I\'ll put you all-in
 

Hi.

In my home game some people like to say "I'll put you all-in" when playing HU vs a shorter-stack, rather than just "All-in". Is this acceptable in cardrooms?

Cheers.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

You'd probably get away with it but why not say 'raise' first? I was playing in a cash game recently and a guy said to me 'I'll call you all in' after I raised. I think he ment to reraise all in but wasn't allowed. Needless to say the flop had a K for my KK and his AA went down in flames...

It would change the game a bit if you could call somebody all in wouldn't it? Just wait for AA and order your opponent to put all his chips in!

Rob

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is this acceptable in cardrooms?

[/ QUOTE ]Why wouldn't it be? Is it unclear? Is it an angle? I agree that it's a tiny bit dramatic, but that's all. It'll put the last of the small-stack's chips in the middle, but the way I see it, that's the small-stack's fault, not the raiser's. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
-Sam

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

it's fine.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

I don't know about the rules in cardrooms, but I encourage my home game players to worry more about the chips they are betting by saying "I raise all-in" or "I'm all-in!".

Bettors only have control over their own chips, not those of their opponents. If they put all of their own chips in, we get the idea.

They don't even have to move any chips. If the short stack calls, we worry about counting chips if they win.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hi.

In my home game some people like to say "I'll put you all-in" when playing HU vs a shorter-stack, rather than just "All-in". Is this acceptable in cardrooms?

Cheers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that's okay but just to be clear if there are others still still in the hand the bettor has committed to putting in chips equal to what the guy has that the bettor proclaimed he's "putting All-in". All of the bettor's chips are not at risk as he didn't say "I'm All-in". This would only matter if the hand wasn't heads-up.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

You ought to be fine with "I'm putting you all in." There may be a nit that objects, but you ought to be on the happy side of any ruling...as long as you don't say the word "call" before "all in."

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hi.

In my home game some people like to say "I'll put you all-in" when playing HU vs a shorter-stack, rather than just "All-in". Is this acceptable in cardrooms?

Cheers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't see why not --- but the best thing to do would be to ask the cardroom manager.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'll call you all in

[/ QUOTE ]

i hear this almost daily. i'm gonna say something next time.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll call you all in

[/ QUOTE ]

i hear this almost daily. i'm gonna say something next time.

[/ QUOTE ]

"I call and I call you all in."

-kyo

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

This is just fine. It's essentailly the same as saying 'I'll raise as many chips as you have'. Some other posters here seem to be saying you're better off just saying 'all in' - but that's a very different bet if there are other people still to act...

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

It’s a cheap angle. I find this used a lot by the same clowns who don’t want to show their cards first when called, or only want to show one.

I’m under no obligation to tell you how much I have in front of me. It’s up to the bettor to specify an amount and place a bet. My response to “I’ll put you all in” “how much are you betting exactly?” When they say “All that you have” I respond, “How much is that exactly? What is your bet?, Are you going all in?” If they ask how much I have, I respond by pointing at my stack and saying “this much, what is your bet?”

BTW in major tournaments “I’ll put you all in” is not a legitimate bet.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
BTW in major tournaments “I’ll put you all in” is not a legitimate bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was watching the 1K NL (rebuy) event last night and this situation came up.

I think it was a hand between La and Law, where La made a bet and Law said "I'll put him all in". They took that as the official bet and La called and the hand went to showdown.

Now, I would consider the WSOP a pretty major event, but it was televised. Maybe they let it go because it just sounds cooler or something. On the other hand, this is why we have people making "bets" like that.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

SlamDunk, I think it's fine if a raiser wants to know how much his opponent has left, and then raise that amount. I don't know if you're technically obligated to tell me, but I assume that in a real tournament I could ask the dealer for his chip count and get it. I don't see a problem with this at all, and to refuse to offer a chip count just strikes me as being a dick and angry about being put at a decision for all your chips.

With that said, I think people like to say "I put you all-in" simply because of the psychological factor. It drives home the point that HE is putting YOU at a decision for all of your YOUR chips, not his. It is far more dramatic than announcing all-in to cover the original bettor, and a lot of megalomaniacs at my home games like to use it. It makes them feel big, I guess?

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
I’m under no obligation to tell you how much I have in front of me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you are.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
I’m under no obligation to tell you how much I have in front of me. It’s up to the bettor to specify an amount and place a bet. My response to “I’ll put you all in” “how much are you betting exactly?” When they say “All that you have” I respond, “How much is that exactly? What is your bet?, Are you going all in?” If they ask how much I have, I respond by pointing at my stack and saying “this much, what is your bet?”



[/ QUOTE ]

Wow what a joke. You sound really fun to play cards with.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yes you are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if I go all in.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes you are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if I go all in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true.

If I am in a hand with you, and I want a chip count, I have every right to obtain one.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes you are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if I go all in.

[/ QUOTE ]

In a home poker game with no dedicated dealer, if a player asks how much you have (a legitimate question), IMO you should get to counting or have your chips separated out so the player can count them on his own.

Knowing another player's chip count is important when determining a bet. No I may not want to risk all of my chips (by blindly declaring All-in), BUT I may want to bet exactly how much you have once I know your chip count.

File this under "not a big deal"

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]

I’m under no obligation to tell you how much I have in front of me.

[/ QUOTE ]

You could not be more incorrect. You could try... But you would not succeed.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
It’s a cheap angle. I find this used a lot by the same clowns who don’t want to show their cards first when called, or only want to show one.

I’m under no obligation to tell you how much I have in front of me. It’s up to the bettor to specify an amount and place a bet. My response to “I’ll put you all in” “how much are you betting exactly?” When they say “All that you have” I respond, “How much is that exactly? What is your bet?, Are you going all in?” If they ask how much I have, I respond by pointing at my stack and saying “this much, what is your bet?”

BTW in major tournaments “I’ll put you all in” is not a legitimate bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sound like an ass. How do you even find a game?

If I want to put you all in, and you gave me that stupid response I would ask the dealer for a chip count. (Are you just trying to slow the game down?)

"I’m under no obligation to tell you how much I have in front of me." technically you don't have to count your own chips if you don't want too but you are obligated to allow the dealer to count your chips at anytime during the tournament upon request.

Sotoo summarize: You sound like an ASS!

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
I’m under no obligation to tell you how much I have in front of me.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are incorrect, my friend.

Even if you were right, that attitude in my home game would guarantee you didn't cross my threshold again.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m under no obligation to tell you how much I have in front of me.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



You are incorrect, my friend.


[/ QUOTE ]

Explain please. Is this a house rule for your game? If it is, does this mean (hypothetically) that I can regulary ask every player for a chip count? It is my understanding that the original quote is correct. In a tourney, the dealer has the ultimate responsibility for counting the chips. Whenever I am in a home game and another player asks me how many chips I have, I give a standard answer, "about a million, give or take." Since this would be incorrect, according to you, what recourse of action do you take?

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever I am in a home game and another player asks me how many chips I have, I give a standard answer, "about a million, give or take."

[/ QUOTE ]

And you got invited back? (Sorry, couldn't help myself.)

The correct course of action is to count your chips, and give the total. If you can't, I'm sure another player will be happy to do so for you.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

The host finds it humorous, so I keep get invited back. I guess when I say it with a smile on my face it makes it better [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]. Seriously, I've found that the players that even ask that question are usually the ones that do a lot of talking and posturing. I mean really, the chips are sitting there just a few feet away from you. Why do you need that player to count his chips, why can't you just count them yourself? That's what I do.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

Technically you can never put someone all in. Thet have the option to fold their hand. What are you going to do move your opponents chips in yourself LOL

The only action someone can take at the table is Check, Bet, Raise, Fold, or Call. You can never make some Call you bet all in.
[ QUOTE ]
Hi.

In my home game some people like to say "I'll put you all-in" when playing HU vs a shorter-stack, rather than just "All-in". Is this acceptable in cardrooms?

Cheers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
The host finds it humorous, so I keep get invited back. I guess when I say it with a smile on my face it makes it better [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]. Seriously, I've found that the players that even ask that question are usually the ones that do a lot of talking and posturing. I mean really, the chips are sitting there just a few feet away from you. Why do you need that player to count his chips, why can't you just count them yourself? That's what I do.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen countless threads here and at other forums about a player going all-in, only later to find out that the chip count was incorrect. Asking a player to confirm his chip count is not only within the rules, but is also a good idea to prevent any disputes later on.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

"I put you all in" is not the same as "I bet the amount you have in front of you" or Just bet enough so that if he calls he/she will be all in.


Saying "I put you all in" implies you are making his call/bet for him/her which is improper.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is this acceptable in cardrooms?

[/ QUOTE ]Why wouldn't it be? Is it unclear? Is it an angle? I agree that it's a tiny bit dramatic, but that's all. It'll put the last of the small-stack's chips in the middle, but the way I see it, that's the small-stack's fault, not the raiser's. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
-Sam

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

From Robert’s rules of Poker - PROCEDURES

“19. Any player is entitled to a clear view of an opponent’s chips. Higher denomination chips should be easily visible.”

Please notice it says “clear view” not “count”

Please show me in Robert’s or in the TDA tournament rules where you “have every right” to an opponent’s chip count

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
You are incorrect, my friend.

[/ QUOTE ]

From Robert’s rules of Poker - PROCEDURES

“19. Any player is entitled to a clear view of an opponent’s chips. Higher denomination chips should be easily visible.”

Please notice it says “clear view” not “count”

Please show me in Robert’s or in the TDA tournament rules where you “have every right” to an opponent’s chip count

[ QUOTE ]
Even if you were right, that attitude in my home game would guarantee you didn't cross my threshold again.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's OK I prefer to play with people who play by the rules.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
"I’m under no obligation to tell you how much I have in front of me." technically you don't have to count your own chips if you don't want too but you are obligated to allow the dealer to count your chips at anytime during the tournament upon request.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please show me where in the TDA rules it says that.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
"I put you all in" is not the same as "I bet the amount you have in front of you" or Just bet enough so that if he calls he/she will be all in.


[/ QUOTE ]

When someone says "I put you all-in" what they usually are implying is that they want to bet an amount equal to the number of chips that person has in front of them.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"I’m under no obligation to tell you how much I have in front of me." technically you don't have to count your own chips if you don't want too but you are obligated to allow the dealer to count your chips at anytime during the tournament upon request.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please show me where in the TDA rules it says that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't imagine playing poker without the ability to get a chip count when necessary. Perhaps someone can clarify this better than I can.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
From Robert’s rules of Poker - PROCEDURES

“19. Any player is entitled to a clear view of an opponent’s chips. Higher denomination chips should be easily visible.”

Please notice it says “clear view” not “count”

Please show me in Robert’s or in the TDA tournament rules where you “have every right” to an opponent’s chip count

[/ QUOTE ]

You are just arguing semantics. "Clear view" means that they have to be countable. If you want to be a dick and make your opponent count your chips, I guess you can, but I fail to see the point.

"I put you all-in" is perfectly understandable and acceptable and I don't understand why anyone disagrees.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
That's OK I prefer to play with people who play by the rules.

[/ QUOTE ]

Possibly the most passive-agressive statement I've ever read.

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

Of course they are implying that, however it is incorrect, because you are assuming his action will be to move all in. The correct wording will be "I bet the amount you have in front of you" or "I move all in"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"I put you all in" is not the same as "I bet the amount you have in front of you" or Just bet enough so that if he calls he/she will be all in.


[/ QUOTE ]

When someone says "I put you all-in" what they usually are implying is that they want to bet an amount equal to the number of chips that person has in front of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

I think it's considered a polite practice to give your stack amount, so that it speeds up the game (by avoiding the wait for someone to calculate your chips).

At a home game especially, no matter what the techincal rules, it seems counter-productive to appear as a nit, doesn't it?

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

[ QUOTE ]
Of course they are implying that, however it is incorrect, because you are assuming his action will be to move all in. The correct wording will be "I bet the amount you have in front of you" or "I move all in"

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. You are not moving all-in, you are betting the amount the other player has, which is a signifigant difference if other people are still in the hand. There is no assumption that the other player will call, you are just making this up. Have you ever been confused by this statement in a real game?

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

Didnt I say that in the first part of the statement? Maybe I was a little wrong of the moving all in part. But when someone say "I put you all in" is a totally wrong statement. You CANNOT force your opponent to move all in under no circumstances. Say the correct phrase and you won't look like a pompous ass at the table I say.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The correct wording will be "I bet the amount you have in front of you" or "I move all in"

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. You are not moving all-in, you are betting the amount the other player has, which is a signifigant difference if other people are still in the hand. There is no assumption that the other player will call, you are just making this up. Have you ever been confused by this statement in a real game?

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: I\'ll put you all-in
 

I've probably played over 100 home games in the last year, and not a single time when someone said "I'll put you all-in" did someone interpret it to mean anything other than "I'll bet an amount of chips equal to what you've got".

Being a nit tends to scare away dead money.