chips, just eyeballed it and announced what he saw (he was accurate, if it matters).
It’s not a deepstack tourney, and we only have 4 colors of chips in play at the beginning,
so not too hard to quickly count what you see.

This is a home game mtt, 25 – 30 players, mostly regulars but a few newbies.
Overall competent skill range, but some are pretty new to poker overall.

The majority play occasionally, and some regularly, at B&M casinos.
A handful have never been inside a poker room.

It’s self-dealt, so there is a remote possibility that at some point Player A, who is a nice enough guy but not very talkative
while in a hand, could also be the dealer. I figure we’ll cross that bridge if/when we ever get there.
In which case, Player C may actually be a benefit.

The comment I made to Player C after the hand in scenario 2 was kept light, and I am positive
it was not received negatively. But unless a “Player C” consistently does it or does it
to spite the rules/etiquette, I can’t see myself handing out any kind of penalty
for it beyond, “hey, don’t do that. OPTAH.”

I believe the hiring of good legal representation is required.

In a home game, I don't see anything wrong with any player at the table, not in a hand, acting the part of a dealer for purposes of counting the amount of a bet when the bettor remains silent. As others have mentioned, in a self-dealth home game, the dealer can't be relied upon to play the role of dealer competently. But I guess not even the dealer should be counting the remainder of a player's stack.

Think "color-blindness" and re-evaluate your answer?

Winnah!

As far as rules go, I still don't think player A is obligated to do any more than ensure his stack is visible. If I hosted a game with visually impaired players, I would likely have special house rules to accommodate them. But in general, I wouldn't force all players to count down their stack every time someone asked.

Now from an etiquette standpoint, I think it's courteous to offer at least an estimate when someone asks. It also speeds the game along - you don't have to sit and twiddle your thumbs while Villain counts your stack from across the table.

Both rulings look right to me.

No idea what episode it was, but it comes up during High Stakes Poker. I believe it was Todd Brunson asking someone for a count. Negreanu answers about X and Todd tells him he wasn't asking Negreanu, he was asking his opponent.

I still give the same answer...
Player A has the right to remain silent.
Poker is a visual game.
HOWEVER, I would make an accommodation for someone that was color-blind.
Most likely something along the lines of having the dealer act as his/her color filter.
But I wouldn't want a rule in place, or even to set a precedent, that would require Player A to
respond in some circumstances when he is not in "normal" ones.
I would also expect the color-blind person to bring the issue up, preferably before the
game even starts, to make people aware there may need to be some additional chip counting required.

FWIW, I have played at a B&M casino with a reg that is color-blind.
Particularly in tourney play with colorful chips, he asks the dealer for clarification on bets.
Can't recall him ever asking to have a stack that wasn't part of a bet counted down, though.

Yeah, but isn't Todd Brunson kind of a douche? Obviously, he asked because he was looking for tells. Pretty funny that he asked though, because his dad is pretty adamant about never answering that question.

No offense, but this strikes me as nonsense. Poker is a game of math, and to some extent psychology. I'd say equal parts, but game theory should cover the bits of psych that matter. It's not a visual game any more than chess is. Sure, that's how most people know where the pieces are, but playing blind is entirely possible. Beating someone playing blindfolded is great fun.

If it's a visual game, you don't accommodate. You don't accommodate people who are bad at math, they'll just be bad at poker. You don't accommodate people who can't run in a foot race. Before you say it, sure they allow wheelchair racers...in their own division. They don't compete against the runners.

Vision is not intrinsic to the game.

RF