Last week I've encountered a fun situation as the TD during a local Deaf Poker game. After I've decided, there was some heated debate, but the game continued.

The next day I made some research, pinged some pro players, reviewed our house rules and even studied the official Poker TDA rules. Everyone gave me a different answer, sigh.

So, I'm trying here on Reddit and hope some of you can shed some light in this fun situation. Allow me to tell the story and to add the questions I'm having:

1. Someone raises to 800 (from 200/400 preflop)
2. Next player B puts on 3,000 chips and says afterwards “I am bad with maths”
3. Next, player C seems surprised because of no clear verbal announcement while knowing that player B is a beginner. Asked player B: “Are you sure about this? — don't you want to say call or raise?”
4. Players started to complain. Some say, a clear verbal action must be always announced first. Some say, no, chips have already been placed on the table, hence too late to correct with a verbal announcement.

So, here is the big question: “What takes precedence when betting: chips or words?”

In relation to this situation, I've got more questions for understanding the rules better:

1. If you make a bet silently, no verbal announcement is required, right?
2. If you say something totally off-topic, like “Nice weather outside” and put chips on the table afterwards, which is the same as if no verbal announcement were made and the chips count as well, right?
3. But when you say call, but put a raise on the table, the word take precedence and the raise is invalid, right?
4. Or funnier, when you do the sign language sign for “phone” which means a call, but nobody understands, yet put a raise on the table, what counts?
5. In general, what verbal contents would exactly overcome any physical actions and which not?

Now, onto my research. First, here is the link to the latest TDA Poker rules at
https://www.pokertda.com/view-poker-tda-rules/

Article 40 says:

The interesting part is this sentence:
In unclear situations or where verbal and chips are contradictory, the TD will determine the bet based on the circumstances and Rule 1. See Illustration Addendum. See also Rule 57.

So, I checked Article 57:

Now I am a bit lost and going around in circles. It still doesn't answer my problem, what if the player puts chips but says, “I am bad with maths”. Or when you use a sign language nobody understands. Or say nice weather outside before putting chips. Does that mean, when you use anything verbal it must be clear + valid, or else the TD decides?

(I've also had another thought from a different direction. Since our local poker club is pretty social and beginners aren't likely to be angle shooting either, maybe we shouldn't be too serious about rules. That said, probably better to always double-check nicely after any unclear bets, this by always asking for a clear verbal announcement every time? But that might piss off some pros in our club, give rare angle shooters opportunities, and eat too much game time.)

Totally looking forward to your inputs.

Please, if you can, refer to official TDA rules. Many thanks!

I don't understand how "I'm bad with maths" can have any possible relationship to any bet. There doesn't seem to be anything ambiguous at all about his bet. He put out 3000 in chips, and then made an inconsequential comment. It is not as if someone could be so bad at math that he put together 3000 when he was just trying to call 800. I don't see how this didn't just end immediately with a raise to 3000. If he wanted to raise, 3000 is very reasonable, and if he wanted to call then it doesn't make any sense to put out 3000. And if he really can't tell the difference between 800 and 3000 then you shouldn't be taking his money.

There was no valid verbal declaration in this case. I’m bad at math is not a valid poker action. Had player B simultaneously said 2000 while pushing 3000 chips out, the bet amount is 2000. Player C can have zero affect on this. The bet was legally made and was 3000. Even if player B said he really was not sure and tried to change his bet, it is irrelevant — the 3000 bet was made and stands.

Verbal declarations are fine and can certainly help clarify actions, but those saying that a clear verbal declaration is necessary are just wrong. Silently pushing out chips constitutes a legal bet; no verbal is needed. There are situations where a verbal may be needed to allow the desired action, though. For example, in the given situation, had player B pushed out a single $5000 chip silently, that action would constitute a call, not a raise. A verbal declaration of raise accompanied by pushing out a single $5000 chip would be a raise to 5000. To raise to $3000 a verbal declaration of either raise 3000 or just 3000 would be needed.

Thank you guys!

Oh, ein Schwuchtel sagt es tut niemandem leid?

The only situation where this wouldn't be a raise is if there were no stakes in the game. If they are playing for anything such as money, or who buys dinner, or for reputation, this is always going to be a raise even if this is the guy's first hand of poker he's ever played.

Next player B puts on 3,000 chips and says afterwards “I am bad with maths”

I think you mean 'puts out', not 'puts on' but either way ..

There have been various threads discussing similar spots with mixed opinions. IMO a Player's first completed action is the overriding action. The variables that come into play are when a Player is making a physical betting action but 'completes' a verbal declaration before the physical OR pauses the physical action while making forward motion or when doing a cut/paste in the betting area.

Based on the above, the first completed action is the physical placing of 'multiple' chips in the betting area that total 3000. This is pretty much a 'Day 1' rule for Dealers. It's a raise with action now on the next Player.

Any glimpse of 'tricky' here comes into your room policies and 'culture' towards the Players. Player C may very well be commenting in that direction .. or they may very well want this to be a call only for their benefit. Either way the Dealer needs to get involved now for sure since it appears they didn't make any announcement once Player B 'acted'.

The fact that this is a tournament actually makes this spot easier IMO. As a TD/Floor you need to protect the interest of 'all' the tournament Players, not just those at this table. So you really need to lean on the rules in place. If this was a cash game, then I think the door is open to a little more leniency towards beginners.

We try to keep the Dealers out of the intent business, but a Dealer is also your 'salesman' when it comes to selling poker and poker in your room specifically. This is most certainly a teaching moment and I would hope that a Floor would come over with a more detailed explanation beyond 'It's a bet of 3000' and walk away.

We can post various rules all we want, but we can't decide the culture of a room we're not in. While you don't want to be wishy-washy in your rulings since an angling Reg may choose to take advantage of that somewhere down the line I do feel there's some room for 'discussion' when it comes to these spots. I actually applaud Player C .. even if it was derived from self-interest .. for slowing down the hand and saying something. Perhaps he already knew what the ruling would be, but by saying something we are now guaranteed to have an explanation via Dealer or Floor to Player B to hopefully prevent the issue the next time. GL