All in with half BB?

Hi Guys.
I was playing poker last night in a £12 sit and go at a pub.
There was an arguement about how going all in with half the BB works and now im a little confused.
lets say there are three players left, blinds are now at £10/£20
(Hero)Dealer Button : £10
SB : £200
BB : £300

our hero goes all in with his last £10, the SB calls and the BB raises it to £60. The SB calls.
now the question, SCENARIO A: in the side pot for our hero is there £50 (his 10,the SB call of 20 and the BB) and 80 in the main pot? or
SCENARIO B : in the side pot for our hero is there his 10 just the small blinds 10 and the BB 20. Creating a side pot of £40 and a main pot of 90?

Also in the same situation if he went all in with half the BB and there were eight other players left who called the BB how much would be in the side pot?
would it be 8BB and his SB or
9SB (including his).

Hope you can understand what im trying to say and point me in the right direction for a ruling in this situation.
Good Hustle

I think I understand.

At max, a player can only win what he bets against however many players are in the pot. In this case the shortstack would only be betting against a share of the pot.

With three players in, he can only triple up.

Caveat; there is the weird situation where each of the other players fold before showdown. Only a fool would fold here, or some one colluding or chip dumping.

Good Hustle said:

Hi Guys.
I was playing poker last night in a £12 sit and go at a pub.
There was an arguement about how going all in with half the BB works and now im a little confused.
lets say there are three players left, blinds are now at £10/£20
(Hero)Dealer Button : £10
SB : £200
BB : £300

our hero goes all in with his last £10, the SB calls and the BB raises it to £60. The SB calls.

Click to expand...

Main Pot (button, SB, BB): £10 + £10(SB) + £10(1/2 BB)
Main Pot = £30

Side Pot (SB, BB): £10 (1/2 BB) + £10 (SB blind call) + £40 (BB Raise) + £40 (SB Call)
Side Pot = £100

Good Hustle said:

Also in the same situation if he went all in with half the BB and there were eight other players left who called the BB how much would be in the side pot?
would it be 8BB and his SB or
9SB (including his).

Hope you can understand what im trying to say and point me in the right direction for a ruling in this situation.
Good Hustle

Click to expand...

Main Pot (9 players @ 1/2 BB) = (9 * £10) = £90
Side Pot (eight players @ 1/2 BB) = (8 * £10) = £80 + (any bets/call during hand)

dj11 said:

Caveat; there is the weird situation where each of the other players fold before showdown. Only a fool would fold here, or some one colluding or chip dumping.

Click to expand...

Once one of the players folds, the side pot goes to the remaining player. If he in turn mucks, the only the main pot is given to the button

The main pot could only have a maximum of 30.

If the button is all in for 10, if the SB wants to play he still has to call enough to match the BB. So that would work out to a main pot of 30, and a side pot (between the BB and SB) of 20.

If the button is all in for 10 and the SB folds, then the main pot is 30, and there would be no side pot, the BB would automatically win 10 of the 20 he put in. (He'd basically just take half of his BB back).

Even if each of the other players folded preflop, the BB would still win 10 of his original post back ~ automatically ~. As soon as the SB folded, the BB would instantly win that extra 10 he put in.

Whenever someone is all in and can't cover the big blind, the main pot is made up of the number of people in the hand times the amount the person is all in for. If in your example everyone limped in and there were 8 people (in total ) in the hand, the main pot would be 80, and the side pot would be 70. The other 7 people in the hand, other than the one thats all in would then be betting into the side pot.

oh excellent, thanks for your help. I get it now. I really dont know why but i thought the BB went into the main pot as well, i was going to argue it to the death
Thanks for clearing that up, next time i go play there i might have to eat some humble pie

dj11 said:

Caveat; there is the weird situation where each of the other players fold before showdown. Only a fool would fold here, or some one colluding or chip dumping.

Click to expand...

If someone has gone all in for less than one big blind, and everyone else folds to the player in the big blind, then those two players contest the pot.

In this case, a player has gone all in for 10. If everyone folds to the big blind, who's already in for 20, then he gets 10 back, there's 30 in the pot (including the folded small blind) and both the all-in player and the big blind roll over their hands.

The all-in player cannot win the pot without a showdown.

Aside from this, everyone's got it right: there's 30 in the main pot in this instance, as the all-in player can't win any more than 10 from any other player in the hand.

OzExorcist said:

The all-in player cannot win the pot without a showdown.

Click to expand...

i dont believe that is quite true as said above. If the BB mucks then the player who is all in for 10 should automatically win the 30 chips in the pot while the BB gets his 10 back. This would be theall-in player winning the pot without a showdown.

Only way I can see that happening is if the big blinds wasn't physically at the table - in that case, their hand should be ruled dead before anyone else acts.

If the small blind still folded (though they'd be insane to, because they're totally freerolling in the hand) then yes, as the only one left in the hand with cards, the button would get a total pot of 30, and the big blind would be refunded 10.

If the big blind is at the table with a live hand though, then as soon as the small blind folds, the other two players should be instructed to turn their hands face up, and the hand will go to showdown, as per TDA Rule 9 [old link~tb]. Granted, not everybody follows TDA rules, but the big blind shouldn't have the opportunity to muck their hand.