What should have happened here?

[Fmonti]

Just moved to NH where the poker boom is causing many charities to offer hold em tourneys for fund raising. The nearest casino is Foxwoods a 2+ hour drive. The people who run the tourneys, though well intentioned, know little about rules and claim they are playing the same rules as on the WPT tour. Here is the scenario: Blinds are 300/600. Under the gun goes all in. Folded around to the small blind who puts in an additional $700 for a total of $1000. BB folds. AT this point as their rules require the SB shows his cards.Someone at the table points out that the all in player has $1600 in the pot not $1000. The SB says in that case I am not calling and takes his chips that are still in front of him back. The all in player throws his hand in and the dealer picks up the cards for the next hand. After the dealer starts shuffling the cards for the next hand(but before he starts dealing) the person that was in the BB says that the SB should have been made to put in the additional amount since he stated he was calling. The BB point is that he may have called if the SB didn't and since the SB says he was calling he decided to muck his hand..The guy in charge was called to the table and his ruling was that because the SB called the bet he would have to pay the all in player $1600.00. The SB agreed that he should have been made to put the additional amount in but know one said anything at the time and didn't feel he should have to pay the all-in player $1600 at this time because he now has no chance of winning the hand and that it was either the responsiblity of the BB or the all-in player or the dealer to point out that he did not have enough money in the pot. The end result was that the SB had to pay the all-in player $1600.00. Was that the proper rule? How should it have been handled??

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
The end result was that the SB had to pay the all-in player $1600.00. Was that the proper rule? How should it have been handled??

[/ QUOTE ]

That ruling is absolutely horrible. Once they decide to reward the raiser with a blind steal than that's that, they cannot change the ruling they made. I'd be infuriated if I was the guy having to pay the other player T1600 without even having a CHANCE of winning the hand. They can't tell me that yes I have an option to take my chips back and fold, then change their mind when someone else says something.

Once a ruling is made, it's final. They ruled the chips could be taken back without repurcussion, so that should have been the ruling given the lack of other information available at the time.

[LetsRock]

Technically the ruling is correct, but the timing was awful. Once the player made a verbal declaration of call, he has committed that amount to the pot.

But the player should be made aware of that before he mucks his cards. Once the decision was made to allow him to withdraw his bet, it should have stood. Very poor handling of the situation by the dealer and the floor.

[HUSKER'66]

A bad situation made worse.

The player who originally "called" and put in $1000 should not have been allowed to grab his chips back. It should have been explained to him at that time that he could either pony up another $600 to match the all in or he would have to forfeit what he had already put in the pot. The problem just snowballed from there.

Husker