I posted a thread about this very same topic in 2017 and your response to me was quite different - not that you were the only one to pile on in that thread.

Here is what you said then:

Mind if I ask you what changed?

I don't think much has changed. I think you should definitely confirm that the player is calling a full amount before showing, to protect yourself. In most cases I don't think it is necessary to force the full stack in, but if you want to do it, I don't have a huge problem with it. Those are the rules after all.

The other problem is that the general rule seems to be so long as the player has not yet put chips into the pot, he can always stand up and walk away, not pay off the final bet and take the ban from the casino. So even if you clarify that's not really enough to make sure he honors the bet.

The casino can only take chips put in the middle. If he has chips on his side of the betting line the casino can not take them and has to cash them out. That’s the problem with the one chip all in call. It’s not obligatory he has to surrender the remaining chips to the winning player. They can ban him but can’t take his chips.

Wasn't that the case in that video of the guy saying he was all in holding the rack of chips then took it back?

That’s just an urban legend. It depends on the local law. In Indian casinos, for example, they can arrest you and confiscate your chips for refusing to pay the winner of the hand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is the video I was referring to. https://streamable.com/wxigy

I'm pretty sure theft is against the law everywhere. Casinos do not have their own law enforcement officers on property that I know of, so if someone refuses to pay and leaves, it is going to be your responsibility to get the police involved. All the casino will do is ban the player from playing again until he pays up.

I will note however that I would not allow the player to cash out his chips and would do my best to make sure he is not allowed to cash out anywhere in the casino in an attempt to make him pay up.

It'll be hard to truly keep a player from cashing their chips as they can just (outside of the casino) sell them to someone else. So unless you physically restrain the player and seize the chips (not sure what the legality of this is), the player is going to figure out how to cash them out if they're sufficiently resourceful (of course this doesn't mean you should make it easy for them by allowing them to cash out at the cage).

What I don't get is the distinction between chips on a table in front of the player and chips in front of the betting line or in the pot. If a player took chips from the pot, I surely hope security would be allowed to seize them, so why can't security take chips that were on the table but not in the pot if wagered by rule? IMO all chips on a poker table are "in play" and subject to casino authority.

Your opinion of chips "in play" is nonsense. Only chips in the pot or placed in the betting circle are "in play" and subject ot the control of the casino. So the $1,000 I have never bet at a blackjack table is subject to the control of the dealer?

No wonder you fell for the seat change button call.

This is false. The casino owns the chips.

Not if you bought them. You could bring them home and never ever come back.

Nevada Gaming Control Board Regulations

12.060 Use of chips and tokens.

1. Chips and tokens are solely representatives of value which evidence a debt owed to their custodian by the licensee that issued them and are not the property of anyone other than that licensee. (emphasis added)

Link

In so cal casinos do not force you to put chips into the pot that you owe. If you leave with the money, they will just bar you and pay out the person that is owed the money.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This can be interpreted in several ways. The most obvious would be that they can not belong to any other casino than the one that issued them to the player. Casino A can not use Casino B's chips. This is to determine ownership vs licensed casinos.

A player can take all chips they exchanged cash for and never return them and would not be committing theft.

It is not obvious at all that it means another casino. Generally, anyone means anyone. If they meant another licensee, they would have said that. It is clear if you read the regulation where it goes in depth about the restrictions on using/redeeming other casino's chips.

That could be interpreted as well and it could likely mean that. Wording in law is subject to interpretation until there is a need for a definitive interpretation by a court.

The thing is though once the casino issues the chips then they owe a debt to the person holding the chips. That is stated in the same sentence you posted.

So if the chips are not in play, which I am sure there is a legal definition of, then they are obligated to honor their debt to the person holding the chips. So if there is a legal definition of what is and isn't a bet then that would determine how this all shakes out.

If someone jokingly yells "all in" but never puts a chip in the middle are they obligated to put those chips in the pot? Common believe is yes but I do not believe that is the case from previous discussions on this forum. I could be wrong though.