“How much are you playing?”

In games where cash plays, it is obviously supposed to be visible to establish the fact of cash in play. Then players are, within reason, entitled to have the cash counted or spread out on request.

I see no difference between tournaments and cash. If anything, I could make a case that staying out of it is more important in cash. In tournament, the most at risk is the buyin. In tournament (unlike in your post) tournament chips have no value and are just chips If you ran great that most you have at risk is still only the amount of the buyin. OTOH, all that you might have built up could be at risk in the hand. But generally I see no difference.

The rules are clear. A player is entitled to a clear view and nothing more. That is his personal clear view. The limit of the dealer role, imo, is to help ensure it is a clear view. If that means instructing a player to move stacks to make them more visible, certainly that is a dealer role to ensure fair play. But doing anymore that ensuring a clear view, including any shuffling chips (I am routinely shuffling chips. I try to do this with the smallest chips, typically $1. But if someone asks me, I will put those chips down right where they belong in my stacks.)

As to keeping the game moving, that is a limited role the dealer has. If it was less limited, it might include things like allowing the dealer to call a clock. But unless strict guidelines were provided, that is handing the dealer power to use arbitrarily. Same for what your position is. You are determining when to estimate and give a count or even just a vague stack comment. If the room doesn't' have strict, specific guidance, it becomes an arbitrary dealer decision on how much to help and when.

The issue of a visually impaired player is valid. I don't have a great answer. It may seem unfair or unjust but probably the best answer is to stay out of it. While reading a board is a given accommodation. That is an accommodation of necessity. Player cannot reasonably expect to play without knowing the cards on the board. But knowledge of another player stack size isn't even close to that level of necessity. So while may seem harsh, I don't see a universally fair way to handle. If there is one, I could change my opinion but I don't know a better answer.

For the specific scenario you asked about. Dealer can insist the player make sure all large chips are clearly visible. Dealer can ensure the stacks of green are such that other player can clearly see them but instructing they be moved accordingly. Dealer can then relay to other player, any black are clearly visible and all other big chips are visible.

I would not have a problem saying something like he has no black but that is getting close to my limit.

Your response was beyond my limit but not horribly so. But that is only my opinion. But your logic 'I need to keep the game moving' is the error I see. You don't have a responsibility to force Seat 1 to reply, you don't have a place replying for Seat 1. At most your responsibility is to let Seat 7 know the applicable rules. He is not entitled to a count. Seat 1 does not have to answer his inquiry. That he is only entitled to a clear view of S1 chips and that has been met. Beyond that, you are acting arbitrary or at a minimum you have no way to ensure such actions are consistent between dealers.

That you will admit erroneous info if the floor is called really doesn't matter. It is too late by then. Generally is established that even erroneous info by a dealer doesn't create house liability. That is a part of the player must protect his hand. The error you will have made that I care about is that you arbitrarily went beyond your established role.

But again, only my opinion. What really matters is the house rules/procedures. If you are sure your actions are meeting those, great. But unless I find that and see the room uniformly acting in such a manner, I won't be tipping.

If those black are 'hidden' (even partially), I can understand. Giving dealer a chance to handle by informing the player to put large chips in clear view is better. Directly telling the player the same is fine imo. But what if your view is wrong and it is two stacks?

Played a couple bounty tournaments recently where people asked for counts of stacks behind and floor said just need to be in reasonable stacks and the players whined and whined about it.

The point of asking to see somebody's stack is often to see how much more they have. To understand what an all in will do in terms of getting them to fold. In cash games it really doesn't matter. But in tournaments it can make all the difference. Possibly being short stacked can change an otherwise call decision.

This is important and when I am asked in a cash game with $100 bills on the table I will always count the hundreds I have in front of me and tell the questioning player exactly how may $100 bills I have.

Often in a cash game I will ask the other player how many hundreds he has and every single time they will tell me the exact number. This happens in 2/5 NL and up at casinos that allow it (like Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun).

I will always show my stacks. The way I keep my chips the highest quantity chips are always in front of the other chips. So it will be obvious. I have OCD so my stacks are always sized according to how many chips I actually have. The stack sizes will be 5, 10, or 20. So it should be fairly simple to figure out close to the exact amount I have.

When I have a lot of the highest value chips I will break up that stack so it becomes clear exactly how many of those chips I have. So in a tournament if 25,000 is the biggest chip size and I have 7 of them I will often say I have 175,000 in 25,000 chips or I have seven 25,000 chips

Why do I do this? Because I think it might help to speed things up. Also, in cases where I have a borderline hand or a bluff it will look very strong. Like I want the other player to know exactly how many chips I have. In cases where I have a monster the way I say it will probably be different so it looks like I want them to think I could be bluffing.

But in the end I never try to hide my chips so I rarely get asked this question.

Yeah I agree. For the most part the less the dealer does the better. But if there's any question as to whether all stacks are visible and a player has asked how much they're playing, I think it's better for the dealer to say something. Your suggestion is probably the best approach. By just asking the player to move the higher denomination chips out front there's no risk of misconveying info or unfairly influencing action.

My previous comment about telling someone their opponent has an additional stack behind was speaking as a player. If I misconvey something as a player it's not really my responsibility to the extent that it would be for a dealer.

I mainly just speak up because certain players will knowingly "hide" their big chips to sucker someone into making a big mistake going all in. Most often the victim is a recreational player who is typically not as vigilant to verify stacks. I would rather speak up rather than allowing someone to get angled in that way.

He might be trying to tilt you by subtly reminding you you're still short-stacked.

But if 10 minutes have passed, and you're in a big pot again, it's perfectly cromulent for him to ask again. People like me buy in for 2x max buy and pocket the overage. If I take hits, I'll quietly top up. So 10 minutes ago, my stacks might have been all red, but now I've got fewer stacks and there are greens or blacks on top.

Also, I play in one room where several of the older players have gone color-blind. They can't tell red chips from green or green from black unless the chips are right in front of them.

Sent from my SM-A546V using Tapatalk

And as soon as they do that, you can say:
„Are you in the hand Sir? So shut the **** up“!

Always a good opportunity to get some „spice“ into a game :-)

I like it when the table captains blurt out how much I’m playing so I don’t have to say anything

In well-run rooms you're going to be thrown out if you do this kind of thing very often. Anyway, it's generally better for a game to be happy than spicy.

Sometimes people are so distracted when they play, they genuinely don't know what your stack size is.

I had a guy who was blocking his stack, and I asked to see his chips, and he screamed at me for asking. I informed the dealer and the dealer asked him show his chips.

The fact that they are distracted is a good thing.

I also had a guy ask for a chip count. LOL. I showed my stack and the dealer counted the chips for him. I don't think she was supposed to do that?

But sometimes guys have 1k chips that aren't visible. it's really a thing. People add chips without announcing it. Obviously if you had everybody covered that's a different story.

It's really a thing which is a clear violation of the rules of every cardroom and can result in a reverse freeroll situation for the person with the hidden chips. It can also (and should) result in a ban if done repeatedly. Standard poker room rules state that large chips must be clearly visible. If you have several, they should be in a stack in front of the stacks of smaller chips. If you have one or two, they should be placed on top of your stacks of smaller chips. They should not even be in play in games where most players have no real need for them.

Have you ever lost a hand to someone who made an all in bet with hidden large chips?

If it happens you should call the floor, and if he knows what he's doing, you shouldn't have to match the hidden chips.

This is now a different scenario. Once the all in bet is made, the clear view rule changes because you are entitled to a full and exact count.

Not saying a reverse free roll ruling might apply but that is different from typical how much are you playing. I have been caught by hidden chips on all in bet. Floor said you could have asked for a count.

Otoh, I have bet all in with other player having hidden large chips. Thought I had him well covered. In that case, floor did allow reverse free roll because clear view was all I was entitled to and other player actively prevented. But I called for floor before the runout when the large denom chips suddenly became visible.

You don't think that was a terrible ruling? I think it's worse than in your second scenario, because I think it's silly to say you are "all-in" when you think you won't really be all-in because the other player has fewer chips than you.

Honestly I've almost never heard a player ask for a count when there is an all-in bet, and I've never seen a dealer count the bet when the chips are still in the bettor's area, which is what usually happens these days. The player usually just says "all-in" and throws in one chip, or the dealer puts an all-in button in front of him. How is the dealer supposed to count the bet when that happens?

I think we have a miscommunication. The player with hidden chips went all in, not me. You have never asked for a count before you call when someone bet all in?

Otoh, when I went all in and other player had hidden chips, I could not get a count before I shoved. I was less able to protect myself because of this.

I believe anytime large chips are intentionally hidden the reverse free roll should be in play. But I think it is more important in the case when a count is not an option.

Personally, no I haven't ever asked for a count when someone goes all in, but I don't play a whole lot of NL, and I never have a huge stack.

But have you never seen a player go all in and leave his chips against the rail? Because I see that every time I play. How would the dealer physically count the stack then? I've only ever heard a dealer give his best estimate from looking at the stack, and if big chips are hidden the dealer might also not see them.

Sure. In fact in the all in case that is what that player did. Went all in and left chips against rail with big chips hidden. I did not ask for a count but I certainly could.

If I did the dealer reaches over, pulls the stacks forward, counts them and almost certainly sees/finds and counts the big chips. Thus why floor said I could have requested a count. If dealer could not reach the stacks, he asks the player to push them forward and then he counts them.

When I have asked for a count I expect an exact count not an estimate. I have never had a dealer refuse to actually count an all in. I have never seen a dealer guess an all in.

I have heard a dealer say “he has you covered” but even then if player insists he still gets the actual count not an estimate.

The only time I see dealers giving estimates are when someone is asking what’s behind. Btw, I hate this for two reasons.

First is that what dealer says doesn’t matter. It’s the actual amount not what dealers says. Same rule applies for actual count but dealer is less likely to get actual count wrong and it effectively eliminates hidden chips.

Second, you are not entitled to a count of chips behind. Only a clear view. So dealer should not be giving count or estimate at all. But if you are going to answer, give the right answer don’t guess.

Well, I'm sure you've played more NLH than I have, but as far as I recall I've just never seen this happen.

I don't think most dealers would even be able to reach all the chips on the table.

As I said if dealer can’t reach them, he instructs player to push them forward where he can reach them.

What doesn’t or should never happen is dealer looks and says, “about $xxx”. Now some dealers may look and say “it’s $yyy”, not an estimate, tech a guess but those dealers eyes are usually pretty damn good. Though they can miss But even then you can insist they count/breakdown stacks just to be sure.