Rules Question

[Talking Poker]

Zybomb's post addresses this the best. You are hearing what he his saying as, "I'm going to bet more than what you have left. Here it is, I bet this many chips." And I am hearing what he was saying as, "I bet the exact amount of chips required to put you all in. Here, this stack should cover it. We'llk sort out the change I get if you decide to call."

Clearly two very different things. Based on how it was described, it sounds to me as if Player B's INTENT was to bet the exact amount Player A had in front of him, but as we all know, intentions don't mean much in poker. Actions do. In this case, if I was the floorperson, I would have ruled as they did last night, making Player B's bet equal to Player A's stack, and making Player C's call equal to that... but that's just my interpretation. I can see how it could be interpreted the other way as well.

We need to get an official ruling on this. Maybe someone could email Matt Savage or Linda Johnson or any of a number of other people that could get us a definitive answer.

[Windbreaker]

The biggest problem with all these verbal declarations being binding is that:

A) No one pointed out the problem at the time when it occurred.

B) The player that pointed the error was in fact the person that created the problem and stood to benefit from any ruling different to the original.

C) All decisions were made after the end result of the hand were known.

Like I said, this is the same as a string bet situation in the casino.

If a player in the casino tried to do a string bet, it's the responsibility of the dealer AND other players to point out the problem WHEN it occurred. If no one makes note of the problem when it occurs than the string bet should stand. Once the hand is showndown, you shouldn't be able to reverse the decision.