Hi guys,

Below is what I have witnessed about a year ago in a live MTT, but somehow it's still floating on my mind, mostly because I saw something similar happening very recently.  So I thought I'd ask for your opinions here.

Without further ado, here's what happened:

Two guys were in hand (this was a HU tourney), SB limps and BB checks back. Blinds are 200/400. BB led out on flop and turn, which SB smooth called. Now the pot is about 8k on the river, and BB says "five" as he throws in a 5k orange chip, and SB snap calls, also throwing in a 5k orange chip.

BB was probably bluffing, as he mucks his hand and says "nice hand." SB shrugs and doesn't show his hand, waiting for the dealer to rake the chips and hand them to him. BB didn't say anything either. 

Now all of a sudden, the dealer says "hold on" and calls the floor. Her argument was that BB said "five" instead of "five thousand" when he threw in a 5k orange chip, hence it should stand as a "five hundred (500)" instead of 5k betting, and since SB didn't say anything when throwing in chips, it should stand as calling a 500 bet.

SB is going on tilt for a number of reasons. First off, he thinks it was very obvious that BB was intending to bet 5k into a ~8k pot, since betting 500 into a ~8k pot wouldn't make much sense there. Second, when SB called the river bet BB didn't say anything and was ready to surrender the pot, and the dealer (from his POV) intervened unnecessarily, thereby giving unfair advantage to BB. 

Alright, so my questions are:

- What should be the floor's (final) decision?

- Did the dealer really give BB an unfair advantage, or was she just doing her job/duty by being vigilant?

- Does the BB's "intention" matter? Like, we all know that betting 5k into 8k seems way more reasonable than betting 500 into it, but how can we "prove" it?

- If the floor decides that the bet was 500 instead of 5k, does that still hold even if BB says "I meant to bet 5k, so just give him 5k not 500?"

And final question:

- In the end the floor declared that the bet was 500 and 4500 should be given back to both SB and BB. BB still admits that he intended to bet 5k, but it doesn't seem like he wants to pay 4500 back to SB. From this, can we say BB is angle shooting? Is his behaviour morally/ethically douchey?