That's a raise, as stated above:

You're throwing two chips.

One of them isn't mine.

The post or the chips? I'm just saying the question has been answered and then quoted the answer so you didn't have to scroll up.

Sorry for the ambiguity; what I mean is how is this possible if one of the chips I'm throwing isn't mine?

Think you're being way too technical. Understood it's part of the pot. Also still understand you're throwing 2 chips now when you pick up the initial red to go along with the black.

The rule says So, in your case, you did exactly what the rule describes. Your original $5 chip was already in the pot. It is a call.

Sometimes dealers will feel like it is obvious you were trying to raise so they may give you the benefit of the doubt and ask you. This is not what they are supposed to do, but generally no one cares.

Or... You toss out the black chip as an angle and when someone calls, you say "I didn't raise, I only called." and by rule you are correct so you get away with it and if everyone folds you take the pot without speaking up at all.

That's one of the reasons that the rule is there. So you don't get that option.

No. There is one correct ruling. Adding one black chip when $20 more is needed is a call.

Pulling back the red chip, and then tossing forward a black chip should be ruled as a raise to $100, according to Matt Savage's philosophy. If you are calling, you just need to add the black chip. Pulling back the red chip first implies that you are raising to $100.

However, it is best to first verbalize your action first to ensure that the action that you intend is the action that occurs. Dealers, floor people, and TDs are liable to rule incorrectly.

"Matt savage's philosophy" seems very wrong here, if that is actually what he believes. Player could easily pull back the red, and throw out the black expecting change. (Especially if player doesn't have exact change to call, this would just make it easier on the dealer than leaving 105 out there expecting 85 change)

Can anyone else back this up? I've never heard this.

I think he is overstating it. Pulling back the red chip should obligate the player to call or raise. If in the OP there had not already been a raise then pulling back the red chip should obligate him to raise.

Yeah definitely don't think Savage rules that as a raise.

Yeah. I did not like writing that one part of my post because Savage does some things that do not make sense, and I just try to keep up with what he says.

Savage said:

https://twitter.com/savagepoker/stat...11558520086528

This should be a raise, but if someone doesn't see you actually do that (especially the dealer) it will looks exactly like a call, so if you want to raise to 105 the best course of action is to say the word "raise."

If uttering that one syllable will cause your opponents to get a read on you and ruin the hand, you need to move down in stakes.

Sorry for the double post, but someone asked for the rule in writing, i actually like the wording of it in this years WSOP rules better.

Here are all three:

Robert

15. If you put a single chip in the pot that is larger than the bet, but do not announce a raise, you are assumed to have only called. Example: In a $3-$6 game, when a player bets $6 and the next player puts a $25 chip in the pot without saying anything, that player has merely called the $6 bet.

TDA

45: Oversized Chip Betting
When facing a bet or blind, pushing out a single oversized chip is a call if raise isn’t first declared. To
raise with an oversized chip, raise must be declared before the chip hits the table surface. If raise is
© Copyright 2015: All Rights Reserved, Poker Tournament Directors Association. See use policy at PokerTDA.com.
declared but no amount, the raise is the maximum allowable for the chip. When not facing a bet,
pushing out an oversized chip without declaration is a bet of the maximum for the chip.
46: Multiple Chip Betting
When facing a bet, unless raise is declared first, a multiple-chip bet is a call if every chip is needed to
make the call; i.e. removal of just one of the smallest chips leaves less than the call amount. Example:
preflop, 200-400 blinds: A raises to 1200 total (an 800 raise), B puts out two 1000 chips without
declaring raise. This is just a call because removing one 1000 chip leaves less than the amount to call
(1200). If the single removal of just one of the smallest chips leaves the call amount or more, the bet is
governed by the 50% standard in Rule 43

WSOP

92. When facing a bet, unless raise is declared first, a multiple-chip bet is a call if every chip is needed to make the call; i.e. removal of just
one of the smallest chips leaves less than the call amount. Example: preflop, 200-400 blinds: A raises to 1200 total (an 800 raise), B puts out
two 1000 chips without declaring raise. This is just a call because removing one 1000 chip leaves less than the amount to call (1200). If the
single removal of just one of the smallest chips leaves the call amount or more, the bet is governed by the 50% standard in Rule 95.

97. Oversized Chip Betting: Putting a single oversized chip or multiple same-denomination chips into the pot will be considered a call if the
participant doesn’t announce a raise. For example, pre-flop, blinds are 200-400: A raises to 1,200 total (an 800 raise), B puts out two 1,000
chips without declaring raise. This is just a call because removing one 1,000 chip leaves less than the amount needed to call the 1,200 bet.
To make a raise with a single oversized chip, a verbal declaration must be made before the chip hits the table surface. If a participant says
"Raise" as an oversized chip is placed into the pot (with the word Raise being announced prior to the chip landing on the table surface), but
doesn’t state the amount, the raise will be the maximum allowable up to the denomination of that chip. After the flop, an initial bet of a
single oversized chip without comment will signify a bet equal to the size of the chip

I will nitpick that I don't like that the second part of WSOP rule 97 basically restates rule 92, and does it worse and contradictory. It says that multiple chips needs to be the same denom (they don't, and in rule 92 they don't), and also confusingly just says that multiple same denom chips are a call without (initially) saying that removing one has to be less than the call amount. Like, if you were facing a bet of 800 and put in 3 1000 chips, rule 97 initially seems to say that is a call. It later clarifies that it's not, but why bother? Rule 92 already covers this.

the RRoP rules are older and certainly much shorter, but less clear. I do wish they would be clarified.

Note that in none of these cases does the rule specifically address whether a player's chips already in the pot (via blinds, or previous action) count for the purposes of these rules, which is the real question being raised in this thread.

In general, players and rooms have collectively agreed that any chips already in the pot are IGNORED for the purposes of this rule, unless either they would already cover the amount of the raise (in which case, adding more chips is obvious an attempt to raise), or unless the player FIRST pulls back (or at least fiddles with) those previously bet chips THEN throws them out again along with additional chips (again, making an obvious case for an intended raise). Note that throwing more chips out without first handling the previously bet chips, but instead trying to do so afterwards, or just leaving them out there, is generally not considered good enough for triggering the "obvious raise" part of this interpretation.

But none of this is codified in any written rule (or at least, in RRoP, TDA, or WSOP).

This is incorrect.
This is correct.

This situation happened recently at 1/2 NL game at Sugarhouse in Philadelphia, and the dealer ruled it a raise. With several limpers in the pot, the small blind completed, and then the big blind threw in a red chip to raise to $7. There were calls all around, and then it got back to the small blind. He threw in a green $25 chip, and the dealer immediately announced "raise."

The small blind protested and said that he had meant only to call. The dealer said, "too bad, that's a raise." I then spoke up and said that the one chip rule should apply. The dealer looked at me like I was nuts, pointed to the three chips in front of the small blind, and said, "that's a raise."

No one seemed inclined to call the floor. The "ruling" that a raise had been made stood.

Either
a) The room has a different rule or
b) the dealer

1) doesn't know the rule or
2) doesn't know how to interpret/apply the rule
3) got confused in this specific case

If I am the SB, we are getting a Floor
But I guess the players in the hand were okay with the "ruling" or just didn't want to rock the boat. The problem comes when the situation arises again but this time with a different dealer and a different "ruling" and George complains that "Last Saturday Maude said that was a raise"

That's 100% wrong and why wouldn't you call the floor when the dealer is making you do something you don't want to do?

But if anyone had called the floor, the ruling would have been the opposite of the dealer's ruling.

This distinction is evidently lost on some dealers and floors. I don't recall what casino I was in, but I was in the small blind and wanted to raise. I picked up the small blind and the raising chip, threw them both forward, and the dealer said it was a call. I called for a floor ruling and he confirmed it, even though he acknowledged that I placed both chips int the pot in one motion.

Just say raise.

Agree just say raise.

But depending on the denomination of the raising chip, even under the multi chip rule you may not have qualified as a raise.

The multi-chip rule is basically, if any single chip can be removed from the chips put in, and the chips remaining are enough to call, then it's a raise. Otherwise it's a call.

So if the bet is 600, raised from 300, and you throw in two 500s, it's a call of 600 not a raise to 1000, but if you throw in a 500 and a 1000, then it's definitely a raise because removing the 500 still covers the 600 bet.

Many floor and dealers get this wrong.

I knew a tournament director who took this position. His claim was that the chip was part of the pot and therefore you aren't allowed to pick it up and put it out as part of your bet. He was wrong about lots of things.

Am I the only one tired of this rhetoric?

It's actually very common in poker for people to not verbalize action if they feel the chips sufficiently represent their bet. There are quite a few different psychological reasons why someone might not verbalize, and while one of them might be, "because they might get a tell on me", I'd wager that would be the case mostly for very new players.

Can you imagine sitting at a 1/2 table and 8 people limp with $5 chips and every one of them says, "Call" when they throw it in?

Wish they would. Inevitably they missed the UTG $5 straddle to begin with.