Interesting scenario and ruling from my local casino recently.

1-2 NLHE game, 200 max buy-in. Player A has been losing consistently all day. Into the game for 800 total. The first 200 were all red $5 chips and then every re-buy was 100 in red and 1 black chip. Player A is on his third rebuy and has $140 in front of him (8 red chips and 1 black). He is head's up with Player B going to a flop. On the turn, player B bets 55 with about 190 behind. Player A jams for 140. Player B immediately throws a fit, saying he didn't see the black chip and really thought he was betting enough to put Player A all-in for his last 40.

Floor is called. Dealer is very non-committal about the black chip and whether it was visible or not (dealer is one of the worst in the room who doesn't pay attention to anything happening on the table). Two players speak up and say the black chip has been visible since Player A rebought 4-5 hands ago. It's also my opinion that the chip was visible as it was sitting on the felt, not mixed with the red chips in any way.

I'll update in a little bit with a very interesting ruling from the floor (who also happens to be the poker room manager). But I'm curious, what do the 2+2 experts think the ruling should be in a situation like this?

Well, the context is very important. If no one else is backing the player that the chip was hidden, and there is no evidence to the contrary, I don't see how you can rule anything other than that it all plays.

The no-no's for me are having them on the bottom of a stack (or mixed in), or behind other stacks.

Even with other stacks and not covered would be perfectly acceptable to me. Ideally you put them on top or in front, though.

It would be difficult to imagine a black chip being so hidden by eight red chips that player B should be forgiven for overlooking it.

From what you have said, seems pretty simple that it's $140. Nothing wrong with the floor asking the dealer and the table about the whereabouts of the black chip.

The tease makes it sound like that was not the ruling though...

If it was on the felt at the beginning of the hand, even obscured, it's in play. If he was hiding it in some way he gets a warning to keep it visible. Other player gets told what he should already know, which is to pay attention and ask for a rough count when stack size becomes important in a decision.

I was curious and tried to replicate the scenario with 8 reds and one black chip. Without mixing the black chip in the stack of reds, there's basically no way to hide it unless you have two players sitting exactly opposite from each other. Otherwise, the black chip is even visible if it's right behind the stack of reds.

Curious to see how the ruling could have been 'very interesting'. Based on the info available to us right now, I only see a good or bad ruling.

I once had a guy scream that I was hiding money after he shoved on me thinking I only had $40 left. I had a $100 bill flat on the table under 1 stack of chips which were at the back of the bill. My arms were sitting on the rail. He was 2 seats away with a clear view. He simply wasn't paying attention and was upset after he lost the hand.

Also, if the lighting is bad and the red chips are a darker shade it can be hard to spot a single black chip underneath or even mixed in from the opposite side of the table.

if he wasnt clearly trying to hide it it should play. if the house doesnt want them to play if under other chips then they should not use them in the game and use 25 dollars chips more often.

if the chip is behind other stacks of chips then the player has a case. but if in one of the front stacks then it should play.

and if hidden it is the dealers job to ask him to keep it visible. you know the dealer is the guy you give thousands of dollars a year in tokes to protect you in the game.

If that is the case, the casino shouldn't give players black chips when they buy-in or rebuy.

how many stacks that are tall enough to hide a chip behind them can you build with 8 red chips?

If as above, chip was clearly not hidden and in play. Player B needs to learn to pay attention.

Context definitely need for if it's on the felt, it's in play...
You're telling me that if I have 2 stacks of red 20 high and 15 blacks hidden behind it should all be counted to double me up?

Absolutely should not with a good floor. If there was a good dealer to start with they wouldn't be there but that's a different subject.

Nonsense. Just because the dealer gets a dollar (or a hundred dollars) a hand from you, doesn't mean the dealer knows the hidden chip(s) exist in the first place.

They sit down, count the rack, and deal. They're not running inventory on every players' stack prior to every hand and on every street. If they see an out of place/hidden chip, then sure they should say something. But you, and the other players at the table, are more aware of what's been going on and who should have what. Pay attention to what's going on instead of being on your phone then blaming the dealer when things go wrong.

No, that is not correct.

Since he most likely re-bought at the table, the dealer is the one who gave him the black chip in the first place.

They're also responsible (as part of their job description) to make sure everyone is following the rules and keeping their higher denominational chips up front or on top. It's not a difficult task but of course someone can hide it. Cheaters will eventually get caught.

Nope, all rebuys at the local casino have to be done at the cage. No chip runners, no chips sold from the tray.

So, this is where the ruling gets ridiculous:

Floor comes over and decides that player A (with his 40 in red and one black) can only call the 55 bet by player B, but that the 85 he has left after breaking the black chip is in play for the river.

No one at the table, including the dealer can believe the ruling. In most opinions, he’s either all in for 40 or he’s all in for 140. I can’t imagine a situation where he isn’t all in for some amount (and if it’s ruled he’s all-in for 140, it’s now on Player B to call or fold.

So, player B is upset that it’s in play in any way. Seems all pissed off, talking about how he’s going to start hiding chips every time he plays from now on and just making a big scene. It’s fairlt obvious he doesn’t want more money going in the pot. So on the river, Player A jams all in for 85, Player B grabs his two stacks of red chips and walks away without ever truly folding. Dealer grabs his cards to muck them and Player A shows the rest of the table a missed flush draw and we all kind of got a laugh out of it.

But yeah, I’ve never seen a scenario where Player A’s black chip only partially plays on the turn and the rest is in play for the river. I talked to the floor about it a couple hours later and he basically admitted he screwed up the ruling.

all my life it was up to the players to pay attention to the stacks of others. very few times did anyone hide chips on purpose.

good dealers would look around before they sat down as they are responsible for the integrity of the table first and foremost. then the dealing of the cards.

generally players would ask in no limit if someone had bigger chips behind if they werent sure. that is part of the players responsibility.

Yeah, unfortunately many recreational 1-2 players don't pay attention to things like chip stacks and bigger chips. They play their cards and not much else

Why is that unfortunate?

I tried to wrap around my head how the floor came up with that ruling and think his reasoning was that on the turn, player B didn’t know about the black chip but now that he’s aware of it the chip should play on the river?

That’s one of the sad situations where the floor tries really hard to make right by everyone but in the process reveals how little understanding of the game he has.

I was kind of thinking there was a 'meet in the middle' ruling coming here when the tease was put out there.

1) Seat for each Player? Drinks/drink holders on the table?
2) Was either Player a reg?
3) Why do we have Black chips in play at 1/2, especially at a 200 max table?
4) Did Player 2 see any of the other re-buy-ins?
5) Were there more than the two 'previous' black chips on the table that other players had in their stacks?
6) Some Dealers will announce 'black in play' ... but that could've been at the first re-buy only and wouldn't apply if there was a push in there.

Even if the chip was hidden this is a 'warning spot' and the hand plays out with Player A all-in on the Turn. To me this is similar to a tournament spot where a player gets his own chips/chip colors mixed up and tosses out an oversized chip in a mis-clik spot. GL

Same kind of middle ruling you would get in the NFL in a situation that’s either a touchdown for team A or fumble through the end zone resulting in a touchback for team B and instead the refs decide for team A to retain possession with 1 & 10 at the 50 yard line.

Was player A left handed?

Are you suggesting something sinister?

In my experience Black does not look the same as white, red or green! Of course it would help if payers actually looked at the stacks and not the TV or cocktail lady or their phones.

I deal, after counting the rack and dealing, first hand I am absolutely checking out every players' stack to make sure they aren't hiding any chips. More often than not, it's a 1/3 noob who doesn't know any better and keeps a few green chips stacked behind his messily stacked 10-high red stacks, and I just politely inform him of the rule and why it's a rule.

Only time it ever gets by me is if it's some clown in the 1 or 9 seat with a few neatly stacked 20-high red stacks and some greens/blacks behind it blocked off from half of the tables' view. In these rare cases I'll make a bit of a scene when sternly telling the guy to move his green chips up front, because it very well could be an attempt at cheating and I want to make it known to everyone that he was hiding them.