Strange NL dealer error with stacks- what should floor do here?

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Similar, more clear-cut situation:

Player A has $150 in his stack. Player B has $600.

Player B says "all-in" and intends to toss out two black chips ($100 each), but throws out a black and a red by accident ($100+$5).

Player A says "call", and puts out $105.

Player B says "I pushed all-in." Player A says "no, you bet $105."

Assuming that at least three other players heard player B's all-in verbal declaration, what happens here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Verbal declaration is binding. Player B said all-in. It's all-in.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Similar, more clear-cut situation:

Player A has $150 in his stack. Player B has $600.

Player B says "all-in" and intends to toss out two black chips ($100 each), but throws out a black and a red by accident ($100+$5).

Player A says "call", and puts out $105.

Player B says "I pushed all-in." Player A says "no, you bet $105."

Assuming that at least three other players heard player B's all-in verbal declaration, what happens here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Verbal declaration is binding. Player B said all-in. It's all-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if Player B said all-in low enough that only the players near him could hear, and the other player could not hear it. This happens all the time.

[Randy_Refeld]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Similar, more clear-cut situation:

Player A has $150 in his stack. Player B has $600.

Player B says "all-in" and intends to toss out two black chips ($100 each), but throws out a black and a red by accident ($100+$5).

Player A says "call", and puts out $105.

Player B says "I pushed all-in." Player A says "no, you bet $105."

Assuming that at least three other players heard player B's all-in verbal declaration, what happens here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Verbal declaration is binding. Player B said all-in. It's all-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if Player B said all-in low enough that only the players near him could hear, and the other player could not hear it. This happens all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

The poster above specified it was loud enough for at least 3 other players to hear. Three players hearing something is generally enough to conclude that it was said.

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]

The poster above specified it was loud enough for at least 3 other players to hear. Three players hearing something is generally enough to conclude that it was said.

[/ QUOTE ]

Randy -

if someone called you over about the situation in the OP, what would you do as the floorperson?

-dB

[Randy_Refeld]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The poster above specified it was loud enough for at least 3 other players to hear. Three players hearing something is generally enough to conclude that it was said.

[/ QUOTE ]

Randy -

if someone called you over about the situation in the OP, what would you do as the floorperson?

-dB

[/ QUOTE ]

I have faced a very similiar situation as the original poster posted. It was a touranament (4 players left) and there was an allin bet and call and the players had small and very similiar stacks and the dealer pulled both stacks into the pot without seeing which one was bigger. I told the players to go ahead and take a break (live game you can set teh amount in question aside, but this was a touranment with a player possibly eliminated) and i called survelience (note: this is the only tiem i have gone to survelience with help with a decision; other calls to survelience have always been to confirm somethign i saw on the floor). I was lucky because there was a survelience supervisor that also played poker so he reviewed the tape with me and we were able to make a very good guess as to what the stack sizes were on the river.

If this were a live game or if survelience had been inconclusive the players that lost the pot should be treated in a favorable manner (the winner of the pot just won a pot so they will be happy wiht a fair solution). In the OP since the amount of chips the loser of the pot would have remaining is unclear I would leave him with the maximum he migth have left. Basically I would get a good estimate (table concenous and dealer observation) of how much more he owed and mkae him put in around 2/3 of that amount (find a round number that is clsoe to what he owes, but is clearly a less than what he owes). He has no complaint that he got cheated, the winner has a little bit of a complaint but he just won a pot and received compensation that is fair to everyone involved.