Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Crispen
Your book and what you can or cannot imagine aren't the determining factors though. I'm not calling you dumb or stupid and I'm not saying that your argument is in bad faith. I'm just suggesting that sometimes our intuition doesn't match with how things are.
With the chips he placed in the pot, it is literally ambiguous as to whether it is a call or a raise. He could be trying to call, or he could be trying to raise. Because his intentions are not clear, we go with the lesser amount because we're not mind readers and we have to be consistent with how we rule these things.
I agree with your point (but not that I'm arguing in bad faith). I was not saying what I think the official rule is, I was giving my impression, what I would think if I were at the table and that happened.
Now I just have to wonder, am I remembering things wrong, or 15 years ago would I have been right, or is this just one of those weird things were midway through your life you realize you've been mispronouncing a word or something like that and somehow you never noticed before!?
Anyway, as to the other question, about the small blind's call being mistaken for a raise... The general rule I've seen applied in that situation is that if someone (mainly the dealer, but could be anyone at the table) put a stop to it after the big blind "called" then the mistake could have been undone. But after the second person called, it is considered too late to change it. It might be different if it were some gross violation of the rules, or someone has 3 cards in hold 'em, etc., but for a bet or bet size misunderstanding, it just stays in place, mistakes happen.