Angle shoot or dealer error or both?

J

Jiffylube

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Jan 3, 2016
Total posts
2
Chips
0
Game $1/3 NL Hollywood casino
I'm UTG pick up QS QH raise to $25, both players to my left call as well as a player in middle position, button and big blind also call. 6 players to the flop. Flop comes out 36T all spades. I bet $85 player to my left (who is loose and wild) looks at his cards again and raises $90 to a total of $175. I have him 3-1 in chips while he's sitting with $323 remaining. For some reason I decide to 3 bet and raise another $125 and he instantly puts everything but $3 in. I called And he throws his cards face up A2 or spades. Dealer declares that he was all in and 2 players at the table say that he wasn't all in and had $3 left, so the dealer agrees that he's not all in. Then the dealer puts out the turn card pairing the board with another 3. Then the river right after without giving any time to act on the turn. river double pairs board with a ten. I tell the dealer that I wasn't given the option of acting on the turn and he still had money behind. Floor comes over and tells him to shuffle to the river back in and put a new one out. New card wasn't one of my outs and he wins the pot. Shooting an angle by me for asking for the rules be the same on every hand or dealer error ?
 
detroitjunkie

detroitjunkie

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 11, 2009
Total posts
826
Awards
4
Chips
0
There are so many things going on here so let me break it apart piece by piece.

First, when your opponent shoved in his chips did he declare AI or just put them in? If he said AI then those 3 chips go into the pot and no case for a new river at all. But I have to assume he did not or this would not even be an issue.

However, since the dealer declared that the player was AI, and you called, then you are calling the AI, and action should then stop, and the 3 dollars goes into the pot since you and your opponent didnt argue the AI call and are therefore conceding to the dealers rule. This is subjective of course, and can be a floor call to reverse the ruling. But this is how I would rule it in my rooms anyways.

Since the dealer reversed his own decision (A VERY BAD THING BTW) without making a floor call, he changed the flow of the hand and then made a mistake by not allowing for action on the turn.

Now the floor call MUST take the river back and shuffle and re-river the board. This is the correct call based on the action up to this point. Had the floor been called during the confusion as to whether or not your opponent was AI then this would have never happened. I tell my dealers to ALWAYS call the floor at the first sign of an issue, to keep people like you from angling a mistake.

Which brings me to the point that you did make a slightly shady angle play here, BUT you had every right to do it and it will teach the other players and the dealer to pay attention. This is my opinion and would never tell a player that IN THIS CASE because you were actually right to have a new river according to the action to that point.

So to sum up - player error, several dealer errors, slightly shady angle shot (which sadly didnt pan out), but the floors call at the end was correct.

Is this Toledo Hollywood? If so tell Hood to get his shit together down there and train his dealers or I am gonna come bust him up!
 
teepack

teepack

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Mar 5, 2014
Total posts
2,317
Awards
1
Chips
14
Do you think he was going to fold a $900-plus pot over a $3 bet? Next time just give him the $3. The dealer messed up for sure, but it is definitely shady on your part that you were trying to get another shot to win a $900-plus pot over $3.
 
OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Total posts
8,586
Awards
1
Chips
1
However, since the dealer declared that the player was AI, and you called, then you are calling the AI, and action should then stop, and the 3 dollars goes into the pot since you and your opponent didnt argue the AI call and are therefore conceding to the dealers rule. This is subjective of course, and can be a floor call to reverse the ruling. But this is how I would rule it in my rooms anyways.

But isn't it incumbent on the other players at the table to point out an error in progress, and for it to be corrected in the manner that least affects the game?

Assuming that villain put all but $3 of his stack in without a verbal declaration, then the dealer did made a mistake declaring him all in*. Players pointed out the error, and it could be corrected without any impact on the outcome of the hand by just having the normal betting rounds after the turn (and river, if necessary). I'm not a poker room manager or anything but IMO the dealer did the right thing at this point by declaring villain wasn't all in.

Of course the dealer made another mistake immediately after that by dealing the turn and river without allowing any betting.

Regardless of the fact that allowing that betting wouldn't have changed the outcome of the hand (obviously neither player is folding for an extra $3 on the turn here) it was definitely an angle shoot on OP's part getting the river redealt, but you can't fault the floor for their decision on the redeal given how the rest of the action played out.

* why villain turned his cards up if he didn't intend to be all in is another question entirely, of course...
 
detroitjunkie

detroitjunkie

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 11, 2009
Total posts
826
Awards
4
Chips
0
But isn't it incumbent on the other players at the table to point out an error in progress, and for it to be corrected in the manner that least affects the game?

Assuming that villain put all but $3 of his stack in without a verbal declaration, then the dealer did made a mistake declaring him all in*. Players pointed out the error, and it could be corrected without any impact on the outcome of the hand by just having the normal betting rounds after the turn (and river, if necessary). I'm not a poker room manager or anything but IMO the dealer did the right thing at this point by declaring villain wasn't all in.

Of course the dealer made another mistake immediately after that by dealing the turn and river without allowing any betting.

Regardless of the fact that allowing that betting wouldn't have changed the outcome of the hand (obviously neither player is folding for an extra $3 on the turn here) it was definitely an angle shoot on OP's part getting the river redealt, but you can't fault the floor for their decision on the redeal given how the rest of the action played out.

* why villain turned his cards up if he didn't intend to be all in is another question entirely, of course...[/quote

I would make my ruling that the original bet was all in based on the (what I call) 'assumption of all in' rule which states that if a player shoves in his chips and then somehow finds a chip or two (in this case 3) say under a book or something they were reading, and thought they were all in, then those chips go into the pot immediately upon finding them, and not as action but as a correction and the other player MUST call them. I assume the player who shoved meant to go AI and didnt mean to leave 3 behind, therefor this rule comes into play. Not all managers would rule this way but by the book it is the correct thing to do. And since it was other players that were not involved in the hand that 'found' the extra chips and not the people in the hand only makes a stronger case for this rule to be in effect. This (and about half of the rules in poker) stops any angles being shot, as the one that happened here.

Where the dealer made the error was by reversing what he originally called without contacting the floor (aside from not noticing the chips left behind). Changing the call from AI to not AI is suspect and probably an error based on intentions (which is a lot of how rulings are determined)

And yes the final floor call was correct due to everything that happened up to that point
 
Top