Quote:
Originally Posted by dinesh
I agree that OP probably could have talked the whale (and dealer) into his desired outcome better by sweetly explaining that the whale couldn't go all in and had only bet pot, and that he had re-potted it to get it all in. But maybe OP tried that, it's hard to tell.
But other than that, OP acted perfectly. He didn't turn his hand over when whale did so prematurely, he tried to clarify that whale needed to call first, and he asked dealer to call floor to help get things back on track when dealer was confused as well.
Thank you very much and halleluja ... i was beginning to think i'm totally crazy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinesh
It's a little unclear what happened between calling the floor and the floor ruling he only wins 360. Obviously, the whale could fold to OPs re-pot (once it was explained to him), which would be a perfectly valid outcome and ruling, and likely what happened.
Right, should have explained that better.
Well, i remembered the last "discussion" i had on this forum regarding heated situations and arguments at the pokertable so i stayed mostly quiet, tried once to explain my point but floor wanted to to hear it from the dealer, and since he obv didn't get the problem in the first place the decision so to say didn't go my way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinesh
But OP makes it sound like he was forced to table his hand for only the 360 pot bet, which would be wrong. Either whale called OPs re-pot all-in, or whale folded to his re-pot and OP takes it down without having to show.
This is exactly what happened, and yes, again you are correct, give him the option to call or fold (he most likely would have called anyway), but forcing me to show for 360 is nuts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinesh
There is another ruling that sometimes comes into play, "action offered and accepted". Essentially, whale overbets pot, dealer doesn't stop him, and another player accepted the overbet and calls. Even though by the rules he shouldn't have been able to bet that much, you can't allow him to freeroll the overbet, so you rule that the overbet action was offered (by whale) and accepted (by OP). Essentially you allow the overbet / all-in when it's heads up.
If you had just called his all-in and then you hit showdown and he saw he lost and then tried to argue he couldn't have bet all in, that is how I would have ruled.
Having said that, you definitely can't count on all floors making that ruling. IMO you did the right thing by trying to clarify the bet amount (since you noticed it) and then repotting it yourself, even if it gives the whale the opportunity to get out of making the (illegal) all-in bet he was trying to make. I just would have tried to sweet talk him into it by explaining what was happening a little better than you seem to have, based on your description, but since we weren't there I'm just basing that on the way you described it above.
Yes, know about that ("action offered and accepted".), but choose not go tht way because it didn't want to make the whale mad (he definitely wouldn't understand) and also wasn't sure if the dealer would know about this or rule that way, that's why i choose to re-pot.
The point you make about "sweet talking" is very good advice, didn't think about that. But that's also because the situation was so obvious to me, that i thought by re-potting it's perfectly clear that his bet wasn't an all-in bet
thx