Bad floor decision

[sicvic]

I think I saw a pretty bad floor decision today

Playing 15/30 and guy on the button busts out and has only 3 dollars left. He wants to do a short rebuy for 100 but says he isnt allowed since he doesnt have enough for a short rebuy. So he says he'll go to the ATM but wants to be dealt in on the button. Dealer calls floor and floorman asks the guy how much is he going to get from the ATM. He says 400 for a total of 500 and the floorman says he's 500 behind.

I think this was a very bad decision for a couple reasons

If the guy loses more than 100 on the next hand he may go to the ATM and never come back or says he cant get anything out of the ATM.

If the guy wins and still has to go to the ATM and comes back not being able to get cash. Then there's another mess.

Although this was moot since the guy folded his hand on the button, I think it was a very bad decision just so the guy can play his button. Any opinions?

[youtalkfunny]

The floor must've known the player, and was highly confident of his intregrity, and his liquidity. There aren't many players that I as a floorman would back that way--the few that I would, wouldn't ASK ME TO.

If this guy did fail to return with money, he was freerolling the house (who guaranteed his stack), not the other players.

[jnalpak]

[ QUOTE ]
He says 400 for a total of 500 and the floorman says he's 500 behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

sorry to hijack but...
can someone explain what 500 behind is? i have heard it used a couple time

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
If this guy did fail to return with money, he was freerolling the house (who guaranteed his stack), not the other players.

[/ QUOTE ]
Let's hope so, anyway. After the floorman makes that ruling, the house really should have an obligation to cover the funds if the player defaults. But depending on where this occurred, it might just have been an inexperienced floorman making a big mistake. As a player sitting at the table, I would be wary about getting involved in that particular hand against the player on the button "playing behind". I guess what the OP should have done is ask the floorman (before the cards are dealt) whether the house is guaranteeing the player's chips.

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He says 400 for a total of 500 and the floorman says he's 500 behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

sorry to hijack but...
can someone explain what 500 behind is? i have heard it used a couple time

[/ QUOTE ]

It just means you have $500 in chips coming so they are in play during that hand.

SpaceAce

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
can someone explain what 500 behind is?

[/ QUOTE ]
It's money/chips that are not physically present at the table but nevertheless are "in play" for the player on subsequent hands.

For example, if you give $300 cash to a chip runner, proper procedure is for the chip runner to count it and confirm the amount to the dealer, who can announce "300 behind". That way, the other players will know that the player in question is going to receive chips that are in play on the current hand. If the player loses those chips before they arrive, the dealer keeps track of how much the player "owes", and the debt can be settled when the chip runner returns.

[cardcounter0]

If the floor makes a decision that a player is playing behind, then they will make it good if the player fails to do so.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

The only cash that ever plays is cash in hand. Perhaps let him super-short-buy for the $100, but letting him play cash he hasnt gotten out of the ATM is obviously very poor judgement.

al

[jnalpak]

so if the runner is late after he counts my money and confirms, i can call with "imaginary chips" if i run out of money before he gets back?

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
so if the runner is late after he counts my money and confirms, i can call with "imaginary chips" if i run out of money before he gets back?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, exactly. You indicate your call verbally and the dealer keeps track of how much you owe the pot.