I addressed why you put the chips out for the camera. If someone verbally says call, then tries to claim he didn't, the camera doesn't record audio. If he puts out chips, even if not the exact amount of the call, there is clear evidence supporting a dealer saying that the player called, so that he can be made to put in the rest of the money if it is not enough.

The camera is not confused because it does not make decisions in a vacuum. The floor has a story and asks observation to verify it. What are they going to verify? That a call was made? That's pretty easy. That the correct amount of chips were put in the pot? Well, the dealer should be breaking down stacks at some point. Maybe not at that very moment, but at some time before the pot is pushed.

IMO, the idea that putting out a stack to call that is smaller than the bet is something that might confuse the camera is a stupid idea. I don't think it is a valid concern that requires dealers to immediately make sure that the correct number of chips are out there.

You can still claim a gross misunderstanding. Also it is well document d here that many places won’t enforce the single chip as a call without verbalizing a call so I am still not careful convinced any room has that as a for the cameras rule

No he cannot be forced to put anything in. Whether no chips or one chip was put in the house will not force you to put more in. They can and may penalize you with a ban until
You do pay. But if the dealer insists you said call and the floor backs him it is just as binding

Also the issu isn’t really that to few chips confuses the camera for a all it is the single stack or single valid bet chip pushed in as an all in. We are saying that just the confirmed verbal call or all in is at least as clear if not more so

Then push zero chips. Give me one good reason to push out only some chips and I promise I will give you a better reason not to.

i always ask "is that a call" before turning my hand over unless i've played with that person a lot and know they aren't a scumbag

And by putting out $100 in chips when facing an all in for $1700 you could try to freeroll the other 1600 by saying you thought the bet was 100. Don't do it. Ever. Period.

Or by saying all in and only pushing out 100 of your 1700 stack you could freeroll the other 1600 when your opponent has earbuds in and thinks the bet is 100. He says call. You win, you expect him to pony up the full amount. You lose, he only expects to get the 100 and you keep quiet and hope the dealer and floor make a poor decision if they even are asked to. Don't do it. Ever. Period.

What rule? The rule I believe you are referring to is only valid if it is heads up or the opening bet of the round. Any other situation could give the calling player the opportunity to back out of the full amount.

If he has earbuds in and can't follow the action, he deserves to get freerolled.

FYP and really?

Not really. Plus what if he is deaf? Still deserves it?

If a player is hurting the game due to earbuds then address that. Don't start encouraging angles. That is a poor plan in the long run.

The traditional rule has been:
notice there are some exceptions where a player may be released from his call I acknowledged those exist but they are limited exceptions ..... they basically involve misunderstandings.....so its not like a player may through in a single chip and not be held to the call simply because a single chip is not a full call....

The language you refer to about opening bets and heads up action comes from the TDA rule and the TDA ryule notes those as times where their is no discretion and the call must be comppleted ..... but that other situations are not "not binding" they are subject to TD discretion and I would contend that the discretion to let the player out of the call should rarely be used and only in cases where it is clear their was a misunderstanding and that it will result in no prejudice to other players to put the player back into his preaction position.

And when we have argued about this before even you have said you would hold a player who called with a single chip to a call if you thought his intention was to call the full bet.

I know I was talking about the TDA version, but it is the only version that actually goes into any detail about when a call is binding in these types of cases. RRoP's version allows people to use avenues to escape a call when they completely intended to call and I think it is BS.

And I still would, but you say there are limited exceptions like they are very minimal. I disagree that is the case. There may not be many but they are certainly not limited. They will generally be very expensive for one of the parties involved as well.

heads up. Seat 10 bets all in and seat 1 tosses a redbird in. Seat 10 exposes his hand and seat 1 sees the nuts and now it becomes "whoa wait a minute, why are you showing your hand". Well he's all in and you just called. "I didn't know he was all in. I couldn't see around you. I thought he checked and I was betting $5."

3 ways. 1 bets $18. 2 says "all in". 3 tosses in a $25 chip. 1 folds and 2 exposes hand. Same thing... 3 sees the nuts and blah blah blah.

heads up. OTR A says all in and pushes out 100. B tosses in a $5 chip, sees he's beat and pushes out 100 to pay the bet. Dealer says it was all in. B goes ballistic.

We may feel pretty certain that this guy is trying to get out of a call that he intended to make, but because of this stupid ass rule we now have a serious judgment call to make. My take is to make calling with one chip not an accepted action and then we never have to make this call again. What is so hard to handle about that? Is it that important that we are allowed to be cool and toss in one chip?

It's not about being cool. It's about having some degree of common Sense and consistency. If an undercall is not a call then putting out $95 when facing a bet of $100 should not be a call.

If you want to tell people not to do it... That's fine with me. But when they do it they should be bound to the call.

Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk

The rooms I play in most have an All-in disc the dealer tosses out to indicate an all in. Is that common everywhere nowadays? That sort of eliminates the problem. If someone goes all in and the dealer doesn’t hear it, then it’s the bettor’s fault for not being clear.

If the bet is clear to the dealer, and he tosses out the disc, a player has no excuse for not being aware of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fresh off the boat ...
'Head phone/phone staring' 2-5 player straddles UTG. (He is slowing the game down)
UTG+1 'always' min raises to 15

BB says all-in while putting out 2 reds
Dealer points at UTG who 'finally' looks right and tosses out a single red.

All-in or misunderstood action? GL

PS .. For effect, we'll just say that the Dealer announced the all-in.

FYP

Seriously. Just get rid of it already.