not yet, he's still behind.tony raises to 80k with call from erik ...
> .... tony bets 60k, erik moves all-in and gets called quick time...
...7S... tony takes the pot - up to one million...
Does this mean our illustrious chairman B has beaten Erik?
Nope - still behind in chips but much healthier. $90000 if he winstony raises to 80k with call from erik ...
> .... tony bets 60k, erik moves all-in and gets called quick time...
...7S... tony takes the pot - up to one million...
Does this mean our illustrious chairman B has beaten Erik?
not yet, he's still behind.
Only the person All in can be knocked out. If they win, the other player has to give them the number of chips they had.Oh ok, I thought that when somebody went "all in" that they lose everything. What did Erik do to keep some of his chips?
Erik had 1400 chips, TB had 240 chips....Erik all in and loses, so TB wins 240.Oh ok, I thought that when somebody went "all in" that they lose everything. What did Erik do to keep some of his chips?
Sorry - poker speak does sound very geeky!Thanks for the commentary,Cornholio.Dont understand it but you are making it sound good.
Only the person All in can be knocked out. If they win, the other player has to give them the number of chips they had.
Ah ok, that makes sense. Because Erik went "all in" and lost, he only gave Tony the same amount of chips that Tony bet with, whereas if Erik won, Tony would be out.
What would happen in that situation if Tony had gone "all in" and won? Same situation as above or does he get all of Erik's chips?
And what happens if they both went "all in"?
Apologies for the questions, but I've watched quite a bit of poker on TV over here and find it quite interesting, but I'm still not au fait with the rules.
Although Seidel may have said all in, he was basically putting Bloom all in as he had mroe chips. If both players go "All In", only the player with the least chips is actually all in as the other player only has to match their stack and will therefore have chips left over.