I was playing $1-2 ($200 max). Villian in mid position, was just felted and was playing behind. Villian is tilting and bets out $20 into 2 callers of the blind. I am on the puck with $370 and look down at 99s.

I ask the dealer "How much is that play behind", dealer says "$60", I say, "I put that player all in". To which the dealer says "All in call, and sir you need to put your $370 in the pot". I said "what? I am only betting what that player is behind. I clearly asked you (the dealer) how much was the player behind and that I put that player all in.". Dealer and floor say sorry that because I put that player all in with 4 people left to act, it is an all in call.

I thought about it, and could not believe this situation, and then played the all in raise.

The hand played out, but it left a bad taste in mouth. I felt as if I was being cheated.

Is this a normal rule at most brick and mortars?

-Callahan-

I don't really like it when people use the wording "I put you all in." Most the time it comes out condescending and very douchey. Why not just announce a bet of whatever the player has after you make the dealer count it out?

It doesn't bother me that much when it happens to me, but it bothers a high enough % of players that I think it should just be avoided.

You can't put someone all in. In a heads up pot you can go all in and essentially you are only betting the $60.

In a multi way pot you need to state a specific number or go all in for all your chips.

The dealer should have clarified your bet.

He bet $20 (with what? you said he just got felted, so I assume you mean he announced 'Raise to $20' )

Dealer told you he had $60 behind ( $60 total or $60 beyond the $20 he raised?).

Just say 'I raise to $60 [or $80]' and quit the TV talk. Then there would have been no reason for this thread. Maybe.

You can't put me or anyone else all in. You're repeating what you have heard others say without thinking about what you're saying, as many people do (as 27offsuit does by calling people and/or things "gay.".

In a multi-way pot, you're letting the dealer and floor person interpret what you're saying. I do my best to state my actions clearly so that there is no room for interpretation.

Does my head in when idiots say I put you all in. Nobody at the table can put me all in apart from me. Just make a bet and get on with it rather than sound ******ed trying to put someone all in when you cant.

I absolutely agree with the ruling here. "I put you all-in" should be interpreted as "all-in" in order to avoid any ambiguity or angle-shooting.

I tell people who say "I'll put you all in", that they either need to go all in themselves or name a number.

We don't accept that as a bet. As the other posters have stated, you have to say an amount or put yourself all-in.

I don't like the floors ruling, but think the OP was wrong too. What dealer guy said is the right response.

I definitely agree that once he found out the amount from the dealer he should have bet that specific amount. However, his statement should not have required him to go all in.

Putting the bet at $80 and telling him that in the future that action will be taken as an all in is better than forcing it to be an all in this time.

This seems like a terrible policy to me....What about this scenario?:
Player A: "I put you all in"
Player B: "I call"
Player A: "Hold on, I didn't actually make a bet yet, I was just try to get a tell on you....on second thought, I fold"

Floor's ruling was incorrect. Substantial difference between intended bet and actual bet. Also, the immediate denial of the all-in before any other action should have been enough to stop the misunderstanding.

In the future, put an exact amount of chips in or say exactly how much it is.

Yeah we do the "I put you all in" thread every 2 months.

Summary: Stop saying that.

Next time try this.

"Dealer, how much does he have left?"

"Gimme a second. *chips click* He has 85 left"

"Bet 85"

you left it up to someone else to make a decision on what you were trying to do... learn from your mistake. almost every rules thread in this forum is about someone saying something that could be misinterpreted as something else. the rest of the threads are about someone who won't turn over their hand

op shouldn't be saying "i put you all in" but the floor's ruling was far worse

just because op made a newbie mistake is no reason for floor to essentially punish him for it

also no way was this ruling in the best interest of the game

i think this is the first time such a thread has had floor ruling op goes all in

It's your own fault. You asked how much he had. You could have said "60" but instead you used ambiguous and essentially meaningless terminology. You cannot "put someone all-in," you can only "bet enough so that if they choose to call you, they will be all-in." I wouldn't expect to get much support here. Sorry about your stack tho, I doubt this would be a thread if you won.

al

How about this:
Player in seat 3 looks accross table (3 players in the hand, seats 3, 8, 9)
"how much do you have"

Seat 8
"$90"

Seat 3
"I put you all in"

Seat 8
"I call"
seat 9 mucks

"NOOOO I mean the guy next to you that had $20!!! I didn't want to bet $90!!!"


This happened while I was in a game last week. Action stands. Seat 3 was a jagoff for pulling a shot like that, he subsequently lost his $90.

LOL. This is slight douchebaggery and more than anything, just unnecessary. Just name the bet amount you want to bet instead of being a little dramatic. Its not the worst thing in the world, of course, but I think if you look back on it without getting your feelings hurt in this thread, you can see that you shouldn't do that going forward.

You learned something. Move on.

This isn't getting enough love <3

If this happened in a casino, and the OP picked up his chips and left the table (without taking anything from the pot, but without putting all his chips in), the casino is not able to stop him, correct? They can ban him from the casino of course, but they can't force him to put in the money.

The intent here was clear, the casino made a bad ruling from a customer service point of view. The dealer should have clarified the bet before action continued, and the bet should have stood at either $80 or all in, depending on the clarification.

I'm not sure that I agree with this completely.

The Op thought he could put another player all in, why can't the floor put him all in?








Okay no the floor should not be putting someone all in, I agree.

But the OP certainly learned not to do that again, sisn't he?

And who's to say he had not been warned about that sort of thing before and just "forgot" to mention that?

I would even agree with you here....but....the real point is, why leave it up to interpretation when you don't have to? The OP even asked how much he was behind, was told, and still decided to use some loose terminology. He should take some responsibility for it considering how easily it could have been avoided.

It could be easily avoided, but obviously the OP did not realize that what he was doing was not allowed / did not work that way. The OPs intent is crystal clear - he asked for a count of the shortstack, and then said that he put said shortstack all in. He obviously meant to bet exactly the amount that would put the shortstack all in. It is clear he is not shooting an angle, and it is pretty poor customer service on the part of the casino to say that he is now all in for 340$. Taking my money off the table with the house saying I have an outstanding wager is not something I have ever considered before, but in a situation like this it would be my first thought, because I would definitely never be playing at the casino again if they made me do that.
Do we really want to be chasing away players who have learned how to play poker by watching tournament television?