Re: a ruling from last night (sticky)
 

Standard Harrah's poker management. Clueless.

Re: a ruling from last night (sticky)
 

FLOORWOMAN: That's not a call, I don't believe that was binding action.
ME: Thank you.
FLOORWOMAN: You're welcome.

Hand over. When the second floorperson came over, and when they asked you to either pay the $60 or leave, I would have demanded to see the first floorperson who said what she had said above.

In retrospect, when they asked you what you had, you could have said (truthfully), "nothing, I had bluff-bet and had no intention of calling the raise, none whatsoever."

Re: a ruling from last night (sticky)
 

Go back there tonight.

Re: a ruling from last night (sticky)
 

I have been seeing a lot of reference on-line to this business about chips in front of cards being a bet. I can't imagine this rule being put in place in any well run room. It sounds like somebody somewhere saw forward motion and didn't really understand it. If a room as a forward motion rule it is pretty easy to understand, if you bring your chips forward and it looks like you want to put them in the pot they go in the pot. Some rooms have a rule that you must actually release them into the pot. For limit poker forward motion is a better rule (you already know the amount of bets and raises). For no limit and pot limit betting a released into the pot is a better ruls as you are permitted to return to your stack for more chips (note: many, many inexperienced people in poker management do not know you may return to your stack in NL and PL, this presents a problem when they are the ones making/interpreting the rules).

Oh and in the OP's situation the dealer should be suspeneded for arguing with the floor after she made a decision.

Re: a ruling from last night (sticky)
 

you handled the situation very well.

Honestly, after reading B&M you'd think that the people working the floor at most poker rooms had [censored] for brains.

and the dealer has to get over himself.

Re: a ruling from last night (sticky)
 

I hate this cards past a chip is a bet rule. In one Las Vegas room I saw the follwing happen:

A player had placed a single chip on the top of his cards to protect them. There was a bet to him and he decided to look at his cards again. With one hand he slid the the chip forard and picked up the edge of the cards. You guessed, -- it was called a bet because the single chip went forawrd past the edge of his cards.

Re: a ruling from last night (sticky)
 

Thank you all for responding. In honor of Al, my nut kicking should have been fast and furious.

I think I was just so surprised I actually got a ruling in my favor, (original one anyway) that I didn't want to rock the boat with unecessary nut kicking. I never get rulings...2+2'er dopp16 can back me up on that one.

Just an example.....

Came home from a business trip to California. 3 straight nights of Commerce action. Playing 6-12 with Dopp16 at the Trop on my first night back home.

I look at red AK UTG. In my best asian accent, I announce "I LAY" (like a jackass) and throw $11 out. I failed to grab that bottom white chip. Dealer says, "What the hell is LAY?", throws a red bird back at me, and tells UTG +1 "6 to call." I say, "Oh come on, I announced a raise". I call the floor over. Floor says, "What the hell is LAY? The bet is 6".

5 people saw the flop of 10 9 7 all blue

nuff said

Re: a ruling from last night (sticky)
 

This incident is a perfect illustration of why a betting line marked on the table should become standard everywhere. Provides a very clear "point of no return", and takes unnecessary guesswork away from the dealer.

All that said, the way the staff handled this is mind-boggling stupid. The one I really can't figure out is the friggin' dealer; once the first floor ruled, why would he care enough to actually begin arguing, and to go grab a second floor? That's pretty suspicious...I think I would have left the game immediately even if I'd gotten a favorable ruling from the second floor.

Re: a ruling from last night (sticky)
 

[ QUOTE ]
This incident is a perfect illustration of why a betting line marked on the table should become standard everywhere. Provides a very clear "point of no return", and takes unnecessary guesswork away from the dealer.


[/ QUOTE ]

A betting line solves nothing and creates additional problems. A player comes forward with some chips and then pulls back, the dealer still has to make a judgment if they crossed the line; whereas, with forward motion it is clear they were coming forward and wanted to bet. The only purpose for a line on the table is to keep the dealers from breaking their backs.

Re: a ruling from last night (sticky)
 

[ QUOTE ]
5 people saw the flop of 10 9 7 all blue


[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't tell me that a live casino is using the four color deck or I'll have to kick someone in the nuts. What an idiotic idea.

al