Floor was called and said $50 was going to have to stand at that point.

I was just curious. At that point there’s nothing else the floor can do. Doesn’t make too much sense to ask villain if he wants to pay another $50 after seeing the winning hand.

We could say that your friend paid $50 for this lesson but OTOH villain might have folded to a $100 bet. So maybe the misunderstanding won him an extra $50.

That would be too easy.

Or as we say in German:
(Both my dad and my brother have engineering degrees and are used to me making fun of them)

I've had chips fall or roll back more than once.

Each time I push them back out very quickly - and since my intent was obvious, nobody ever questioned my total bet.

In this case though there are several problems:

The first problem is that the person making the bet didn't get the chips back out there before the dealer said anything.

The second is obviously that the dealer called it a $50 bet. It would have made more sense if he had called it a $100 bet since the chips had crossed the line and were not touching the player's hand.

The third problem is that the person who tried to bet $100 didn't stop the action before the other player called.

The fourth problem is that the Floor wasn't called before the other player exposed his hand.

But the most important problem is that if once the dealer says $50 and the other player calls, any attempt to make the bet $100 could result in not getting the original $50 call. If the floor comes over and decides that the $50 bet is actually $100 then the player who called the $50 bet will in all likelihood be allowed to take back his $50 bet and then decide whether to fold or call $100. And there will likely be tells regarding whether the $100 bet was from strength or not.

So had it played out as it did I would have taken the $50 and learned a $50 lesson.

I always thought with a betting line anything you brought over the line was in the pot. I guess it’s house rules dependent.

I had the same thing happen the other day I went to bet $20 and a $5 bounced back and I was still allowed to bet $20. However I don’t think they play betting line where this was it’s just interesting how poker rulings can vary by place.

I guess this thread serves as a friendly reminder to always place the chips in the pot instead of throwing them. I’m sure dealers prefer not chasing thrown chips as well.

It can probably be described by region. I have never played in card room where that is the rule in cash games. Most of my play has been in New England and Nevada.

The OP is a case of the dealer being wrong, not the house rule being different. Your experience is standard.

The thing with betting lines is that many rooms use table felt designs that have an oval line that goes around the table. The felt may be a different color inside the oval than outside. But it may or may not be an actual betting line. When they arent actual betting lines that affect whether a bet has been made or not, they are often referred to as courtesy lines. It guides players where to place their bets so that everyone can see them easily, and to help out the dealer by putting the chips where they can reach them more easily.

So with an actual betting line, chips must cross the line to be considered bet. With a "hard" betting line all chips brought across the line must play. With a "soft" betting line, you can bring a stack of chips out in your hand, cut out a bet, and then return the remaining chips to your stack. And with a courtesy line, forward motion determines whether a bet has been made. So if you move chips forward, whether you stop the chips just short of the line or just over doesnt matter. The courtesy line has no affect on the action.

This is a tough spot, because calling for the floor to get the bet to change to 100 just looks so strong. The player might just fold after rolling back the action. Otoh if you’re bluffing you might as well try to call the floor.

I would take it as a lesson in not throwing chips around.

this is pretty common and the player is always allowed to bet what he initially was betting in his forward motion so $100. dealer's kinda dumb and creating issues when he doesn't know basic rules but can be stopped pretty easily by saying the bet should be 100 before action happens and it becomes an issue. Once a lot of action happens like the dealer calling the bet $50 without anyone saying anything and the player calling $50 it becomes a floor decision on what he thinks is fair

not here
If he had immediately pushed those other two greens over the line the 100 probably would have stood.

Once there is a call and hands tabled it's way too late to speak up.

Sounds like the dealer looked up and saw two chips over the line with two behind the line.

I don't think I've ever played anywhere that used the betting line.

TCH Austin when they first opened used one but has since changed to forward motion…Dumbos casinos are forward motion, and yeah they player betting has to be responsible for saying something once the chips roll back otherwise it could set up an angle where the bettor says the other 2 chips fell out and were not meant to be a part of the bet…

If he’s bluffing he doesn’t say anything and loses $50. As floor I’m not allowing this free roll. Horrible decision by dealer

It's possible the dealer's attention was elsewhere and all he saw was the $50 bet.

The time to try and fix it was right away when the dealer said "it's 50"
One the opponent calls 50, nothing is said and the hand is tabled nothing can be done.

Did this happen to be at Winstar?
I ask because this happened this last weekend at my table and the dealer called all four chips the bet due to forward action (it wasn't really an issue for either player).
After the hand the dealer said that this had happened before and had caused a debate at the time of what the bet actually was.

This is $100. There's no reason to call the floor and anyone who raises a stink is either shooting an angle or dumb.

10 or 15 years ago at Winstar I think someone in charge of the dealers made a big fuss about string bets and it got interpreted badly, and as a result, the casino went through a period of extreme rules nittery concerning bets. Like, you're pushing multiple stacks forward at once, and a couple chips fall off the top of the stacks as you are moving them forward: the chips that fell off are not part of the bet. Or you simultaneously push a stack forward in each hand, but one hand crosses the non-binding bet line before the other: the second stack is not part of the bet. And as in the OP, you toss a few chips out, and one or two roll away or bounce back: the bouncers are not part of the bet!

It was stupid. I would be happy to hear they have become sane and stopped enforcing this kind of foolishness!

I also find it slightly dumb that someone can push in a stack of hundreds or thousands and then try to put their last remaining $5 chip in (like maybe it was being used as a card protector for example), but have it called a string bet if they didn't say "all in." Obviously it *is* a string bet, but who cares? Yeah yeah, slippery slope, judgement calls, just say "all in" and remove any doubt, etc., so I'm not grouping this one in with the ones above... but it is still a little silly.

I've seen dealers declare a string bet when chips that were clearly intended as a bet, but bounced, or fell off the stack. While I didn't say anything at the time, I did talk to the floor about it after a bit. The floor's response was: "that's harsh. I'll talk to the dealer".

If it happens in the future, I'll speak up.

If the player doesn't push those extra chips over the line
after they fall, I could see a dealer not including them in the bet.

Dealers aren't supposed to be in the intent business. And since we've pretty much eliminated hard betting lines we now lean on forward motion. Common sense pretty much tells you what a Player is trying to move forward .. but since a Player may or may not be 'good' at moving chips forward it may be held against them? Silly of course.

Obv if we would just verbalize our action none of this matters .. and we also have to rely on a Player to 'help' the Dealer by expressing an action should we be not so smooth with it's execution. In this case here IMO most Players would quickly declare 100 or at least be scrambling after the two renegade chips in an effort to get them into the betting area.

OP states that V acted too quickly for this to happen, well it could be. Get a ruling and see how it goes. Could go one way or the other depending on how things are explained to the Floor and the room 'rules'.

The 'hard' rules are there to protect the game, but common sense should be used in the marginal spots. Problem is one person's common sense is not the others .. at times. GL

So, the question is, who is being penalized by rulings like this? From what I've seen it's almost exclusively the casual (and bad) players. These are the people we absolutely want playing. In short, prune-faced, tight sphincter rules like were talking about that go against clear intent hurt the game by penalizing casual players.