Simultaneous all ins

This is really interesting. My first reaction was that they are both all in because Player B didn't say it before Player A.

But what Player B said would not be right. It would be a call not an all in (unless Player B had <= player A's chips in which case people sometimes do say "All In" but in reality they are just calling)

What I don't get is why Player B would be saying All In at the exact same time as Player A. Player B has to know that Player A is tanking. My guess is that what happened was player A was putting chips out across the line but not all of his chips and Player B thought he would raise All In but then Player A said All In just before letting go of his chips and Player B did not see that coming.

Still I don't know what the Floor would do here. I think the rule is clearly that if Player B had acted before Player A then Player B would now have a choice of whether to fold or call and if Player B had acted after player A then it is always going to be an All In call. But if it really happened at exactly the same time and nobody at the table (especially the dealer) could say who acted first, I am not sure how it would get ruled or if it would get ruled the same each time.

If I were the Floor I think I would rule that Player B hasn't acted yet because in all likelihood they were acting before they knew that Player A was going all in. In general when a Player acts after an All In when heads up they don't say all in. They just either say "Call" or they toss in a chip or push a stack of chips forward.

Pay that man his monies

Personally, it sounds like angle by Player B. He hoped that acting out of turn would cause Player A to fold. Player B either has the responsibility to not act before Player A or understand what the bet was if he is acting after the bet. This is not a "gross misunderstanding of the action." Player B is all in.

Player B is claiming that this is an OOT action situation, not a "gross misunderstanding" situation.

I'd be very hesitant to give him his options, especially if he elicited so much as a raised eyebrow or any reaction that could betray the strengths of his opponents' hands.

The floor would typically ask the floor and others at the table to chime in and say whether they believe one acted before the other or if there were other factors such as player A tapping the table in a way that could be interpreted as a check. If everyone seems to agree it happened at exactly the same time, I would probably rule it's an all in and call.

I see this the same as if two players push their chips forward in unison. In order to act out of turn you have to act BEFORE the other person.

If B actually did act out of turn, then A has not yet taken a valid action. So if he checks, the action to player B has not changed, so he would be held to the all in.

If this happened to me as player A, and player B tried to angle me in this way, my responses would be -

If I hoped for him to fold, play it cool and let him reconsider his action.

If I was looking for a call, I would agree that B said "all in" before me, but say that I had already silently checked with my hand.

Player A would be the one who has the option to either check/call the all-in or bet all-in if player B acted out of turn.

Player B's action is still binding.

If they spoke near instantaneously, it is fine to treat A as all-in and B as calling.

Actually, yes I agree with the above for the most part. But if it were a verbal all in on both players behalf pretty much in unison- they are both all in. I think its being overthought too much