String Bet called back by dealer after an all-n

String Bet called back by dealer after an all-in

This hand happened at a $1/$3nlh game the Potawatomi Casino in Milwaukee. The hand folded around to the button who raised to $12. The SB folded and the BB without verbalizing his bet moved two $25 stacks across the betting line in 2 separate motions. It wasn't an angle shoot but it was a clear string bet. The Button immediately announced all-in and the SB immediately folded. The dealer then pushed only one of the $25 stacks to the winner and returned the other to the loser which of course the winner strongly objected to. The dealer said that because the second $25 was a string bet that it wasn't included in the pot. The winner of the hand thought that because the dealer never announced the string bet that it should stand. The dealer maintained that his declaration of all-in was immediate and left her no time to announce the string bet, which may have been true, but she followed up by stating that it's a players responsibility to recognize a string bet and that dealers are not obligated to do so. What do you think? Given that the shove left little or no time for the dealer to announce the string bet should the additional $25 stand? If it's not the duty of the dealer to announce this, how could this be abused? It seems unlikely that the buttons actions would have changed based on the bet size but the argument could be made that the SB's large 3 bet made the button more confident that an all-in would be called, and that a weaker SB min bet might have provoked a more restrained raise from the Button instead of an all-in.

Only thing that doesn't make sense to me is the dealer claiming not to be obligated to call string bets. That's enforcing the rules of the game, it should be part of their job.

Aside from that, the dealer did what I would have done: I would have tried to get a word in about it being a string bet and what that meant for the action, but if it really was bang-bang-bang bet-shove-fold one immediately after the other and there was no chance, then there's not much that can be done. It's the button's fault for not taking a moment to clarify the action before shoving.

Well if it was an instant all in the player has the give the dealer time to react. The dealer and players involved both have a responsibility to call out the issue , not anyone else at the table.

Good thought, but doesn't this open the door for abuse by the blinds? What would prevent someone for intentionally string betting just to get someone off a hand if the there are no negative repercussions. If the string bet gets announced by the dealer they just take it back. If it doesn't then they can just wait until the other player reacts and then leave it or pull it back as they choose. It seems like the wrong person is being penalized and it's a bit of a freeroll for the string bettor.

It definitely should not be the responsibility of the opponent to call the string bet as this could provide information as to the strength of their own hand. Asking them to take it back implies weakness. Asking to leave it implies strength.

I think the string bet shouldn’t stand but the player should get a 1 round orbit penalty for unsportsmanlike play.

Thenightrain said:

I think the string bet shouldn’t stand but the player should get a 1 round orbit penalty for unsportsmanlike play.

Click to expand...

In this case i don't think the string bettor was angle shooting. He clearly intended to bet $50 but ended up benefitting from the string bet. That doesn't seem to me to be in the spirit of the rule.

I don't think there's much wrong here. I think the dealer should declare the string bet as soon as they could though.

This poker room is run poorly. The floor staff aren't knowledgeable and constantly make questionable calls.

I think BB, button and dealer are at fault, dealer should of given button both stacks that BB had put in front of him, it is BB's fault for not saying what he was raising, and the button should of took his time and asked what the raise is. He obviously got too excited and just shoved without thinking.

I think the rules for the dealer should be to just take what is in front of the string bettor as the actual bet. BB probably wouldn't even kick off when both stacks went over to the button, as a string bet normally happens by inexperienced players, and they wouldn't have a clue.

my casino that bet would have stayed and the guy wold have been penalized

paulsmall007 said:

my casino that bet would have stayed and the guy wold have been penalized

Click to expand...

It was a mistake, I dont think he needs to be penalized. The penalty should just be tgat he forfeits the $25. You should never benefit from a string bet.

<div>

Four Dogs said:

This hand happened at a $1/$3nlh game the Potawatomi Casino in Milwaukee. The hand folded around to the button who raised to $12. The SB folded and the BB without verbalizing his bet moved two $25 stacks across the betting line in 2 separate motions. ... The Button immediately announced all-in and the SB immediately folded.
It is interesting that the SB gets to fold TWICE. Never saw that before.

The dealer then pushed only one of the $25 stacks to the winner and returned the other to the loser which of course the winner strongly objected to.
You never mention who won, but I guess we can assume it was the Button? No idea why the Button is objecting, because you, and I assume everyone else, realized it was a string bet. How much did the Button have for the all-in? Was it more than the $50?
I do not think the Button has a legitimate complaint. He/she gave the dealer no time to reject the string bet, and made the right decision.

The dealer said that because the second $25 was a string bet that it wasn't included in the pot. The winner of the hand thought that because the dealer never announced the string bet that it should stand. The dealer maintained that his declaration of all-in was immediate and left her no time to announce the string bet, which may have been true, but she followed up by stating that it's a players responsibility to recognize a string bet and that dealers are not obligated to do so. What do you think? Given that the shove left little or no time for the dealer to announce the string bet should the additional $25 stand?
Absolutely NOT. String bets are not valid. The Button snap raised all-in. This is not a legitimate move in poker to win chips that are not really in the pot.

If it's not the duty of the dealer to announce this, how could this be abused? It seems unlikely that the buttons actions would have changed based on the bet size but the argument could be made that the SB's large 3 bet made the button more confident that an all-in would be called, and that a weaker SB min bet might have provoked a more restrained raise from the Button instead of an all-in.

Click to expand...

</div>

Herkstwin said:

This hand happened at a $1/$3nlh game the Potawatomi Casino in Milwaukee. The hand folded around to the button who raised to $12. The SB folded and the BB without verbalizing his bet moved two $25 stacks across the betting line in 2 separate motions. ... The Button immediately announced all-in and the SB immediately folded.
It is interesting that the SB gets to fold TWICE. Never saw that before.

Click to expand...

Just an editing mistake. He raised.

Herkstwin said:

You never mention who won, but I guess we can assume it was the Button? No idea why the Button is objecting, because you, and I assume everyone else, realized it was a string bet. How much did the Button have for the all-in? Was it more than the $50?
I do not think the Button has a legitimate complaint. He/she gave the dealer no time to reject the string bet, and made the right decision.

Click to expand...

Sure I did. The SB folded. Twice! Remember?

He objected because regardless of the rules it was clear that the intent was to bet $50 and allowing him to take $25 back was like rewarding him for the string bet. The All-in was for around $300 and the SB had him covered.