Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him.

03-05-2010 , 01:18 PM
I can't think of any reason why a player should be allowed to play with his chips split into two separate stacks. A player's stack should always be in a single group, with higher denomination chips clearly visible in front of or on top of the stacks of lower denomination chips.

This is for two reasons: first, to avoid the exact situation that the OP faced, where a large amount of chips were out of his sight because of his position at the table; and second, because dealers are taught to deal to stacks during tournaments, not to players. Any split stacks can lead to a misdeal where the dealer deals cards to both groups of chips. In addition, a TD keeping track of empty seats will count stacks, not players, and having a split stack can only confuse the process.

Agree that OP has a responsibility to be aware of the chips on the table, but I think that the biggest responsibility in the situation by far falls on the dealer for allowing the player in seat 2 to keep his chips split. Makes a very tough situation for the floor to rule fairly and is easily avoided.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-05-2010 , 01:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by icwuturdoin
It’s Day Two of a Venetian Deep Stack event. I’m moved from a broken table to Seat Ten, to the right of the dealer. Starting with 70k, I quickly build my stack to 350k. A couple more players are eliminated. I’m feeling really good about my positive momentum and the fact I’m probably a medium stack now amongst the 13-14 remaining players. I feel very much in the hunt for the $28,000 first-place prize.

However, with the blinds and antes at nearly 40k each hand (the same amount lost by each player per round), even I have to keep pushing all-in in favorable situations. At this point I will push all-in with premium hands. With borderline hands, I’ll push all-in against the short stacks to my left. Seat One is vacant, Seat Two has about 200k in yellow (two tall stacks), and Seat Three has about 150k.

The action folds to me on the button. I have QT off-suit, a borderline hand. I notice Seat Two is interested in playing but, as a short stack needing to double up, could be on a broad range of hands. I don’t mind racing with a short stack, as I will still have chips and an opportunity to double up again should I lose. I push all-in. He calls with aces. I lose the hand.
Shoving QTo into a player that wants to go all in is an awful play risking over 1/2 of your stack. He has a "M" of around 5, meaning he's going to shove all pairs, all aces and probably a bunch of kings too if no one enters the pot. Even if he decides to play with that whole range, you're a 40/60 underdog.

/strat in non-strat forum.

As mentioned by others, the dealer should have had Seat 2 keep his chips together. Otherwise, you learned an important lesson at a price.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-05-2010 , 01:47 PM
Why do I sometimes feel that I am living in some sort of Bizarro World where people are reading a different OP than I am?

OP sat and played at this table long enough to build momentum and a chipstack as several other players are eliminated. He seems to know that Seat one is “Vacant” not just walking – he’d really have to in this situation given the action and blinds.

He starts quoting TDA Rules about keeping chips visible and identifiable. Nowhere does he imply that the chips were not visible, they were just not directly in front of a player. If there had been a player in Seat #1 then the chips would have been in a similar position. He claims that it was somehow impossible to see the chips from Seat #10 – again what if there had been a player in seat #1? Everyone else at the table knew about the chips. So clearly the chips were not hidden – the OP just didn’t see them.

People spread out into vacant space all the time – boundaries are vague and when you have a large stack you’ll shift into available space. The chipstack was apparently split and probably should not have been so. But that is very different from accusing someone of deceit, robbery, and incompetence while making a scene and then coming here to make those accusations. He jumps in here with his first post to make with a Thread Title that screams out the defamatory accusation of Robbery at the Venetian – denigrating other Players, Dealers, Floor and ultimately the casino itself, and never returns to clarify.

Pay attention and don’t over play Q10



Quote:
Originally Posted by ~red0nkulous
I am starting to think OP is needing a reason to justify shoving with Q10o and that saying he didn't see seat two's whole stack seems like the most logical reason.
Me too. As another poster pointed out, there is no way that the OP would have returned any chips if he'd won the hand for a double up.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-05-2010 , 03:11 PM
When you sit at a table long enough to go from 70K to 350K, play short handed with 13-14 players left meaning there are going to be some open seats, not notice that dealer isn't taking blinds out of the Seat 1 stack, and not see the difference between an open seat or someone who's just up and walking around, then you don't deserve any sympathy. Sorry, but playing the victim here when you weren't observant enough to notice all the clear signs is pathetic.

I call big-time shenanigans on your claim that you've been playing 10 years.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-05-2010 , 04:24 PM
the only thing you did wrong was relinquishing your chips and leaving your seat

also OP clearly stated if he knew he was covered he would have passed so a double up on the hand was not a possibility
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-05-2010 , 04:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentonja
the only thing you did wrong was relinquishing your chips and leaving your seat

also OP clearly stated if he knew he was covered he would have passed so a double up on the hand was not a possibility
So.

If, as played, he had sucked out and won the hand, he wouldn't have accepted the double up?

That was the point people are making with asking:
Quote:
Would you have returned some of the chips if you had doubled up on that hand?
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-05-2010 , 04:53 PM
I'd much rather open shove QT from the button into large stacks that have fold equity instead of shoving into short stacks that are calling with a much wider range.

Seat 2 posting the SB and seat 3 posting the BB should have clued the OP into the fact there was no seat 1. It's possible I misread the OP.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-05-2010 , 04:59 PM
The title of this thread is VERY missleading and you should change it. You need to chalk up this experience as a lesson learned the hard way and move on. From now on when you sit down at a table and there appears to be chips infront of an empty chair you should address it when you sit down so there will not any confusion again.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 01:08 AM
ok this story is interesting and a great read for any player playing tournies in the future (bc they can learn from this player's mistake). There is no way the TD or floor can determine you didn't know that seat 2 had that many chips so you could possibly be cheating and trying to get some of your tourny life back. Yes this situation is horrible for you and I agree with you trying to argue to the floor bc its BS that player 1's big denomination chips were not seen by you. At the casino i play at, dealers always make sure your big value chips are out front (or they verbally tell you to show them). IDK just learn from this experience and hit a big score again.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 01:47 AM
wats up with all the flamers? with 28k on the line and the read u had on the villain im sure we all would have been just as upset
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 02:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RanchDressin
wats up with all the flamers? with 28k on the line and the read u had on the villain im sure we all would have been just as upset
Well, it's a single post gimmick account, IMO, and he has not replied to anything said, at least not with the gimmick account anyways.

It is a large payday, so much more reason to pay attention.

OP decided to push with a questionable hand without getting a firm count. He got called and was out.

He said he would have never pushed if he knew that the other player had him covered.

Isn't that a really, really good reason to make sure of the other players stack before shoving with Q,10 into a player who looks like he wants to dance?

OP said he chips were in front of seat 1 which he knew to be empty. OP also said everyone else could see the chips there except him.

So Seat 2 was angle shooting against seat 10 only?
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 04:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjm
OP doesn't think there is a player absent from seat 1, he doesn't think there is any player or chips there. So why is everyone going on about paying attention to blinds and antes? The player in seat 2 has a load of chips which are not in front of him and not in view of the player he is in a pot with.

Should OP be alert enough that at some point he would notice that there are a load of chips randomly stacked in front of seat 1, probably, but I think he has a legitimate arguement that the chips which are not in front of the player and are not even viewable from where he is sat should not be allowed to go in this hand.
Ya. You know how people say, "and I woke up with KK"? That's what happened here. Our "hero" just woke up, looked dazedly around and saw that the BB was short. Clearly he hadn't been cognizant at that table for long or else he obviously would have noticed seat 2 winning lots of chips or seat 2 having lots of chips or SOMETHING.

As for handing out a penalty, you must be joking. Give him a warning, but that's all this minor infraction warrants.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 12:41 PM
What about this?

The big stacks in seat 1 were never touched since OP was at the table. How would OP know they existed especially when his line of sight was blocked by the dealer?

While its true OP should have been paying attention when he was running up his stack, what if this happened to be his first hand at the table? What if the table OP came from was directly behind where he was sitting, thus never having a chance to see the chips in front of seat 1?

This isn't as black and white as some people seem to think.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 01:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zomgwtfbbq
What about this?

The big stacks in seat 1 were never touched since OP was at the table. How would OP know they existed especially when his line of sight was blocked by the dealer?

While its true OP should have been paying attention when he was running up his stack, what if this happened to be his first hand at the table? What if the table OP came from was directly behind where he was sitting, thus never having a chance to see the chips in front of seat 1?

This isn't as black and white as some people seem to think.
To me it is pretty Black & White.

The OP doesn't support any of your hypotheticals. We can "What If?" all day long. But even if I accept your attempt to interject grey into this scenario and trying to ignore personal responsibility, I'd still conclude: Pay Attention.

And I certainly wouldn't accept the conclusions of deceit, cheating, and incompetence with an Thread Title screaming out the accusation of “Robbery at the Venetian”

No one can pay attention for you – that is your responsibility.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 02:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MezMan
Respectfully, I have to disagree. When you arrive at the table, you look at everyone's stacks. If you see these stacks at Seat 1, you ask about them. If Seat 2 won them while he was there, he obviously should have noticed. How can you play and not know how deep your opponents are? No one would put up with people hiding their chips in their pockets, c'mon, that's not what the guy was doing.
What is he supposed to survey everyone at the table when he arrives? Nah. Seat 10 and Seat 1 cant see each other and theres no one sitting there why look at the felt in front of an invisible person. If the guy violates a rule then only the chips in front of him should be in play for the hand. The only thing that would help us figure this out since we have no visual is how exaggerated the chips not being in front on the player in seat 2 is. For hero, you could always make it 2.5x next time just in case.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 02:45 PM
Your fault, your out.

Win like a man, lose like a man.

If I were there I would of banjoed someone to be fair. I'd of stood up (because I'd still of been in) and battered you for being a soppy sack.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 02:53 PM
Why does the rule exist that u should have ur chips in front of you?

because not having them there misleads the other player. If its the other players responsibility to know, then the rule to have them in front of you shouldnt exist.

OP was robbed imo.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 02:55 PM
According to the OP, he is an experienced live player.

According to the OP, he came to the table and
5X his stack.

Accroding to the OP, Seat 1 was vacant.

OP said he was the button and he decided to push all in on Seat 2.

If OP knew seat 1 was vacant, and seat 2 was there for the SB, did he not take into consideration that Seat 3 might re raise him?

Since OP never mentions Seat 3 (conveniently?).

Why? Either he knows Seat 1 is vacant (his words) or he is ignoring the players in Seat 1 and/or Seat 3 and pushing into what bhe thought was a short stack.

Let uis assume that OP truly did not see the chips in front of seat 1, what about Seat 3, why was that not part of his decision?

As described, Seat 10 (OP) is the button, Seat 1 (Vacant), Seat 2 SB, Seat 3(?) BB.

Mabye seat 3 was vacant, there could not have been more than 7 players at the table. Then Seat 4 or Seat 5 was the BB. OP HAD to have seen who was the BB, they had to have put out about
T$24K in chips and everyone else had FOLDED!

And BTW, I have players in Seat 1 and Seat 9/10 ask me to lean back all the time so they can see the other players in the seat on the far side of me.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 03:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dealer-Guy

Accroding to the OP, Seat 1 was vacant.

OP said he was the button and he decided to push all in on Seat 2.

If OP knew seat 1 was vacant, and seat 2 was there for the SB, did he not take into consideration that Seat 3 might re raise him?

Since OP never mentions Seat 3 (conveniently?).

OP has already mentioned Seat 3 and said seat 3 had 150k, which is less than what Seat two had in front of him

Last edited by Rapini; 03-08-2010 at 12:39 PM. Reason: removed trolling
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 04:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by savatage
Why does the rule exist that u should have ur chips in front of you?

because not having them there misleads the other player. If its the other players responsibility to know, then the rule to have them in front of you shouldnt exist.

OP was robbed imo.
OP lost because a dealer mistake and his own carelessness. Its not any one person's fault, its both of them.

not robbed.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 04:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AutoReShipzz
What is he supposed to survey everyone at the table when he arrives?
Yes?
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 04:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by savatage
OP has already mentioned Seat 3 and said seat 3 had 150k, which is less than what Seat two had in front of him
Oops, yep I missed that.

Which is proof that even observant people make mistakes and this scenario is not robbery, it was human failure on the part of the OP.

Last edited by Rapini; 03-08-2010 at 12:39 PM.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 05:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zomgwtfbbq
OP lost because a dealer mistake and his own carelessness. Its not any one person's fault, its both of them.

not robbed.
What should the dealer have done?

I can't tell a player how many a chips another player has unless asked. Impartial observer only.

There was only one player who was not aware of the chips belonging to seat 2 as OP claims. How could the dealer be aware that Seat 10 did not see all of the chips belonging to seat 2?

When OP came to the table, he should have taken a look around carefully to see who was the big stack.

He either failed to do so or he did not notice Seat 2 winning several huge pots.

We only have the word of the OP, silent since posting, that the chips were not visible to him or exactly where in front of seat 1 they were.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-06-2010 , 09:42 PM
Situation sucks. Really though, what's the ruling going to be?

1. Kill the hands - return all bets? Super LOL.
2. Return the 150k - perhaps in some back water club where OP is the TD's BFF, but again LOL.
3. Give the Villain a one orbit penalty, which sounds like it would sting a bit where things are at structure wise.

Best case scenario the villain IS going to be punished and you ARE NOT going to be compensated. I don't believe OP is 0% at fault, but OP could have done things to protect himself, but again, very weird situation.
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote
03-07-2010 , 12:37 AM
Quote:
I never knew these chips existed! After all, I don’t have x-ray vision, nor would I strain my neck to look for chips positioned in a vacant seat!

TDA rule #37: Players must keep their higher-denomination chips visible and identifiable at all times.

I believe about 800,000 in chips is a very substantial denomination. In fact, at this very late stage of the tournament, it’s a very important piece of information that I require to make important decisions when playing for $28,000! In fact, I’ve just busted out of the tournament knowing full well I don’t make that play against an interested big stack. This missing piece of information cost me my tournament life!
Aside from the fact that "denomination" refers to the value of a single chip and not stack(s), I think the two bolded sections contradict each other:

You acknowledge the importance of the information you are missing, yet you're not willing to expend a little extra effort to obtain that information:

You're coming to a new table from a busted one. If the table is full, then there is someone in seat 1, and seat 2's stack is in front of him. If it's a big stack, then you should notice and be aware of it, right?

If it's not a big stack, then he would have to build it to a big stack while you were at the table. Which means that you should be aware that he now has a big stack because you watched him build it. Or should have.

If seat 1 busts out after seat 2 gets his big stack, then at some point after seat 1 busts out, seat 2's stack is going to suddenly appear a lot smaller: like less than 50% of its previous size (if I'm reading OP right). If you haven't seen him losing a lot of pots, particularly big ones, then don't you think it's suspicious that he now has a small stack?

If seat 2 builds his stack after seat 1 has busted, and keeps sliding his extra stacks to his right, why haven't you noticed that he doesn't seem to have as many chips in front of him as you have seen him win?

If you haven't noticed any of this—either before you sat down or while you were at the table—were you really paying enough attention to gathering important information when you are that close to a big payday in the final stages of the tournament?

I don't think so.


Is $28K worth straining your neck over?

I think so.


Quote:
What would you have done if you were in my shoes?
Argue with the TD for a minute or two, sulk over to pick up my meager winnings (if I cashed), then mope around for a couple of days thinking about how bad I ****ed up.

It's over.

You lost.

Lesson learned.

Move on.


--klez
Player does not have all his chips directly in front of him. Quote

      
m