Rules Question

[jillaj]

You are a nice guy. My friend announced a raise to a certain amount in a casino before and put in too many chips accidently and had to keep the amount he put in play. He asked why that wasn't a string bet and they said that the only thing that mattered was when he said raise, not the actual amount. So when he put in more than he intended to in play, that was his actual bet. I would recommend to him for "the sake of getting it correct" that when he puts chips in the pot he should expect them to be counted as in play. The only time I would let it fly is when they are heads up.

[Quint]

You did the right thing. No need in potentially ruining a game, or a friendship, over $65.

[ChipFish]

Player B's bet stands $95.
Player C is only a call.

They can bitch all they want.

[drewjax]

I agree with Chip. If someone says the words "all in", they are all in. Trying to be cool by saying "I'll put you all in" is stupid, and should only be said when you are heads up. Too bad for player B. Although in a friendly home game of course this changes.

[Robbr25]

Verbal bets are binding.
So, player B "puts all in" player A, i.e. raises to $30 (I assume he talked before he pushed the chips.)
Player C calls so he would call the $30. (Once again I assume he talked before he pushed the chips.)
Player A then gets to decide if he wants to call the extra $20.

[eddo31]

i dont think that this is right at all. you are right that verbal bets are binding, but pushing chips into the pot is binding as well.

if you declare $50, and only put in 25, then you have to put in the other 25. if you declare 50, and put in 100, then your whole bet stays in the pot. when the guy said "i put him all in," and pushed an undetermined amount into the pot, then his bet should have been the amount tat he put in the pot, not whatever player A had left.

this is just a bad situation. the money involved isnt worth losing friends over, but the fact that it was a unanimous decision is ridiculous. i guess that this is a very good game profit wise, as playing against uninformed players must be +EV.

[Talking Poker]

This is also not correct. Verbal declarations are binding. When a verbal declaration does not match an action, the verbal declaration takes precedence.

In both this post and the one I replied to above it, you guys are describing not the verbal declaration being binding, but whatever bet is LARGEST being binding, and that's not correct. In these two examples, the first player would have to put in an additional $25, but the second player would get $50 back. Both verbal bets were $50, so that's what the bets are. Regardless of how many chips are moved into the pot. Period.

[Talking Poker]

This is not correct and should have never happened. More below.