Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Gunner57, post: 1801258, member: 78827"] The underlined text for me is why the ruling that the floor gave is correct. The fish took the chips off of the table and were not visable before the action took place. This shows the players intent before play began. The dealer should have made sure that the chips were in view and playable when he dealt the hand. I have had a similar situation happen. I dont think it is that uncommon when playing with fish and when I saw it, there was a similar ruling and I agree that it is fair as long as the chips that the player had intended to take with him are off the table/out of view and there was clear intent. To make the player go with his verbal commitment I think is taking a literal interpretation of the rules where as the casino should also be at fault for allowing the chips to be taken off of the table. Good example though. Sucks about the hand but at least you got another few hundred out of it [/QUOTE]