Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ruling on very strange situation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Ruling on very strange situation

    Live E100 F.O in Macau Cork
    1st hand of tournament (i only sat down on the flop so didnt see opening action-no that it matters) Blinds 25-50
    Flop- Q 8 5 rainbow: player 1 (UTG) Bets
    player 2 (button) Calls
    Turn- Ten: player 1 check
    player 2 bet (aprox 1,000)
    player 1 thinks, assesses player 2's stack and raises to 6,000(seemingly putting player 2 all-in)
    player 2 asks how much and is told it is him all in, another player says how can player 1 have chips behind as it is 1st hand and one all-in must equal another all-in. It transpired player 2 was apperntley missing a blie 5,000 chip and had started wiht 10,000 not hte 15,000 of everyone else.
    Dealer (also T.D.) gives player 2 a 5,000 chip and the hand simply continues. Now player 2 moves all-in which is now a rasie to put player 1 all in. Player 1 folds after deliberation and player 2 takes the pot.
    Neither player seemed too pushed but if I was player 1 i would wan the hand declared dead???
    Was the correct thing done??
    Hope this is clear.

    #2
    I don't see any argument for anybody's hand to be declared dead.

    Allowing the bettor to change his bet size would seem to me to be a fair enough decision in this situation.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Kie Diddy View Post
      Neither player seemed too pushed but if I was player 1 i would wan the hand declared dead???
      Was the correct thing done??
      The correct thing to do would be to question how P2 didn't have the biggest chip in his stack.

      Why would you want his hand declared dead? What reason?
      Last edited by curleywurley; 16-07-11, 21:31.

      Comment


        #4
        Why would someone need to check how much someone else is playing the first hand of a tournament? The ruling seems fair enough to me.

        Comment


          #5
          I know it was stupid of the guy who x raised , but if you think you're putting a guy to a test for his tourney life then all of sudden his remaining stack doubles...
          surely he should've got to take his turn bet back or something??

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Kie Diddy View Post
            I know it was stupid of the guy who x raised , but if you think you're putting a guy to a test for his tourney life then all of sudden his remaining stack doubles...
            surely he should've got to take his turn bet back or something??
            technically you're correct, but it's the first hand of the tournament, it doesn't take a genius to realise all-in for hero=all-in for villain.

            If you take a similar case where villain had just arrived at table and the TD was bringing additional chips over for example, then I think you can argue taking bets back etc.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Kie Diddy View Post
              I know it was stupid of the guy who x raised , but if you think you're putting a guy to a test for his tourney life then all of sudden his remaining stack doubles...
              surely he should've got to take his turn bet back or something??
              It was first hand, surely he should of been aware that their stacks were equal

              Comment

              Working...
              X