How would y'all rule on this:

Player A bets $80 with three greens and a red.

Player B calls $80.

Player C raises to $300.

Player A brings out and cuts down $75 in reds, pulls back his greens, and mucks.

Floor!

Ehhh. Unless A is a known angler, I'd let it slide *this* time assuming his action didn't cause B to act behind. But I'd tell him that he should not do that in the future as he may be bound to keeping the extra $75 next time.


Then KITN

Every time one of our regulars post "what would you do..." I'm always expecting it to be a huge waste of my time because we've seen it all, but literally every time I'm just like "Da FAQ???"

A) let him fold
B) make him leave $150 in and he can call $300 or fold for $150
C) forced to call $300

Not sure why my gut says id rule differently if it were a MTT... In a cash game assuming the player isn't a known scum bag I like A>B>>>>C

For whatever reason in MTT I think I prefer C>>B>>>>A

Just text this to five people whose opinion I respect the most from a supervisor perspective. Let's see what they say lol

I'd like to cut him some slack but that feels so much like an angle to me. I would assume he cut out the 75 in red looking to get a reaction to determine if he would be heads up or if B would also be calling.

I think I default to what SirRawrsALot said. If he's a know angler, the money stays in. If he's not, I'll probably let him keep it. But he gets a very serious conversation away from the table.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using 2+2 Forums

I don't see an issue. The amount he brought out wasnt even close to a call. It seems fairly obvious that his intent was always to swap out the chips.



Sent from my SCH-I535 using 2+2 Forums

Not to me, unfortunately--I see clueless idiots (who have no ill intent) do stuff like this all the time (especially preflop from the SB, which is miles away from $300 action, but it's still the same thing).

Quiet, Stiffy!

JK.

(I'm getting better about the "less than friendly" thing, tho, as I finally learn to quit being frustrated by players who do things that confound my efforts to keep the game moving.)

So far I got 3 responses that are all making him call $300

I'm sorry, but there's no way that's not a call.

I'd be okay with letting him fold if he pulled back the greens first, but he showed no intention, verbal or otherwise, of making a fold. He's adding to the chips that are across the line, which is a string call.

It wasn't said what street this occurred on, but if this were on the river, the other player could have easily tabled his/her hand while the player was cutting out chips. I've certainly either tabled or announced my hand before while somebody was still cutting out chips.

If I was the other player and the dealer tried to let the guy fold, I would snap ask for a floor ruling.

I don't see a need to make it stay in unless there has been action behind, or the player leaves it out there for a good amount of time before taking the green back.

Pretty much if there is no action behind, and no angle to shoot, then no need to make a ruling against him. If an angle opportunity opens for whatever reason(action behind, tabled hand, etc) then prevent the angle.

In a tournament it stays in and the player decides if he wants to call the rest, and if there is action behind then he is obligated to the whole amount.

Don't put the greens out in the first place if you don't want to lose them idiot.

In my room those greens are staying in because we have a specific rule - forward motion with chips in turn = those chips are staying in.

Floor probably gets some leeway to decide whether he has to call the complete bet or can fold and just leave the green.

I don't see how you can make a player stay in a pot, under any circumstances.

On the grunch, if I were able to observe the situation I would take a look at whether the "exchanger" was taking his time and looking around while doing it, or merely pushing out chips and bring chips back without any other motions. But the entire time I'd be leaning toward a potential angle because there's no need for him to move chips forward if he isn't calling.

But to demonstrate what a close call this is, check out the differing opinions below from respected regulars so far:

I have to agree with this. If he had mistakedly thought the amount of the bet was $150, we would have allowed him to take the money back under the Gross Misunderstanding (barring any action behind). While this wasn't a misunderstanding, the same principle applies.

Of course, it does come with a short lecture and warning that this action will be considered a call in the future.

No Gross Misundertanding allowed?

It's not a call, no dealer/floor can compel a player to put chips into a pot if they are not already in the pot. If player didn't muck his cards already, he is allowed to complete the call, or he's allowed to fold for $155.

Some floors may take mercy on the player if it is thought to be an innocent mistake...

So your position is that if a player verbally announces "Call" he still doesn;t have to call ......

As long as Player B didn't act behind then I am going to let this slide with an obvious warning at the table in front of everyone so no one gets this wrong in the future. "If you'd like to exchange those green chips you need to ask the dealer first so it's obvious what you are doing. You won't always get them back the way you did it."

If you can't play nice with green, I can get you change. Some people think its intimidating when they bet green in a mostly red chip game, so when he was raised he decided he wanted them back. Happens all the time.

Not in every room, but a lot of them are switching to this.

Brought additional chips (not enough to raise) forward making it a must call.

Another example of what the player DID being set aside for- uh well what did you mean to do... Who cares what the player meant to do!

If he/she knew enough that he wanted his green back, he knew enough to ask before acting. Try grabbing back a lost bet in the pit.

No, we don't have that here as a written rule.

Floor could always walk over and invoke rule 1 I guess just as with anything, though I've never seen it happen.

This is pretty much where I come out here.
While this wasn't a Gross Misunderstanding of the bet he was facing, it seems pretty clear that he intended to fold, changed his reds for greens, and then physically folded.
I would tend to give him the benefit of the doubt on this, unless there was a strong indication that he was angling, or unless he had induced subsequent action somehow. (I would also caution him about doing this in future, because he'd be likely to lose.)
I do see people do stuff like this occasionally, but normally they're bright enough to announce what they're doing (i.e., making change and/or folding) which avoids this kind of problem.
Many years ago, normally no one would have tried to force this to be a call, at least IME. (Actually, anyone who did try would probably have been viewed as angling!)
But today (thanks, I suppose, to the internet and tournaments), poker is moving toward an environment in which the rules are written and strictly enforced so as to reduce ambiguities as much as possible.
This isn't all bad, I guess, but it does make it harder on newer players who aren't yet familiar with the rules (or who just have a momentary mental lapse).
And it is definitely a noticeable change for those of us who learned to play in a much looser rules environment, in which intent really did matter, common sense was applied by experienced people and often trumped technicalities, and ambiguities were usually resolved by asking the player to clarify, rather than by invoking written rules (which, in those days, mostly hadn't been written yet).....
Honestly, I feel like Rip van Poker sometimes... .

They can at the least put the chips in lockdown and call gaming if the player refuses.