Tourney Misclick bet ruling (from WSOP) (2 Viewers)

upNdown

Royal Flush
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
23,903
Reaction score
40,201
Location
boston
This happened last night.
Final table, blinds are 200,000/400,000 with 400,000 bba. UTG has around 5.5 million. First to act, as he’s cutting out 2.5 million chips he announces “two hundred fifty thousand,” then pushes his chips forward, then corrects himself saying “I meant two point five million.”
FLOOR!!
Ruling?
 
I'd say it's a 2.5 million bet. He verbalized a bet that wasn't legal, which he then clarified. If he verbalized a legal bet then it would have had to stand regardless if he pushed out more or clarified a different amount later, but he didn't. Be interesting to see what the TDA posters say.
 
as he’s cutting out 2.5 million chips
Interesting one! I'd say as long as it's clear that he's cut out these chips for a bet, and that the chips cut out (and/or later pushed into the middle of the table) do actually total 2.5 million, (and the point that @Natskule made, that a bet size under the big blind isn't a valid option anyway), I could see how someone could easily mis-state a large numerical amount, and I would be OK if the floor ruled this to be a 2.5 million chip bet.
 
This happened last night.
Final table, blinds are 200,000/400,000 with 400,000 bba. UTG has around 5.5 million. First to act, as he’s cutting out 2.5 million chips he announces “two hundred fifty thousand,” then pushes his chips forward, then corrects himself saying “I meant two point five million.”
FLOOR!!
Ruling?
Hmmmm interesting! I gotta go with raise. We need to see everything in context: if he had said 2.5, we wouldnt blink. If he hadnt said anything, we wouldnt blink. But he says thousand because hes nervous. Its a raise in my eyes, the raise he named wouldnt even be a legal amount to bet.
 
1: Floor Decisions

The best interest of the game and fairness are top priorities in decision-making. Unusual circumstances occasionally dictate that common-sense decisions in the interest of fairness take priority over technical rules. Floor decisions are final.

40: Methods of Betting: Verbal and Chips

A: Bets are by verbal declaration and/or pushing out chips. If a player does both, whichever is first defines the bet. If simultaneous, a clear and reasonable verbal declaration takes precedence, otherwise the chips play. 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.

B: Verbal declarations may be general (“call”, “raise”), a specific amount only (“one thousand”) or both (“raise, one thousand”).

C: For all betting rules, declaring a specific amount only is the same as silently pushing out an equal amount. Ex: Declaring “two hundred” is the same as silently pushing out 200 in chips

43: Raise Amounts

A: A raise must be at least equal to the largest prior full bet or raise of the current betting round. A player who raises 50% or more of the largest prior bet but less than a minimum raise must make a full minimum raise. If less than 50% it is a call unless “raise” is first declared or the player is all-in (Rule 45-B). Declaring an amount or pushing out the same amount of chips is treated the same (Rule 40-C). Ex: NLHE, opening bet is 1000, verbally declaring “Fourteen hundred” or silently pushing out 1400 in chips are both calls unless raise is first declared. See Illustration Addendum.

B: Without other clarifying information, declaring raise and an amount is the total bet. Ex: A opens for 2000, B declares “Raise, eight thousand.” The total bet is 8000.

51: Binding Declarations / Undercalls in Turn

A: General verbal declarations in turn (such as “call” or “raise”) commit a player to the full current action. See Illustration Addendum

B: A player undercalls by declaring or pushing out less than the call amount without first declaring “call”. An undercall is a mandatory full call if made in turn facing 1) any bet heads-up or 2) the opening bet on any round multi-way. In other situations, TD’s discretion applies. The opening bet is the first chip bet of each betting round (not a check). In blind games the posted BB is the pre-flop opener. All-in buttons reduce undercall frequency (See Recommended Procedure 1). This rule governs when players must make a full call and when, at TDs discretion they may forfeit the amount of the intended undercall and fold (see Illustration Addendum). For underbets and underraises, see Rule 52.

C: If two or more undercalls occur in sequence, play backs up to the first undercaller who must correct his or her bet per Rule 51-B. The TD will determine how to treat hands of the remaining bettors based on the circumstances.

52: Incorrect Bets, Underbets and Underraises

A: In limit and no-limit, opening or raising less than the minimum legal amount is corrected anywhere on the current street (if on the river any time before showdown starts). Ex: NLHE 100-200, post-flop A opens for 600 and B raises to 1000 (a 200 underraise). C and D call, E folds then the error is noticed. Increase the bet to 1200 total for all bettors any time before the turn is dealt. After the turn the error stands. For undercalls, see Rule 51.

57: Non-Standard and Unclear Betting

Players use unofficial betting terms and gestures at their own risk. These may be interpreted to mean other than what the player intended. Also, if a declared bet can legally have multiple meanings, it will be ruled the highest reasonable amount that is less than or equal to the pot size* before the bet. Ex: NLHE 200-400, the pot totals less than 5000, player declares “I bet five.” With no other clarifying information, the bet is 500; if the pot totals 5000 or more, the bet is 5000. *The pot is the total of all prior bets including any bets in front of a player not yet pulled in. See Rules 2, 3, 40 and 42.

https://www.pokertda.com/view-poker-tda-rules/
 
Last edited:
Verbal is binding when said before he moves the chips in. Since his amount was too small, make it a call. Also a warning since this could be abused as an angle to get reactions.
Wouldnt this be obvious though if he already has 2.5 million cut out? Saying an amount below the BB then pushing a large stack out?

Whats the angle? Not rhetorical, trying to picture it. I cut out a big raise, say an amount smaller than the big blind, then push the raise out. I guess halfway through saying the 2.fiv- and I see someone getting ready toshove their stack, I say thousand to try and save the big bet Im pushing out?

Or I say a tiny amount, see someone perturbed and then shove the full amount I had cut out?
 
1: Floor Decisions

The best interest of the game and fairness are top priorities in decision-making. Unusual circumstances occasionally dictate that common-sense decisions in the interest of fairness take priority over technical rules. Floor decisions are final.

40: Methods of Betting: Verbal and Chips

A: Bets are by verbal declaration and/or pushing out chips. If a player does both, whichever is first defines the bet. If simultaneous, a clear and reasonable verbal declaration takes precedence, otherwise the chips play. 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.

B: Verbal declarations may be general (“call”, “raise”), a specific amount only (“one thousand”) or both (“raise, one thousand”).

C: For all betting rules, declaring a specific amount only is the same as silently pushing out an equal amount. Ex: Declaring “two hundred” is the same as silently pushing out 200 in chips

43: Raise Amounts

A: A raise must be at least equal to the largest prior full bet or raise of the current betting round. A player who raises 50% or more of the largest prior bet but less than a minimum raise must make a full minimum raise. If less than 50% it is a call unless “raise” is first declared or the player is all-in (Rule 45-B). Declaring an amount or pushing out the same amount of chips is treated the same (Rule 40-C). Ex: NLHE, opening bet is 1000, verbally declaring “Fourteen hundred” or silently pushing out 1400 in chips are both calls unless raise is first declared. See Illustration Addendum.

B: Without other clarifying information, declaring raise and an amount is the total bet. Ex: A opens for 2000, B declares “Raise, eight thousand.” The total bet is 8000.

51: Binding Declarations / Undercalls in Turn

A: General verbal declarations in turn (such as “call” or “raise”) commit a player to the full current action. See Illustration Addendum

B: A player undercalls by declaring or pushing out less than the call amount without first declaring “call”. An undercall is a mandatory full call if made in turn facing 1) any bet heads-up or 2) the opening bet on any round multi-way. In other situations, TD’s discretion applies. The opening bet is the first chip bet of each betting round (not a check). In blind games the posted BB is the pre-flop opener. All-in buttons reduce undercall frequency (See Recommended Procedure 1). This rule governs when players must make a full call and when, at TDs discretion they may forfeit the amount of the intended undercall and fold (see Illustration Addendum). For underbets and underraises, see Rule 52.

C: If two or more undercalls occur in sequence, play backs up to the first undercaller who must correct his or her bet per Rule 51-B. The TD will determine how to treat hands of the remaining bettors based on the circumstances.

52: Incorrect Bets, Underbets and Underraises

A: In limit and no-limit, opening or raising less than the minimum legal amount is corrected anywhere on the current street (if on the river any time before showdown starts). Ex: NLHE 100-200, post-flop A opens for 600 and B raises to 1000 (a 200 underraise). C and D call, E folds then the error is noticed. Increase the bet to 1200 total for all bettors any time before the turn is dealt. After the turn the error stands. For undercalls, see Rule 51.

57: Non-Standard and Unclear Betting

Players use unofficial betting terms and gestures at their own risk. These may be interpreted to mean other than what the player intended. Also, if a declared bet can legally have multiple meanings, it will be ruled the highest reasonable amount that is less than or equal to the pot size* before the bet. Ex: NLHE 200-400, the pot totals less than 5000, player declares “I bet five.” With no other clarifying information, the bet is 500; if the pot totals 5000 or more, the bet is 5000. *The pot is the total of all prior bets including any bets in front of a player not yet pulled in. See Rules 2, 3, 40 and 42.

https://www.pokertda.com/view-poker-tda-rules/
So which rule do we go with?

(Also I haven’t looked, but doesn’t the WSOP have their own rules? Or do they just have additional rules to the TDA?)
 
So which rule do we go with?

(Also I haven’t looked, but doesn’t the WSOP have their own rules? Or do they just have additional rules to the TDA?)
He announced first - so that’s his permanent action (rule 40)

Announced an under bet, which makes it a call (rule 52)

It’s ruled a call.

But, Rule 1 rules them all…. So like you said earlier - FLOOR!? :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
 
He announced first - so that’s his permanent action (rule 40)

Announced an under bet, which makes it a call (rule 52)

It’s ruled a call.

But, Rule 1 rules them all…. So like you said earlier - FLOOR!? :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
I believe floor went with 1

Floor didn’t cite any particular rule, but he ruled it a raise to 2.5 million, saying something to the effect that it was the only thing the player could have intended to do.
 
C: For all betting rules, declaring a specific amount only is the same as silently pushing out an equal amount. Ex: Declaring “two hundred” is the same as silently pushing out 200 in chips

this one sticks out to me as relevant. let's say you're in a tourney where the blinds start at 100/200, and you are now up to blinds being 25k/50k. you verbally declare "200" but haven't counted any chips yet - is that meant to be taken literally, or is the "thousand" implied? obviously the thousand is implied, and i don't think anyone would ever question it. even less so if you had already counted out the chips.

this situation is obviously different, but i do think clear intent should matter first in any potentially ambiguous situation, so the floor correctly decided 2.5m was the bet.
 
This happened last night.
Final table, blinds are 200,000/400,000 with 400,000 bba. UTG has around 5.5 million. First to act, as he’s cutting out 2.5 million chips he announces “two hundred fifty thousand,” then pushes his chips forward, then corrects himself saying “I meant two point five million.”
FLOOR!!
Ruling?
Floor may have some leeway to allow a correction depending on whether or not subsequent players have acted.

But if anyone has acted after the declaration I am going to say this is a call.
 
Floor may have some leeway to allow a correction depending on whether or not subsequent players have acted.

But if anyone has acted after the declaration I am going to say this is a call.
No, Nick Schulman was next, and I think he may have just called for the floor himself.
 
Wouldnt this be obvious though if he already has 2.5 million cut out? Saying an amount below the BB then pushing a large stack out?

Whats the angle? Not rhetorical, trying to picture it. I cut out a big raise, say an amount smaller than the big blind, then push the raise out. I guess halfway through saying the 2.fiv- and I see someone getting ready toshove their stack, I say thousand to try and save the big bet Im pushing out?

Or I say a tiny amount, see someone perturbed and then shove the full amount I had cut out?

This player likely was not angling, but rules exist so that you don’t have to speculate deeply about intent and motivations to make a quick and correct ruling.

Someone else might do the same thing with bad intent.

Saying one number while pushing out a much larger stack could get a visible reaction to the non-binding bigger amount.

Or even an instantmuck before the “mistake” got corrected.
 
No, Nick Schulman was next, and I think he may have just called for the floor himself.
Good on Shulman, I think that's the best chance for the bet to be ruled what was intended. Whenever it is possible to find the intended action without damaging anyone, I think that is in the best interest of the game.
 
This happened last night.
Final table, blinds are 200,000/400,000 with 400,000 bba. UTG has around 5.5 million. First to act, as he’s cutting out 2.5 million chips he announces “two hundred fifty thousand,” then pushes his chips forward, then corrects himself saying “I meant two point five million.”
FLOOR!!
Ruling?
I tried to cheat and find a story, but my Google fu was not up to the task.
 
Good on Shulman, I think that's the best chance for the bet to be ruled what was intended. Whenever it is possible to find the intended action without damaging anyone, I think that is in the best interest of the game.
Yeah it was interesting because the kid knew he’d screwed up and he was prepared to just accept that it would be a limp. But while they were waiting, he asked Nick what he thought the ruling would be, and he said he didn’t know, but sometimes they do make rulings based on intention.

This was the $25k NLHE 8-handed, by the way. It’s up on pokergo now, but I don’t have a timestamp or anything.
 
1: Floor Decisions

The best interest of the game and fairness are top priorities in decision-making. Unusual circumstances occasionally dictate that common-sense decisions in the interest of fairness take priority over technical rules. Floor decisions are final.
First, thank you Lou, for researching and tracking down the applicable rule sections that might apply. (I wish I was retired)

I like the way this rule is worded: "The best interest of the game and fairness are top priorities in decision-making. Unusual circumstances occasionally dictate that common-sense decisions in the interest of fairness take priority over technical rules."

I think Rule #1 would be a good starting rule for a home game rule sheet.
 
First, thank you Lou, for researching and tracking down the applicable rule sections that might apply. (I wish I was retired)

I like the way this rule is worded: "The best interest of the game and fairness are top priorities in decision-making. Unusual circumstances occasionally dictate that common-sense decisions in the interest of fairness take priority over technical rules."

I think Rule #1 would be a good starting rule for a home game rule sheet.
#1 :)
IMG_1307.jpeg
 
WSOP makes their own rules

43: Raise Amounts

A: A raise must be at least equal to the largest prior full bet or raise of the current betting round. A player who raises 50% or more of the largest prior bet but less than a minimum raise must make a full minimum raise. If less than 50% it is a call unless “raise” is first declared or the player is all-in (Rule 45-B). Declaring an amount or pushing out the same amount of chips is treated the same (Rule 40-C). Ex: NLHE, opening bet is 1000, verbally declaring “Fourteen hundred” or silently pushing out 1400 in chips are both calls unless raise is first declared. See Illustration Addendum.

B: Without other clarifying information, declaring raise and an amount is the total bet. Ex: A opens for 2000, B declares “Raise, eight thousand.” The total bet is 8000.

This happened in one of the daily deepstacks at Horseshoe last week, if you played here you know the colors are an abomination (same as last year). Whoever thought 1k pastel yellow and 5k pastel peach are good idea needs to be fired. I have 20/15 vision and I still need to double check these chips.

Player was either not paying attention or couldn't tell what the bet before him was because the colors suck, put out a stack which turned out to be 50% of a min raise without saying anything. Most of us thought that equated to a min raise but the dealer called floor to clarify. Ruling was it's not a full legal size raise so it was just a call. I don't remember if the player intended to call or raise.

I asked the floor about this exact 50% rule. He repeated, not a full legal size raise so it's just a call. Which I followed up with "what if he pushed in a stack 100 short of a min raise with the clear intent of min raising but miscounted and didn't verbalize?" Same answer again, not a full legal size raise so it's just a call.

New rule change for this year's WSOP.
Player with the nuts on the river and last to act is no longer required to bet their hand.

I asked why because that allows some form of collusion, like not stacking your friends/horses if you happen to be on the same table (rare but possible). Said he doesn't know, that's just what he was told. Someone else at the table asked if that's in the new TDA rules to which the reply was that the WSOP makes their own rules, they don't have to go with the TDA
 
WSOP makes their own rules



This happened in one of the daily deepstacks at Horseshoe last week, if you played here you know the colors are an abomination (same as last year). Whoever thought 1k pastel yellow and 5k pastel peach are good idea needs to be fired. I have 20/15 vision and I still need to double check these chips.

Player was either not paying attention or couldn't tell what the bet before him was because the colors suck, put out a stack which turned out to be 50% of a min raise without saying anything. Most of us thought that equated to a min raise but the dealer called floor to clarify. Ruling was it's not a full legal size raise so it was just a call. I don't remember if the player intended to call or raise.

I asked the floor about this exact 50% rule. He repeated, not a full legal size raise so it's just a call. Which I followed up with "what if he pushed in a stack 100 short of a min raise with the clear intent of min raising but miscounted and didn't verbalize?" Same answer again, not a full legal size raise so it's just a call.

New rule change for this year's WSOP.
Player with the nuts on the river and last to act is no longer required to bet their hand.

I asked why because that allows some form of collusion, like not stacking your friends/horses if you happen to be on the same table (rare but possible). Said he doesn't know, that's just what he was told. Someone else at the table asked if that's in the new TDA rules to which the reply was that the WSOP makes their own rules, they don't have to go with the TDA
Interesting (but not shocking) that you saw a different ruling for a similar situation.
I wonder if it’s easier (or simply just more worth consideration) to establish intent at a million dollar final table.
 
If there’s considerable action before or after him, this ruling is going to be a call a lot of the times.

He is very fortunate that in this case, it possible for the floor manager to go with the logical decision and rule it 2.5 mil raise
 
Last edited:
Interesting (but not shocking) that you saw a different ruling for a similar situation.
I wonder if it’s easier (or simply just more worth consideration) to establish intent at a million dollar final table.
Similar but different. In the situation you described, he verbalized 250k which isn't even a legal call so I think there's grounds to say that verbalized action can be disregarded. The motion of pushing 2.5m chips in on the other hand well over a min raise.

In the situation I described, no verbalization and enough chips pushed in for a call but not enough for a full min raise.


So which rule do we go with?

(Also I haven’t looked, but doesn’t the WSOP have their own rules? Or do they just have additional rules to the TDA?)
The reason I brought it up was to answer your question, WSOP makes their own rules. It's mostly based on the TDA but I've already found those two differences in 4 days of playing.
 
Per TDA rules, his verbalized amount is considered a call. Per WSOP rules, it's less clear.... which means it might get ruled either way, pending circumstances, any prior or subsequent action, and who is making the decision.

Personally, I prefer the more black-and-white approach of the TDA rule. No confusion or dealing with trying to establish "intent".
 
This is just a call,

If he would have said "raise 250.000" then I would rule it a min raise

Verbal overwrites the chip stack pushed forward
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom