Blinds 400/800.

SB has 4x100 chips posted and BB has a 500 chip and 3x100 chips.
Player limps from MP.
SB pulls back 1x100 chip, leaving 3 in the pot, and adds a 5000 chip.
Dealer announces raise.
BB folds.
MP goes all-in.
SB calls.

MP complains after the hand is over that it should have been a call and not a raise.

The questions:
1) Is SB's action a call or a raise?
2) If it is a call but the dealer announced raise, when could this issue be brought up and when does it hold? What if MP went all-in and then SB said 'no, that was a call'? This is moot if it is always a raise.

so..

I. SB clearly intended to raise
II. Raise was announced
III. MP shoves
IV. SB calls
V. Board runs out
VI. MP loses
VII. MP complains

got to be in Florida

Not in Florida haha.

Part of the question came down to whether or not putting in one chip is different than taking a chip out and putting a chip in.

Also the SB didn't announce raise, just the dealer, and if I understand correctly it is possible for the dealer to announce an action incorrectly and it is the responsibility of the player who's action it is on to make sure he understands the action to him.

Raise to 800. KITN to MP.

I'd say it was a raise. If he doesn't interact with his small blind at all or pulls the entire small blind back, it would be a call. By only pulling one chip of his small blind back, he made the rest of the chips of his small blind part of his bet. Therefore, he bet 5,300 facing a bet of 800 which is a raise.

The BB is 800.

MP limp/shoves and then complains that SBs action should have been a call? I hope he slipped on a banana peel on the way out.

If I'm floor I'd love to be able to put a penalty on MP, what an idiot. If he didn't think it was a raise then say so before you jam all your chips in and essentially validate it.

Regardless whether SB technically made a raise, he got a fold from the BB and an all in from MP which he then also called. Seems pretty obvious that everyone involved in the hand agreed about the action so the ruling would be that it is a raise and MP can suck it.

Did SB add a 500 chip or a 5000 chip?

A 500 chip is definitely a call, since along with the 3x100 he left out there it leaves an 800 bet, which is a call of the 800 BB.

A 5000 chip is unfortunately somewhat ambiguous. The rules in most rooms (including RRoP) don't directly address what to do if a player removes some or all of their SB (or previous bet) before adding an oversize chip. A strict reading of the letter of the rules would cause me to lean slightly towards call, but the fact that there are context clues that make it clear in many/most/all cases that a raises was obviously intended make me rule it a raise absent any additional evidence to the contrary, plus a warning to the table that it could easily have gone the other way, so for the love of god just say raise when making an ambiguous bet like this.

Then warn MP for complaining about it after action completed, if he was indeed complaining and not just trying to clarify the rules after the hand was over.

The ideal time to raise the issue is immediately after the bet is made (whether or not the dealer rules it a raise verbally). Waiting until your turn may work, but if enough people have already folded to it you're likely to be ruled against regardless. Shoving and then raising the issue after a call is definitely not going to work.

The raise/call action is irrelevant after MP shoves. Why else would he shove unless he thought it had been a raise. Unless he complained straight after the SB acted then he absolutely has no cause for complaint.

And if the dealer and floor had no idea what to do in this situation then I'd stop playing in this cardroom straight away cause this is an easy one for them to call

This is a TDA spot, not RRoP, and there are 2 issues here with one gray area.

1) Once a player pulls back chips they are committed to a call or raise .. rule 47b.

2) Silently putting out an over-sized chip with no verbal declaration is a call .. rule 45.

The only gray area is that he did leave some chips out there but I'm more than willing to ignore those chips and lean more so on the 'silence' attached to the over-sized chip per rule 45. Although not recommended due to the confusing it creates, a player may 'adjust' his calling chips to make return change easier on the dealer. That is why a player should make his intentions clear when acting at these times.

My ruling is completion of the BB by SB. There is probably a thread on this site about the possibility of this being an angle by the SB.

Now AP ... If the dealer has incorrectly announced raise and unfortunately there is significant action, which in this case there was with a fold and raise then the action stands but the SB is allowed to fold and only 'lose' 800 if he so chooses.

Where MP thinks he's getting anything out of this after the hand is way out there, especially after going all-in. I assume he lost the hand or he most likely wouldn't be bringing the issue up!

The issue is that this could be an angle on both sides .. SB and MP .. and no one rule can cover both of those possibilities. So we look at the rules in place and apply them accordingly ...
1) Chips were pulled back .. call or raise
2) Silent single chips pushed out into betting area and released
3) SB didn't protect his 'call' before significant action took place .. play on!! GL

I think this is a call.

SB could have been modifying the chips to Make change easier (4500 back)

It's a call....period. One chip into the pot facing a bet larger than the amount he had in front of him.

The most significant errors are by a)Dealer for misreading action and b)Players for not protecting action at the time.

If I get called over preflop, it's a call. If I get called over after the whole mess and action is accepted and board run out, I'm ruling the hand standing as played for action offered and accepted, and the dealer disciplined.

MP had the opportunity to correct the action BEFORE his call of the bad bet, I'm not tailoring my ruling to give him a freeroll at the pot.

Too late for sour grapes at VII.

If the SB didn't complain when the dealer said "raise", it would seem that his intent must have been to raise. In gray areas like this where the action is ambiguous, it seems to me that the players have an obligation to question the dealer's ruling immediately. If they don't (and neither player did in this situation), the dealer's ruling has to stand.

Making betting actions to "make it easier to get change" is almost always a bad idea if you don't specifically say what you are doing.

1)Technically it is a call. The dealer should have clarified at the time of SB's action. Was it obvious he was trying to raise? Seems that way to me. I don't have a problem with allowing the raise in this situation honestly. A lesson in how to raise properly is due however.
2)It holds when the dealer says raise and SB remains silent. His chance to argue that it is a call is over once MP reraises.

This is one of those calls that can go 2 ways. I will always pick the way that goes against the freeroll. You don't get to see what happens and then decide what the action was. If SB says he only meant to call after MP goes all in, too bad. You shouldn't make ambiguous actions. If MP says it should only have been a call after seeing the flop or entire board, too bad. You should've said something before calling/raising.

am I missing something? if the MP raised all-in then he interpreted the move as a raise and acted accordingly. He can't declare action against someone's move and then after the fact say that move was invalid. If so, then clearly this should be upheld as a raise.

on the single chip question, IMO if the player doesnt announce raise with a single chip, it should always be applied as a call (whether they pull a chip out of the pot beforehand or not.) If the player wanted a raise then they should have announced an amount or verbalized "raise"; however since the dealer announced the raise with no objection and 2 others acted with that knowledge in mind, then I'd say the "fairest" interpretation of the rules is to keep this a raise.

mp is an angle shooting prick who should have his ribs broken in an alley behind the casino

I think this is a raise. But even if it is to be ruled a call it must be ruled a call immediately. In this case I would say there was significant action and the raise stands.

I'm in Florida, and this should be a raise.

The player manipulated multiple chips (took one out, and added one), therefore it's a raise.

The single oversized chip rule only applies to tossing out a single oversized chip, and not doing anything else.

I think he intended to call. And accidentally put out a 5000 instead of a 500.

25/50 game. SB has only one $25 chip, in front of him as his SB. Limped action comes around to him. How can he call, without verbally announcing his intention? If he takes out the $25 chip and puts in a $100 chip, you rule that a minraise?

Again the SB said nothing about his intention. Thought it looked too cool to just throw out a 5k chip and say nothing. Dealer assumed a raise , announced it, again SB said nothing about a call. MP shoves and only bitches after the hand. MP is trying a scumbag move. SB could have avoided the confrontation and DELAY with a single one word declaration (call or raise) but of course then he would not look cool. JHC

First he could just toss out one chip which would be a call. Second even if he removes the 25 chip tossing one chip is a call.

What was different here was that there were four chips out and he took back only 1. Becaused ofbthis when he puts oug the large chip I consider it putting out the large chip and three small chips.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

It would be funny if SB made an oversized raise because he is afraid of seeing a flop with JJ and MP misinterpreted this as an intended call with a weak hand and shoved with his 66, then got sigh-called by SB.

one chip rule = call