Cash Game Weird situation in cash game (1 Viewer)

[Budha]

Did he mean it as a raise to $25? I think everyone agrees this is not viable. If he was just moving SB's chip in, his one chip without verbalization makes it a call.

OK, I’m totally confused now. Based on this, if I’m in a hand, the action to me is $2 and I put in a single $100 chip with no verbalization.

Is that a call for $2?

I’m not a rule’s dictionary, but that feels like a raise to me…?

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

OK, I’m totally confused now. Based on this, if I’m in a hand, the action to me is $2 and I put in a single $100 chip with no verbalization.

Is that a call for $2?

I’m not a rule’s dictionary, but that feels like a raise to me…?

There's a million threads on it, but that's a call in many scenarios. One chip rule. Always verbalize!

(Didn't mean the million thread parts rudely, just to say I don't have the specific rules in front of me and people argue all the time about the very specifics)

 

[JustinInMN]

Why do you disagree? Because the player thought he was putting two chips in the pot? Too bad, pay attention or verbalize your action.

It's not just because the raiser thought he put two chips in, but the small blind I think very legitimately thought this as well. Your suggestion to retroactively apply the one chip rule after small blind folds his hand on a reasonable assumption the raise was to $26 supremely damages the small blind more than anyone else in the hand.

 

[CraigT78]

It's $26 to go.

Play pot limit and this isn't a problem because $25 or $26 isn't a legal bet.

It's $4 to go.

 

[JustinInMN]

OK, I’m totally confused now. Based on this, if I’m in a hand, the action to me is $2 and I put in a single $100 chip with no verbalization.

Is that a call for $2?

This is 100% a call for $2. Any single chip when facing a bet is a call (and a request for change) unless the player verbalizes an amount constituting a raise.

(Edit to add, if this happens in a live 1-2 game, a dealer is usually going to grab $100 in fives right away out of his well and make change leaving one $5 chip in the pot and the player would pull the other $95 into his stack. This is still a call and if the player ends up owed $3 from the pot when he scoops the bets, he will make that change then.)

 

[Budha]

There's a million threads on it, but that's a call in many scenarios. One chip rule. Always verbalize!

(Didn't mean the million thread parts rudely, just to say I don't have the specific rules in front of me and people argue all the time about the very specifics)

Thanks. I seem to recall something along the lines of a single chip rule. But it’s not something that comes up frequently in any of my games.

I agree, verbalize everything - avoids confusion and controversy.

 

[WedgeRock]

The button had a $25 chips in his hand just prior to action on him. Unless he announced raise, putting just that $25 chips in the pot is a call. Everyone is with me on that, right?

So why does mistakenly picking up someone else's chip change things?

 

[WedgeRock]

What if HJ kinda got splashy and threw his chips in the pot, but one rolled towards button. If button picks up that chip and throws it back in the pot with his $25, is that a raise? If not, is the difference that button believed the SB $1 was button's chip in the OP and not someone else's chip like in this hypothetical?

How can we get into button's mind on who he thought the $1 belonged to?

Y'all cray, cray.

BTW, SB gets to rochambeau the dealer for announcing the action wrong, causing him to fold. Then the whole table and anyone else (next table, waitress, floor) that heard SB say he would've made aces full gets to rochambeau SB for his sad sack story.

 

[CraigT78]

why does mistakenly picking up someone else's chip change things

Because he now has two chips, and by definition the "one chip" rule cannot apply.

 

[JustinInMN]

The button had a $25 chips in his hand just prior to action on him. Unless he announced raise, putting just that $25 chips in the pot is a call. Everyone is with me on that, right?

So why does mistakenly picking up someone else's chip change things?

Because to everyone that sees two chips go into the pot, very rightfully assumes $26 is the accurate amount of the action. That's the overriding factor here, not some weird application of the one chip rule.

I get the feeling your position on this is to make sure the button is punished for this mistake, which he may not have been aware of at the time of the action. But I can't overlook ensuring the raiser is punished makes severe collateral damage out of the small blind. Changing the action after the small blind folds, punishes the small blind even more harshly for making no mistake at all other than not realizing the small blind is gone after folding.

 

[JustinInMN]

What if HJ kinda got splashy and threw his chips in the pot, but one rolled towards button. If button picks up that chip and throws it back in the pot with his $25, is that a raise? If not, is the difference that button believed the SB $1 was button's chip in the OP and not someone else's chip like in this hypothetical?

If nobody caught that the chip rolled from the HJ's bet to the button an puts it in front of himself with a $25 chip, I would say that's a raise. If he's throwing the chip back to the HJ's bet because he knows where it belongs and then just puts a single $25 chip in front of himself, that's a call.

 

[WedgeRock]

I get the feeling your position on this is to make sure the button is punished for this mistake, which he may not have been aware of at the time of the action.

That assumption would be wrong. I. Fact, I'm assuming button made an honest mistake, otherwise, I think the OP would say button in an angler.

The best ruling, IMO, is not result oriented. It is done for the right reasons, so when it is applied again to the same situation, the results are predictable.

 

[WedgeRock]

Because he now has two chips, and by definition the "one chip" rule cannot apply.

Got it. So whenever I want to angle, steal a chip (from my neighbor, from the pot, wherever) and throw it in.

After I get a reaction, if I want to raise I say I thought it was my chip. If I want to call, I say I knew it wasn't my chip.

When dealer announces "Raise to $26," what do you do when the button says, "No, that was my neighbor's chip...it rolled by me and I was just putting it forward so it doesn't get missed. I intended to call, but I don't have change."

You're going to force the button to bet with someone else's chip?

 

[Jimulacrum]

Bottom line for me about this whole scenario is that it isn't addressed directly in TDA.

There are potentially relevant rules (e.g., one-chip rule), but they don't apply cleanly because the rules don't have a stipulation for "accidentally grabbed opponent's chip and raised with it." There's no by-the-book ruling to make, and there's little to no meaningful threat of an angle.

In other words, it's a "Rule #1" case. Through that lens, we should honor the player's intent, which was pretty clearly to raise; he even followed the step of picking up the posted chip and putting it forward with his additional big chip, as dumb as it all was.

Let it be a raise to $26, make button make SB whole for the $1, and move forward.

 

[Jimulacrum]

Got it. So whenever I want to angle, steal a chip (from my neighbor, from the pot, wherever) and throw it in.

After I get a reaction, if I want to raise I say I thought it was my chip. If I want to call, I say I knew it wasn't my chip.

When dealer announces "Raise to $26," what do you do when the button says, "No, that was my neighbor's chip...it rolled by me and I was just putting it forward so it doesn't get missed. I intended to call, but I don't have change."

You're going to force the button to bet with someone else's chip?

This is one of those things that if it happens just once, there's no real reason to believe it's an angle.

If it happens twice, you should begin to suspect that it's an angle.

If it happens more than twice, pick up his chips and blacklist him.

But here, it only happened once.

 

[Frogzilla]

Got it. So whenever I want to angle, steal a chip (from my neighbor, from the pot, wherever) and throw it in.

After I get a reaction, if I want to raise I say I thought it was my chip. If I want to call, I say I knew it wasn't my chip.

When dealer announces "Raise to $26," what do you do when the button says, "No, that was my neighbor's chip...it rolled by me and I was just putting it forward so it doesn't get missed. I intended to call, but I don't have change."

You're going to force the button to bet with someone else's chip?

There is what the rule is, and what the rule should be. The rule is that it’s a raise to $26 under the multiple chip rule ($25 is sufficient to call so $26 must be a raise).

As for what the rule should be, you’re making a great argument for why it’s good that this is a binding raise to $26 and not maybe a raise and maybe a call depending on whose $1 it is.

 

[CraigT78]

Got it. So whenever I want to angle, steal a chip (from my neighbor, from the pot, wherever) and throw it in.

After I get a reaction, if I want to raise I say I thought it was my chip. If I want to call, I say I knew it wasn't my chip.

When dealer announces "Raise to $26," what do you do when the button says, "No, that was my neighbor's chip...it rolled by me and I was just putting it forward so it doesn't get missed. I intended to call, but I don't have change."

You're going to force the button to bet with someone else's chip?

No, I'm going to tell the player to give the $1 back, but enforce the raise.

If you want to angle into betting $26 into a $3 pot, I'll enforce that angle all day.

 

[WedgeRock]

No, I'm going to tell the player to give the $1 back, but enforce the raise.

But the basis for your ruling is that he threw in two chips, so it's okay to bet with someone else's chip.

And when he protests that he did not intend to raise, he was just cleaning up the bets for the inattentive dealer, that's why he only grabbed one $25 from his stack, you're going to force him to go back to his stack and make his bet 13x, even though he says he only intended to call.

 

[JustinInMN]

When dealer announces "Raise to $26," what do you do when the button says, "No, that was my neighbor's chip...it rolled by me and I was just putting it forward so it doesn't get missed. I intended to call, but I don't have change."

You're going to force the button to bet with someone else's chip?

The big difference in this scenario is the button has stopped the action before small blind acts. If that takes place then everything can be corrected and the button can call and the small blind can call and no one is damaged.

But since the original post states the chips were "placed together" I would interpret that to mean in a place where the button would place his bets. Meaning he isn't putting that chip in the pot to return it to the small blind. He is betting it, and the interpretation of everyone yet to act would naturally be this is $26.

So yes, he is betting with someone else's chip, I don't mind amount forcing that the amount stands, even if it's later discovered it wasn't his chip. He certainly thought it was his own, so I don't think he would have any qualms about the amount. And if someone points out what happened, if the guy isn't shooting an angle, he's going to replace the dollar from his stack and everything will go on as it should.

 

[JustinInMN]

But the basis for your ruling is that he threw in two chips, so it's okay to bet with someone else's chip.

He had two chips in his hand and put them where his bets would normally go, yes I would rule he put in two chips.

I don't think anyone is saying that it's okay to bet with someone else's chip. But the remedy for that is to pay a chip back whether or not it was used in the actual bet (and I believe every post on here in favor of making the raise stand has said as much) or whether the chip goes to the player or the pot. (I assume the pot unless the SB put out an additional dollar at some point.) Pay it back is the same remedy if a chip rolls and gets returned. The same remedy if a neighbor hasn't cleaned up a pot and slides one to his neighbor who just slides it back if he notices.

The remedy is not to introduce the one chip rule as a justification to grossly change a clearly defined action, both by the bettor's intent and how the players yet to act would interpret it. Especially when one player has taken an irreversible action based on that reasonable information.

 

[CraigT78]

But the basis for your ruling is that he threw in two chips, so it's okay to bet with someone else's chip.

And when he protests that he did not intend to raise, he was just cleaning up the bets for the inattentive dealer, that's why he only grabbed one $25 from his stack, you're going to force him to go back to his stack and make his bet 13x, even though he says he only intended to call.

An expensive lesson that the dealer is the one to handle chips that are not your own, I guess.

 

[CraigT78]

Spoiler.

@WedgeRock was on the button and is pissed he had to make it $26.