Quote:
Originally Posted by psandman
If a player is asking the size of the bet they are facing there is no reason to count a smaller bet, only the largest bet.
Now if the player asks specifically about the size of other bets then those should be counted. But 99% of the time that is not the question asked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by answer20
That's exactly what I'm saying, but unless I'm driving that 1% bus I think 99% is a bit high. I 'always' want to know the difference between the main and side action since part of my decision making process is whether or not I can 'break even' (or better) in the side if I write off the main pot.
So if Seat 6 has OP covered we go the Seat 6 stack first? But if OP has Seat 6 covered we start with that stack?
In this case it should've been obvious but I'm more interested in a procedural guideline of following the action backwards or as it occurred. GL
I think psandman has it right here.
You almost never see a player asking for a count of the smaller stack. Which is odd considering how important that info can be.
But I think that it is very important that the dealer not count the other bets unless asked because it may alert the player to the importance of that information (similar to not announcing bet or raise sizes unless specifically asked).
In addition to wanting to know how much will be gained if you win only the side pot, the total of all chips bet plus the pot may be the determining factor in whether or not you're getting the right price on a draw (especially a nut draw). It can also help if you are ranging opponents and calculating the EV of a call given your equity in both the side pot and the main pot vs the size of the largest bet.
I would never say any of that out loud at the table, but I always stand up for players who want to know the size of the smaller bet after being told the size of the larger bet when ironically I have seen dealers not want to have to count out the smaller bet [too bad that didn't happen here...]
