Questionable ruling
Thoughts on this one:
Friend and his dad are playing 5-5 NL
Dad decides to make move on player, double paired board, Villan has about 300 in 5s in front. Seated beside dealer.
Villan calls. Turns out he has about 600 in greens behind the dealers chip jar.
Hero objects. Player agrees that this was a bit unfair and is willing to take 300.
Poker manager says that the full amount has to be covered regardless.
Dad and son get pretty vocal. Security is called and they are told unless he covers full stack, bared from play. They are ok with that and leave.
Two rules come into mind:
LArge chips are always supposed to be exposed.
Nothing larger than a card is supposed to be on the table.
Opinions on ruling?
Friend and his dad are playing 5-5 NL
Dad decides to make move on player, double paired board, Villan has about 300 in 5s in front. Seated beside dealer.
Villan calls. Turns out he has about 600 in greens behind the dealers chip jar.
Hero objects. Player agrees that this was a bit unfair and is willing to take 300.
Poker manager says that the full amount has to be covered regardless.
Dad and son get pretty vocal. Security is called and they are told unless he covers full stack, bared from play. They are ok with that and leave.
Two rules come into mind:
LArge chips are always supposed to be exposed.
Nothing larger than a card is supposed to be on the table.
Opinions on ruling?
Comments
I would have left as well.