Quote:
Originally Posted by FearfulFerret
Some context: this is a small card room with inexperienced floorpersons and management.
What a great time to 'all' learn together. The semantics in PLO are touchy. This is not a time for 'action given and accepted' as you can run into in some NL spots.
In this case here the Floor should explain that a player can't bet 'all-in' if it's beyond the value of the pot. Player 2,
as the supposed experienced player, should know that tossing in one chip is only a call unless it's tied to his own verbal 'all-in' declaration.
The use of 'all-in' (and even 'pot') in a PLO game is/can be an attempt at an angle. We have no context that it is/was an angle here. I witnessed a hand where a player announced 'Pot' on the River when he only had about 15% of the pot in his remaining stack .. and kept the chips 'out of view' from his opponent. What is the Dealer to do? In that case the player knew that if he had said 'all-in' his experienced opponent would've asked 'how much?' but the use of 'Pot' might be enough to get him to fold out due to all the chips in the middle.
This is a pretty easy ruling and Player 2 should've know better than to toss out a single chip without first verifying or indicating that he was also 'all-in'.
From the semantics standpoint the Dealer should've announce "The 'bet' is 156, not all-in." Although the use of the word 'Pot' is probably fine, saying 'bet' is more exact and in this case is moot since Player 2 mistakenly insta-called with the nuts and chips behind. GL