I don't take it at face value that posters here are being truthful or accurate ...

When you say he has no reason to lie here you overlook the fact that there are explanations why someone would lie here:

1) If he was lieing about what he said he could still be seeking some way to pursue his attempt to get his money back.

2) Sometimes when people start lieing they continue it as a justification in their own minds ... that is they come to make it true in their own minds (even if they still know it to be a lie they will continue to tell the story about how they were screwed)

of course he could be inaccurate. People sometimes say things they don't mean to say and don't recall the mistake.


I am not saying he is lying. I have no idea. I'm simply not discounting it as one of the possibilities.

And you ask:
It is when you are only hearing one side of the story that you should be most skeptical.

In person making a ruling this is true. But here on the forums? No way. Sure, someone could be lying here, but internet forum rulings aren't binding anyway, so there is no real harm from taking at face value that the posters are conveying the facts accurately.

Of course, we can consider that other people there might have different opinions or viewpoints, but that is something different than having to be skeptical that an OP is telling the truth as they believe it.

Lying implies an intent to deceive, but this general point is important.

Memory is fluid. When you replay things in your mind, you add more and more interpretation and then match the memory to the interpretation, until you're quite certain of things that never happened. This happens all the time in court cases and probably has a Wikipedia page of its own.

The OP may not have remembered making a gesture. As he replays it in his mind, he can gradually convince himself he definitely made no such gesture. He honestly believes it - he's mistaken, but not lying.

In the exact same way, the Villains may not have heard "all-in." But when their friend shouts it enough, they will believe it. They will honestly believe they heard it. They're mistaken, but not lying.

This is why the role of the floor - and the dealer - is critical. Having everyone shout at you is (a) unprofessional, and (b) not conducive to getting the truth. Step #1 is to get everyone to shut the **** up so that nobody else's memory gets contaminated.

"Tell me exactly what he said, without telling me what he meant by it."

We don't typically get to hear anything more than one side on an internet forum. I believe what someone says as far as my response goes. If they lied, then my response is based on that lie and that is all it's worth. It is not my place to try to determine truth of a post, but to give my opinion based on what is said. True or not.

No kidding, and like has been said. If you get done that way, do not ever take your game back to that casino. That is the way I play it. You live in Cali isn't it like only an hour and half to Vegas?

Bad players/ people always look for angles to make money off your mistakes because they are terrible players. I sometimes have not felt safe playing in certain situations. You have to realize people have lost there lives over 5 bucks before on a Poker table.

I would not play there again if that was me.

Play (or chose not to) where?

I have heard about the casinos in Cali and I would not play there anyway.

I am sure he is talking about the Culver City industrial area, which is just like the Florida casinos. Some of those casinos are not in good areas to begin with.

If I was the OP then I would never set foot in there again, ever.

How many times do people say "OK, I go all in." "OK, go ahead" can easily be misinterpreted for saying "OK, I go all in" by a table full of people where English is not their first language. As stated many times ITT, just keep your verbal and physical actions to a bare minimum and you will not run into these situations where it's easy to think you are being targeted and cheated.

Yea, tough situation here - afraid as far as the actual hand in question you're sorta SOL; if the players all say you said it and the dealer supports it you very likely won't be able to convince them otherwise. I would take the date, pot, time, name of dealer and pit boss down and write a letter to management with the info. But, I would not expect any remuneration or admission of wrongdoing by them here, all you can hope for is to put it on someone's radar if it happens to another player in the future by the same group/circumstances. Oh, and definitely time to find a new place to play - especially in LA where there are tons of options for cardrooms.

saying and doing are two different things. I could say anything but if you shove your stack that is what all in is all about.

No, if you say all-in, you are all-in. You do not need to do anything.

So if I understand your point correctly, you have:

1. Never played in California

2. Think there are cardrooms in Culver City

3. Think there is such a thing as "the Culver City industrial area"

4. Aforementioned "Culver City industrial area" (where you've never been) is just like Florida

You might want to just sit this one out and leave it to the people who know what they're talking about. But I'll help you out anyway- Commerce was the word you were looking for, and he wasn't playing there either.

Gotta be clear too many multi ethnicity language barriers. It sucks but your stuck on a sinking ship. Majority wins no matter what ethnicity.

Learn from experience.

It's always hard to sort out issues based on language differences, accents, hearing, etc. Last week a guy with a heavy accent was telling the table a story about how the day before he had said fold, but the table and dealer claimed he said call. So as he's telling the story he goes " I said fold and he claimed I said call". But the thing is over half the table he's telling the story to heard "I said call, and he claimed I said call". A couple of us go "did you say call or fold" and he says "FOLD" in an irritated voice, which again, many of us (including me) hear as "CALL". His pronunciation was so close that it was clear how the mistake happened. I guess you can rarely be sure if what you heard was what the guy said. There's a saying in communication studies that goes "What you think you heard is not what I thought I said".

As to this particular situation, it reinforces to me to always tap the table when I check (I usually do anyway) just to establish a visual record in case something like this comes up in the future, in addition to just saying "check". Good protection measure, as this situation could have been an elaborate angle shoot or an honest misunderstanding, but either way it's better to be protected.

As a general statement two words sound almost alike and have such different meanings:
All (in)
Call

So many issues I've seen as a dealer floor and player have all stemmed from those two words

Tourney at the Orleans years ago: I was in the big- 1 seat, all (yes all) seats limped, SB calls and says to the dealer he checked, meaning me.
I hadn't budged or spoken and was holding JJ. Immediately several other players in chorus angled with him. Dealer followed by default. Had to defend myself in a voice raising match to get my turn. Told the dealer where his eyes were directed and that he didn't see my action.
I eventually did get my turn but you're certainly on your own if you get outnumbered in opinion of what action was. The small blind tried to check for me I wasn't having it.

Sounds like you got hustled.

As a rule of thumb next time, use your hands when making a decision. Tap table, spin your finger in air etc.

I play at Commerce and there are people from all over the world so sometimes things escalate. Best to just do your best to prevent disasters.

When there's a question about what the player said, the button defines the action. It's very useful for clarity in exactly this situation. Yes, genius, saying all-in puts you all-in. But saying something unclear, what does that do? Why not have the dealer seek clarity?



No, once the opponent announced call the button doesn't become moot, it becomes determining. You're trying to set up for angle shooting. If I have the nuts and my opponent sneezes, can I show my hand and say "He said all-in, I heard him!"



Preventing disputes about all-ins is "minor?" LOL. This dealer's ineptness and possible corruption cost a player his stack. But that's "minor" to you? Brilliant.


Yes, players have an obligation to wait for the previous action to be clear before acting. Yes. Always. Usually there's no issue, but if there is an issue, yes, you have to wait. Nothing else makes sense. You're just setting up angle-shooting.

At any decent casino, the dealer will give the bettor an all-in button or have them push a stack forward.

The problem at hand isn't when someone says "All in." It's when maybe they said "Call him," or "Is he all in?" or "Bet min" or anything else. Then what?

The fear of clarity in his thread is depressing. Long live angle shooting chaos? Whoever can get the most friends to shout the longest, or has previously tipped the floor the best, wins?

If it's on me and I sneeze and my opp says "Call!", just, FML, because, you know, a sneeze might mean all-in and therefore should be ruled all-in because, you know, seeking clarity would be so much more difficult?

This doesn't even make sense as written and is contradictory. The button clarifies, as you said. It does not define.

Everybody at the table including the dealer except the OP says he said All-IN. How do you from that conclude there is something that needs clarity here?


So you think that the button can change the action after it happens? IF a player says All-IN and his opponent instantly says Call before the button comes out how does the button matter?

Even if the bettor now claims that he didn't say All-IN the fact that the button was put out after the call changes nothing.



You think the dealer is inept because his button didn't come out before an insta-call? And for you to conclude the dealer is corrupt based on the information you have is just ridiculous unless you have information that hasn't been disclosed in this discussion.


Imagine you are at a game and you clearly hear your opponent announce a bet. It is clear to you. how long do you have to wait? I agree if its not clear you need to clarify it before you act..... but if its clear to you its not unclear.

So in this case every person at the table including the dealer says they heard the player say he is All-IN. For you to reach the conclusion that that there was a lack of clarity is absurd. IF all those people said "Welll he mumbled something ... it might have been All-in" well thats a lack of clarity.

my understanding of casino law is a bit shaky but I don't think they can take chips from your possession and give them to another player outside of nevada. Your best option was to pick up your chips immediately as this was happening and you might be able to claim they were never in the pot and forcibly removed from you to the gaming commission which is not allowed.

other then that i doubt anyone will listen to you. it's kinda against their interest to and not really worth their time as nothing good can happen from helping you

So why didn't the dealer verify you were all in and tell you to throw a chip over the line ?

I'm guessing because she knew you checked.

I'm not sure why OP is getting killed on the racial issue. I agree that there isn't much of any evidence to suggest that he got shafted because he was white. However, taking his story for truth, he got robbed and was and is probably still steaming over it. When **** like that happens people tend to look for reasons as to why they were victimized and it's really easy to gravitate toward the racial aspect when the entire table, the dealer and the floor whom all took positions against him all share a similar ethnicity while he sits there as the outsider.

I want to note that at commerce favorable rulings based on ethnicity seem to exist in my opinion. but that's an entirely different conversation

But that's exactly what makes it racist.

If you get mugged by a bunch of white teenagers, you vent, "****ing teenagers!"

If you get mugged by a bunch of black teenagers, you vent, "****ing ******s!"

What makes it racist is that in one scenario, you're attributing the negativity to an entire race.

How many goddamn times do I need to point out there are more different types of yellow-skinned people than white-skinned people?

How rational would it be for a non-white person to suspect two white people were in cahoots simply because they were both white?

If there were a French person and a Czech person at your table, would you think they share any affinity solely because they come from roughly the same area of the world?