WE NEED OPINIONS (murder at our casino)

[albert]

James

I sent our friend out for 10 minutes to calm the situation down, as our other friend was getting a little heated.  I thought that that was the best thing to do in that situation as the table declined the offer of a topilet break for 5 minutes.  Just tried to take the heat out of the situation, 'cos it went very quiet after that.

[albert]

yeah he kept on trying to justify his moves to bb, bb asked him not to speak to him, sb continued.

[bolt pp]

yeah he kept on trying to justify his moves to bb, bb asked him not to speak to him, sb continued.

Its easy to call someone scum and then to tell them not to defend themselfs!

The guys got every right to try and qualify to the bb why he isn't scum, and to everyone else that heard.

he's been abused and then penalised for defending himself, i understand what your obligations are but the  SB, it seems to me, has been ruined at every stage since the out set of the hand.

[Dewi_cool]

The BB should have been sin binned for the initial harrasment, the sb did nothing wrong, even after the event I would say that the bb was out of order

[doubleup]

The BB should have been sin binned for the initial harrasment, the sb did nothing wrong, even after the event I would say that the bb was out of order

You are completely naive if you thing the small blind did nothing wrong - he made a comment intended to give information or misinformation about his hand.  This should not be allowed in a tournament because of the possibility of collusion. A cash game is of course completely different.

[Karabiner]

The BB should have been sin binned for the initial harrasment, the sb did nothing wrong, even after the event I would say that the bb was out of order

You are completely naive if you thing the small blind did nothing wrong - he made a comment intended to give information or misinformation about his hand.  This should not be allowed in a tournament because of the possibility of collusion. A cash game is of course completely different.

"Moody" or speech play has been officially allowed in Grosvenor Casinos for well over a year now.

[bolt pp]

The BB should have been sin binned for the initial harrasment, the sb did nothing wrong, even after the event I would say that the bb was out of order

he made a comment intended to give information or misinformation about his hand.  This should not be allowed in a tournament because of the possibility of collusion

Any form of discussion could then be construed as collusion containing secret codes etc, what your proposing is the exclusion of any form of communication at a poker table which is laughable.

What even goes further to highlighting your inability to comprehend the situation is that you think that it could be LESS open to manipulation in a cash game!! are you for real?

[doubleup]

The BB should have been sin binned for the initial harrasment, the sb did nothing wrong, even after the event I would say that the bb was out of order

he made a comment intended to give information or misinformation about his hand.  This should not be allowed in a tournament because of the possibility of collusion

Any form of discussion could then be construed as collusion containing secret codes etc, what your proposing is the exclusion of any form of communication at a poker table which is laughable.

What even goes further to highlighting your inability to comprehend the situation is that you think that it could be LESS open to manipulation in a cash game!! are you for real?

My inability to comprehend the stitation??

Why should I give a toss in a cash game what 2 players say to each other heads-up?  It doesn't matter to me!

In a tournament final I want players to clash and knock each other out - if they start telling each other their hands, this isn't going to happen. 

And anyway whats wrong with keeping quiet during a hand. Do you lack the self discipline to shut your mouth for 30 secs?

 

[Dewi_cool]

The BB should have been sin binned for the initial harrasment, the sb did nothing wrong, even after the event I would say that the bb was out of order

You are completely naive if you thing the small blind did nothing wrong - he made a comment intended to give information or misinformation about his hand.  This should not be allowed in a tournament because of the possibility of collusion. A cash game is of course completely different.

The small blind did nothing wrong, all within the rules, why should he suffer?

[Jon MW]

The BB should have been sin binned for the initial harrasment, the sb did nothing wrong, even after the event I would say that the bb was out of order

You are completely naive if you thing the small blind did nothing wrong - he made a comment intended to give information or misinformation about his hand.  This should not be allowed in a tournament because of the possibility of collusion. A cash game is of course completely different.

The small blind did nothing wrong, all within the rules, why should he suffer?

 

And wouldn't removing the BB for 10 minutes also have diffused the situation and quietened it down?

[doubleup]

Absolutely my last post (rant) on this subject.

This thread and some others on this forum pretty well sum-up why tournament poker in the UK is crap and why I rarely bother with it.

No one gives any thought to the fundamental principle behind a rule.

In this case the fundamental principle is that discussions between players should avoid any potentially collusive activity.  Lets look at an example - it's the bubble and you're shortstacked.  Player A raises and player B reraises - player A goes all-in and says "If you've got AA, you're a lucky man" - player B folds and player A shows KK.  They are friends.  I think you could justifiably claim to have been disadvantaged by that speechplay.

On the bubble in a Vienna tournament, I had 2 Danes at my table. Dane 1 raises, Dane 2 reraises Dane 1 thinks and says something to Dane 2 in Danish.  Result 10 minute sinbin.  Correct ruling, because of possible collusion. 

It is not enough to "allow speechplay" - you have to qualify that to avoid collusion or not allow speechplay. 

Tikays thread about the bizarre rule in Luton is another example of not relying on a principle.  In this case the principle is that players should not get an advantage by delaying action or hiding cards.  Somehow the standard rule in place to deal with this has been misunderstood by someone in Grovesnor and twisted into nonsense.

[bolt pp]

In a tournament final I want players to clash and knock each other out - if they start telling each other their hands, this isn't going to happen.

 

You play in many tournaments where pals openly discuss what cards they've got with each over?

If that happens often where you play you need to play someware different.

[ifm]

No one gives any thought to the fundamental principle behind a rule.

In this case the fundamental principle is that discussions between players should avoid any potentially collusive activity.  Lets look at an example - it's the bubble and you're shortstacked.  Player A raises and player B reraises - player A goes all-in and says "If you've got AA, you're a lucky man" - player B folds and player A shows KK.  They are friends.  I think you could justifiably claim to have been disadvantaged by that speechplay.

The rule is that you are allowed to talk during a hand, i thought you couldn't name your specific card(s) but all else is fine. You appear to be lobbying for a change in the rule, until that happens then there is no "principle" as you describe it.
Foreign languages in a card room is not permitted in the UK either BTW but that's a different rule again.

[sofa----king]

albert card room manager>>>i personally think that if a player asks you to tell another player not to talk to him ,this cant be done,as long as he/she is not being rude,as talking is a part of the game to suss out your oponent,the big blind is a very good m8 of mine(so is the small blind too) and i dont want to sound as if im going against him,but i think its maybee 6 off 1 and 7 of the other here, its very close,what the small blind done in my opinon was not wrong ,but we all know how he plays and his chat do go on a bit,but the big blind in my opinion made the call of the century with 10 10 after table talk went on,if small blind said nothing im sure bblind would have passed 10 10 it was just ironic that the board dished out ace ace ,with added salt to a wound which would not close,we all know how experienced the bblind is in the game and at what level he plays at,but as he declared hes never seen talk like this before,but we all do know that THE SMALL BLIND IS A LOONEY WITH HIS MOUTH (lol) but to be honest ive never seen him be rude to a player,he is very good at this.and im sure the big blind will be out for revenge lol,i hope the 2 players can maybee brush issues to one side and still be able to talk about it as im sure their games will help each other in the future.they are both very good players and im sure that they may both see the light and think that they both did something close to the bone by hurting each other with there words,once again  thanx for your opinions  JAMES

[Ammanford Boy]

I don't think u can compare the BB to SB here, SB been playing 5 minutes and BB has proven he is a top player. So Sofa king stop talking nonsense....
Maybe more to the poing should be the fact that 2 brothers play together in the same tournaments all the time and thay HARDLY ever contaet each others hands....
Maybe this should be looked at?
What do u think about this Albert??