June 30, 2008 by Deadman.

Hello,

 There was a bit of a disagreement at a recent tournament regarding exposure of cards with action pending. Clearly the TDA rules and Robert’s Rules indicate this will not result in a dead hand. However, players at the table, at least two of which had just come back from the 2008 WSOP early events, stated that the WSOP has now indicated that any card exposed (1 or both) with action pending, will result in an immediate dead hand.

 Typically, I follow TDA and Robert’s Rules for the games I run, as I feel that the televised nature and scale of the WSOP creates some need for unique rulings in favor of viewership. Regardless, I searched the WSOP official site to verify this, but everything I found indicates that the WSOP subscribes to the standard TDA ruling, as listed below. Can anyone tell me if there is something I am missing, or if perhaps they called an “audible” for this year’s events and in fact they are now ruling prematurely exposed cards a dead hand?

 http://www.worldseriesofpoker.com/pdfs/wsop.tournament-rules.08.pdf

50. A player exposing his or her cards with action pending may incur a penalty, but will not have a dead hand. The penalty will begin at the end of the hand. All players at the table are entitled to see the exposed card(s), if requested. A penalty may also be imposed if a player throws a card off the table, violates the one-player-to-a-hand rule or engages in similar behavior. Penalties will be invoked in cases of soft-play, abuse or disruptive behavior. All penalties will be imposed at Harrah’s sole and absolute discretion, in accordance with Rule No. 51.

51. In its sole and absolute discretion, Harrah’s may impose penalties that include verbal warnings and missed-hand penalties. A missed-hand penalty will be assessed as follows: The offender will miss one hand for each player at the table, including the offender, when the penalty is given, multiplied by the number of rounds specified in the penalty. Tournament staff can assess one-, two-, three- or four-round penalties or disqualification. Players who receive a missed-hand penalty must remain outside the designated tournament areas for the length of their penalty. The player must notify the tournament staff prior to returning to their seat. Repeat infractions are subject to escalating penalties up to disqualification.

Thanks so much,

Deadman

Posted in House Rules Different from Standard, Proposed New Rules, Exposed Cards, Hand Discussion, Etc., Fouled Hands, Mucking, Dead Hands, Etc, Official Rules & Guidelines, General, Etiquette, Behavior, Play Procedures & Penalties | Print | 4 Comments »

June 24, 2008 by frenchflush.

Hello, A friend of mine was playing a 2008 event when this happened to him:

Someone raised a pot going 3200 … my friend who didn’t noticed that (his own fault) said “1300″ (the amount he wanted to bet but under by more than 50% of the previous bet) … the floor came and ruled that my friend could choose between calling or folding BUT THE 1300 CHIPS WILL STAY ANYWAY IN THE POT!?!

I know this rule is applied in some casinos but didn’t know it was used in a major international tournament!?

 GG

Posted in Verbals, Gestures, & Actions: Bet Raise Fold, House Rules Different from Standard, Gross Misunderstandings, Underbets, etc, Substantial Action, Bets, Min Raise, StringBet, Fwd Motion, Act Out-Of-Turn | Print | 4 Comments »

May 8, 2008 by frenchflush.

Hello,

Let’s try to find a ”final” method to rule the dealer worst errors. With “dealer error” I mean the dealer IS THE REAL & ONLY RESPONSABLE WITH THE ERROR and no help can be find with players being “not clear” or things like that!

Let’s go with the famous exemple: on a 6000 pot at the river player A bets 1000 - player B takes is time to act (while doing absolutely NOTHING wrong or nothing meaning a call) - the dealer announce “player B calls” (OBVIOUS ERROR FROM HIM for absolutely unknown reason) - so player A shows is hand (very good but no nuts) - player B ask for the floor because he wanted to raise … !!! ….

We allready treated this case BUT … I really don’t agree with the way it is usually ruled and MORE AND MORE  I decide to SPLIT the pot when the errors ARE CLEARLY coming from the dealers … here is why:  

Doing the error the dealer is clearly penalizing both players who are absolutely innocent and the “usual” ruling on this case allways advantage A or B depending of their hand at this moment. Let’s be more clear:

The traditionnal ruling would be to say that because B can’t play anymore with the advantage of knowing A’s cards … B is declared as only calling … so imagines the two situations:

If B has the winning hand … well … let’s say it’s ok because we can suppose A would have fold (so nothing change for him) or would have called the raise (would had been worth for him) …

If A has the winning hand … terrible for B who can argument (sincerely) that he would have BLUFF RAISE tho save his head on that situation … I REALLY CAN’T STAND SAYING TO HIM THAT THE BETTING ROUND IS SUDDENLY STOPPED BECAUSE OF AN DEALER ERROR … TAKING AWAY FROM HIM ANY CHANCE TO WIN THE POT ANYMORE! And don’t tell me about a “minimum raise permitted”: it would never work here as a bluff raise! In the other hand you can answer me that A would have paid any bluff raise from B ! … well … so …

I split the pot (and do it more & more often when the errors come ONLY & CLEARLY from my dealers)!

I will wait for your opinions with the usual respect but you know what? My method please a lot’s of people right here (even if they may look like ”no decision from coward floor” for anyone … lol!).

 GG

Posted in Fouled Hands, House Rules Different from Standard, Fouled Decks, Missing Cards, etc., Official Rules & Guidelines, General, Incorrect Pot Awards, Dealer Errors, Bad Flops, Etc., Mucking, Dead Hands, Etc, Chaos: Sloppy Mgmt of Tables & Tournament, Misdeals | Print | 5 Comments »

April 25, 2008 by John Pack.

It looks as though two of the most respected tournament directors have changed their rules on “show one show both”. Jack Effel of WSOP has apperently listened to the players commitie and done away with this rule. Jack McCelland of Bellagio recently at the WPT championship put the rule to a player vote. Overwhelming the players voted to do away with this overenforced rule. This rule had good intentions, but was certianly ineffective in avoiding needleing. I am glad to see directors listening to players, after all without players those running tournaments have no jobs.

Posted in Exposed Cards, Hand Discussion, Etc., House Rules Different from Standard, Proposed New Rules, Collusion, Cheating, Etc., Official Rules & Guidelines, General, Mucking, Dead Hands, Etc, Showdowns & Pot Awarding, Etiquette, Behavior, Play Procedures & Penalties | Print | 3 Comments »

March 20, 2008 by frenchflush.

Hello,

Even if a great defender of the unification of the world poker rules, I’m a bad student in some points!

When ruling a tournament I use to make a speech to the players BEFORE IT STARTS to explain them what will be the SPECIAL RULES of the event. I really hate having too much spécial rules and love to stick to the TDA & RRs … but some home rules make it SO EASIER FOR EVERYBODY (staff & players) to work and unjoy the tournament.

Here is one I do:

The RRs says: (section 2 - house policies) in decision making:

3. The proper time to draw attention to a mistake is when it occurs or is first noticed. Any delay may affect the ruling.

5. A ruling may be made regarding a pot if it has been requested before the next deal starts (or before the game either ends or changes to another table). Otherwise, the result of a deal must stand. The first riffle of the shuffle marks the start for a deal.

6. If a pot has been incorrectly awarded and mingled with chips that were not in the pot, and the time limit for a ruling request given in the previous rule has been observed, management may determine how much was in the pot by reconstructing the betting, and then transfer that amount to the proper player.  

 WE CHANGE THAT TO THIS HOUSE TOURNAMENT RULE: A ruling may be made regarding a pot if it has been requested before the pot is AWARDED! So management NEVER have to determine how much was in the pot by reconstructing the betting, and NEVER have to transfer that amount to the proper player!

The raisons:

1) The time between the moment the pot is awarded and the moment the dealer starts shuffling the card is so little that this house rule do not affect the right of the player wanting to request for a ruling (he do not have anymore something like 15 seconds to react but only 13!).

2) So many time no one at the table was able to reconstruct the pot correctly (no the dealers, not the players) … going to big losses of time & complicated situations!

3) This home rule go in the same spirit than the rule about the delay to bet (betting & raising 12): “failure to stop the action before three or more players have acted behind you may cause you to lose the right to act” : PLAYERS HAVE RIGHTS BUT THEY MUST USE IT IN A LIMITED TIME!

Believe me: this rule changed the life of all my dealers & floor managers: THEY LOVE IT AND LOVE ME FOR USING IT!

Another close spirit house rule: Once all the chips of a betting round had been pushed in the CENTER POT by the dealer: the pot is definitively declared COMPLETED and no one can claim for a missing bet (even if obvious) if all the players still in the hand pretend to have paid their part (unless a gentleman declare he forgot to pay)!

THOSES ARE ONLY HOUSE RULES AND DO NOT PRETEND TO BE SOMETHING ELSE!

PS: about the time limit to act this exemple:

After the flop A is missed By B who open-bet with C, D and E calling him … ok A can’t “act” anymore … meaning he can’t even call and is out right?

TY for you help & opinion

GG

Posted in House Rules Different from Standard, Official Rules & Guidelines, General, Incorrect Pot Awards, Showdowns & Pot Awarding | Print | 2 Comments »