During the first event, I was short-stacked with 3 tables left (thinly veiled brag), and open pushed from CO. I verbally declared all-in, then arranged my chips to give SB a count. I said it was 8900 and SB decided to call. BB called as well.

As the dealer gathered the chips, he realized that my count was off by 5000 (I had miscalculated my stack of 500 chips--it was late). It turns out I had 13900, not 8900. The SB than says he would not have called had he known, but of course now he has the extra information that the BB is likely coming along.

The floor was called and once it was explained, the SB was allowed to take his money out of the pot.

I did not care either way. I would have been content to get it heads up or have a chance to triple up. But I am wondering if this was the correct ruling, and if not, what should the ruling have been.

Ultimately, I guess it was the dealer's fault for not getting his own count of my chips and relying on what I said. But I guess he was as tired as I was.

You didnt know if you had 9k or 14k

I knew what I had. For some reason I short-circuited when I counted it out. Plus at that point a 5000 chip difference was less then the combined size of the blinds and antes.

once u verbally declare all-in it don't matter if u have a million chips or not

I know. The issue isn't my chips or action. It's about what happened after I went all-in and what the ruling is regarding the small blind.

Bad ruling. Once there is action after his then it should stand. Its his responsibility to ask for a dealer count.

I had a similar situation at last year's WSOP, but was in your opponent's shoes. It was a significant pot and while I knew I was behind I thought I had the proper odds based on the dealer count. However, when it turned out he had significantly more chips (I think she said 10k and it was really 18k or something like that).

I called the floor over and he decided since I verbalized "call" and pushed out 10k, those chips would have to stay in the pot. He gave me the option of saving the extra 10k by folding, but I chose to call since it was now only another 10k or so. It sucked because I would have never called 20k...

I left out the details of the hand because I didn't want it to sound like a veiled bad beat story. But I had A7o, and with an M of about 2. As it happened, the BB had A7 as well, but four clubs on the board made me a flush. The ruling cost me some chips, but I was just as happy not to have to beat two hands. I'm pretty sure it didn't affect my overall result.

Incidentally, this was only the second large-field tourney I've ever played in, and the first time I'd gotten that deep. It is amazing how short the stacks were at that crucial stage, and even more amazed at how many players were still in limp/fold and call/fold mode. In that sense, it was not much different from the weekly $100 buy in/100 player tourney I play in at my local B&M.

Wow! Were you born that cool or did you become that way later in life?

This is a horrible ruling that I am seeing more and more in places where they don't understand poker. Generally if there is a gross misunderstanding as to the size of the bet you are facing you can reconsider your action when you become aware of the actual bet size. The case in the OP is more complicated because of the action behind. In the OP I would be inclined to make the call stand because of the action behind.

One detail was omitted that muddies the water even more in the situation here at the Beau. The dealer was asked, and also gave the incorrect amount.

Care to offer an opinion Randy? I think there are multiple viable solutions to that floor call. There is no perfect call in that spot. Especially when the representative of the casino (dealer) offers bad information to the caller.

Johnny is correct. The dealer, trusting my count, did give the player the incorrect number.

BTW, I didn't post this as a complaint or a criticism of the decision or of the way the tournament was run. I don't have anywhere near enough large field tourney experience to make any judgments. I was just curious as to what the proper course of action is/should be.

This is actually how it's handled in most places, and IMO, the most fair way to do it.

The SB should of asked for a count from the dealer, as it was the SB's responsiblity to make sure their information was accurate.

FWIW, I've had the same short circuit myself before, after playing several hours, I thought I had more than I really had, when I went all in. This mostly due to the fact they had just recently colored up the chips, and I miscounted because I wasn't used to the new colors.

The others didn't ask for a physical count, but I did have 2 callers.

They check the flop, but then one guy went all in on his bottom pair on the turn.

It forced the guy with pocket 9's out of the pot as there was a king and Queen on the board as well as a 3.

I get my 10 on the turn (I had Ace/10 suited, and even with my miscounted chips, was short stacked, which is why I went all in).

Then the river was a 9. Had not the other guy pushed all in on bottom pair, I would of been out of the tourney (of course the guy with the pocket 9's was furious, and the other guy just couldn't get why what he did was wrong ... but I made sure to thank him for protecting my hand like that ).

When the dealer counted down my chips it was then discovered I had less than I had verbally said, to which 2 others said they would of called me hand they of known that, and one said he had a King with a bad kicker, when he folded it.

Can someone explain to me why you can ask the dealer to count the chips of an all in, but he's not allowed to tell you what's in the pot?

Because tracking the pot is the players' responsibility, but the dealer (as de facto referee) should be confirming bet amounts on all in bets by counting the player's stack when requested. You have a right to know what size bet you are facing.

There is no good solution in that spot. I can live with either letting him take the chips out or making him leave the chips in. How was the bet arranged. Since the dealer gave the wrong amount also I am guessing a high denomination chip wasn't easily visible. I think taking the call back if a high denomination chip is visible is fine; I am more inclined to say it remains a call if the player could have easily seen the amount of the bet. Also where were the players sitting? If it is a 30 year old with good eyesite sitting right next to the bettor I would be more inclined to make it a call and if it is an 80 year old at the opposite end of the table I would be more inclined to let him withdraw it. This is a situation where you really need to be there to make a good decision. It is also close enough that someone is going to be upset with the decision.

Well here is the rule that most places have some version of on the book.
I have never been in a room that had an experienced floor staff that didn't use some version of the above rule. Note: If you opened a poker room in 1994 with no experience and have never had someone that had worked in poker teach you about these things you still have almost no experience. The only reason I mention this is one of our competitors where I am now has been having poker tournaments for a long time, but they8 have been doing things wrong since the mid 90s and continue to do things wrong.

There's a contradiction in your statement and Johnny's. He wrote that the dealer did count your chips and came up with the wrong amount too, although it seems pretty hard to believe that could happen on the same hand.

The dealer did not physically handle my chips to get a count, although I did arrange them out beyond the betting line. Had the dealer repeated my action, he likely would have caught my error.

Am I wrong in assuming that situations likes these are common in big field tourneys where players and dealers are doing 12+ hour shifts?

I bounced the OP around a little bit. The concensous is that the floor got it right at the time.

Is there an official poker rule book? Is this situation
covered? That's the problem. There's no standard book
for TDs to reference. Every TD rules as he sees fit.