Last hand with less than minimum vs. last hand with exactly minimum

I was in quarterfinal round of $300k Vegas tournament this weekend when the following happened. I was BR2 at a 2-advance table. BR1 was a lock and while not smart enough to realize that, wasn't quite betting big enough to put himself in major jeopardy. The best news for me was I was effectively betting last (vs. BR 3 & 4) on the 19th and 20th (last) hand.

On 19th hand, BR 3 & 4 both go all in, except each kept a $50 chip that was not able to be bet ($100 betting increments only). Without thinking all that much, I kept a $100 chip (I didn't have a $50 -- they only came from odd blackjacks) and pushed in for the rest.

I then had a moment of absolute panic. Suppose we all lose the hand: What if the tournament director rules that they each "finish" with $50 and I have to play my $100 on the last hand? Could I lose this way? I kicked myself for not keeping $200.

I quickly realized that such a ruling would be unfair and bizarre, but given some of the rulings at this casino (major upscale casino), it would not be unthinkable for them to come up with such a stupid ruling.

At which point we all lost the hand, and the round was declared over with me as #2 finisher -- so I advanced.

Has anyone ever seen this situation be ruled the other way, or ever had a serious debate about it? Did I panic unnecessarily? (I think so... but want to confirm).

 

Yes

I have seen that rule in effect before where players are allowed to play less then the minimum as long as they are all in. Also should multiple players all go out at the same time the player with the most chips prior to the last hand would be the winner.

Just one of those things where knowing the rules come in to play.

 

Yes it is great to know the rules but my experience from invite tournaments is that the rules are often sparse and do not address all situations. And they are rarely applied accurately because the people running the tournament don't really know the rules anway.

Moreover I don't always have time to read them and remember every fine detail, especially if I am playing 1-2 tournaments a weekend and playing the tables, etc. All I really want to know is the rounds, number of hands, how position is determined, starting times, chip count hands, secret bets, and number of people advancing from each round. Everything else is just fluff.

But I appreciate the point.

 

Standardize rules

I understand exactly what your saying, but even if th erules are fluff you should read them at every event. If nothing stands out it probably won't matter anyway, but once and a while you'll find something that can make a BIG differance should the situation come up.

Also agree about the lack of rules at most tournaments, I believe this is in part so that rules can be made based on who the players are involied more so then the situation it's self, (lets call this the VIP High-Roller rule...lol).

This is why I have tried to set a standardize set of tournament blackjack rules (TBJPA) so that BJ tournament are more like poker events. No matter where in the world Texas Hold'em is played the rules are the same (many a few rules may vary but basically the same). I also have ALL the TBJPA rule posted at any of my events so we have no problems (or few as possible anyway).

 

Hold 300

If you can afford it hold 300 back going back going into that next to last hand. Suppose if everyone loses this hand and these "high rollers" get to continue to play with 50 because they dont have enough to bet more. Now even if they get $50 BJ's on the last hand they can't catch your 200 held back (after a 100 bet) on the last hand.

I've played in qualifyer tournaments where the top 3 advance to the tournament of champions. In these qualifyer tournaments there is also a cash payout for finishing as high as possible. After 3 players busted out and I'm amoung the 3 remaining players I try to make a run for 1st place but I never risk losing all my chips. Who knows; if I end up with zero chips after the last hand I might be considered tied with the the players who busted out earlier.


....................................BlueLight

 

I was certain they wouldn't be able to bet the 50 -- in fact they had tried to bet it with the all-in but were told no.

Re: your 2nd paragraph. I made the final table of this tournament and as soon as the first player went busto, I clarified immediately that he would be finishing 6th, regardless of whether any of the rest of us busted out on a later hand. Seemed obvious but I wasn't taking any changes given the money involved.