Sensation at the Sandcastle - Blackpool Disqualification!

[The Camel]

hold on a minute fella. it had nothing to do with me. if i were barred they would have carried on

I'm not saying they wouldn't have carried on.

I'm saying in this sitaution I think the players have a duty to do what they would like to happen if they were in Ali's place.

[rudders]

Frankly I'm astonished at the decision to award Ali 9th place.

Obviously he should have been allowed to finish the tournie, but I suppose the manager who decided to ban him had no idea he was still in a comp. You can't blame the receptionists.

But, when he wasn't allowed in the casino, the only fair decision would be to leave his chips in play and let him get him anted away.

apologies- my bad[color=yellow]
[/color]
The players who refused to chop on chip counts should be absolutely ashamed of themselves.

 was confusing with this bit- which I wasnt so sure about

[action man]

i have thought about this issue all day since the final and still believe we made the right decision. the matter was to do with grosvenor and ali. I also stated before the comp that we have all had a slice of luck that the would not be playing. on the other hand i WANTED him to play, but was not prepared to do a chop. for your info i was 4th in chips and recieved 6th place money, so the chop would have benefited me retrospectively, and maybe it was an advantage (it defo was money wise) that he didnt play, but whose to say he would'nt have raised my blind with trademark rags and doubled me up and put me in a position to win the thing.

i would like to add one more thing. Tikay, eventually was the only person arguing ali's cause of to do a chop or to leave his chips on the table after we all heard of the offence he was ALLEGED to have commited. We tried to get the comp delayed as long as possible to get a decision on the matter, i didn't travel from sheffield to reach my first ranking event final to do a 9 way chop, i wanted to PLAY POKER and learn from the other players around

[bhoywonder]

damn interesting arguments on both sides


i only wish i had an opinion


not smart enuff i guess

[totalise]

hold on a minute fella. it had nothing to do with me. if i were barred they would have carried on

I'm not saying they wouldn't have carried on.

I'm saying in this sitaution I think the players have a duty to do what they would like to happen if they were in Ali's place.

this is a great ethical question, some will say they have a duty to do what they would like to happen if they were in allis place, and others will say that they have a duty to what others would do if they were in allis place.

its a bit like the canonical question about being d/c in a HU sng, some will say "well, I would like it if they waited for me, so I will wait for them" and others will say "well, I dont think he would wait for me, so Im not gonna wait for him"

rambling nonsense over!

[The Camel]

Maybe I've got a bit overheated here.

I apologise if I offended you here action man.

The whole situation would have been avoided if Grosevnor had banned Ali immdiately from all their properties if what he did was so severe.

But, having started a comp, and reached the final, it seems unfair to penalise him for something which didn't happen during the comp itself (If Ali had been told he would be barred from Saturday onwards then it's his fault but if he was unaware he was going to barred that's Not his fault)

We don't know what would have happened in the comp. So, we make the fairest estimate which would be to divide the prize money on chip count when the incident occurs.

If you want to carry on playing, just take out Ali's prize and recalculate the prize money.

BTW: he would have got significantly less than 2nd place prize money. My guess (without doing the maths) is he would have got about 4th place money.

[Bongo]

If he'd done something that bad surely it wouldn't take days to ban him?

[action man]

But, having started a comp, and reached the final, it seems unfair to penalise him for something which didn't happen during the comp itself (If Ali had been told he would be barred from Saturday onwards then it's his fault but if he was unaware he was going to barred that's Not his fault)

nah, no worries, just stating my personal opinions for wanting to play on. agree toatally with the above as did the other 7 finalists

[Royal Flush]

I respect Rick's opinions and in no way would he try to profit in this spot. Trying to eek an extra few quid out of something like this is not Rick's style.

I respect his reasons for wanting to play on.

IMO, Grosvenor did the worst thing possible out of the 3 options, let him play, blind him off or disqualify him.

[maldini32]

This is a long ass thread, just finished reading it!

[The Camel]

I respect Rick's opinions and in no way would he try to profit in this spot. Trying to eek an extra few quid out of something like this is not Rick's style.

I respect his reasons for wanting to play on.

IMO, Grosvenor did the worst thing possible out of the 3 options, let him play, blind him off or disqualify him.

Good post Mr Flush. But, you missed the best option of all. Not let him play in the first place.

[Royal Flush]

I respect Rick's opinions and in no way would he try to profit in this spot. Trying to eek an extra few quid out of something like this is not Rick's style.

I respect his reasons for wanting to play on.

IMO, Grosvenor did the worst thing possible out of the 3 options, let him play, blind him off or disqualify him.

Good post Mr Flush. But, you missed the best option of all. Not let him play in the first place.

That would require efficiency in the Grosvenor operation though

[Card_Shark]

It would be nice for a Grovenor rep to offer some sort of explanation as to why he was allowed to start this comp, yet not allowed to finish it.

[dik9]

I do not know Ali, so am impartial, and I know that some of you are dear friends with him. However, regardless of the amount he puts over the table (this shouldn't be a factor BTW, but it does sometimes cloud judgements of casinos) the ruling should be the same for all.

If a player gets disqualified during a comp, or barred during a comp, the chips should be taken out of play and no monies returned even if he was chip leader heads up. If the chips are left in, this is a huge advantage to the players on his right.

If a player is barred during a comp that is spread over a couple of days, the same should apply.

However, this situation is slightly different and IMO Grosvenor have made a huge mistake, either a manager or a receptionist has not updated their system at the time of barring. This must be done to stop things like this happening. For instance an example, lets say someone has tried to present a dodgy card at cash desk at J10 I am quite sure by the time he tries to get to Grosvenor Broad st he would have been barred. This is an oversight by someone at Grosvenor and a potentially costly one. The fact that he was allowed in and purchased his entry oblivious to the backdated bar regardless of where he finished or position still in, should entitle him to his entry back. Grosvenor have barred someone that they must feel warrants a bar, therefore not entitled to enter, if entered by mistake then entry should be returned even if he was knocked out previously. Huge mistake from Casino me thinks. The players that had already been Mallued, could also easily say that, as he was not entitled to enter they have lost their chips for no reason. Which ever way you look at it, someone will not be happy about the situation or decision made in good faith, it is not pheasable to restart the whole of the comp without him.

Chips should be taken off, entry money returned, regardless of whom the player is. It is unfortunate for Grosvenor that this has happened to a popular face on the circuit, and will be debated by friends, colleagues and possibly enemies on a forum. It will also be an opportunity for some casinos to address their barring procedures, it only takes 2 seconds to bar someone nationally on a linked system (which they have?) If this was joe bloggs, I doubt this issue would have arisen.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, as i know from posts that the majority are friends of his, and this post is by no means personally attacking Ali, I do not know what happened and the situation which surrounds it, I am just saying what the normal procedure is for this, even if it does contain a bizzare twist.


 

[ariston]

I agree with Keiths sentiments on this and am glad to hear Tikay was the last man still arguing ali's lost cause on the table, confirms everything I already knew about him. If he had been ill or in a car crash as someone said earlier he would have anted away to about 5th or 6th most likely. To take his chips off and give him 9th was just wrong as is discussing what has allegedly taken place between Ali and Grosvenor on a forum like this. There is no way if Ali had physically assaulted a dealer he would have turned up a couple of days later to play a comp, no man would be that stupid. If he has verbally attacked a dealer then fair enough slap his wrists ban him do whatever but you cannot just throw somebody out of a final like this imo. What has happened between Ali and Grosvenor is their business and should remain that as I am sure there are 2 sides and its none of our business but what happened in todays final is of interest and I think the wrong decision has been made by the card room manager taking his chips out of play and also by the players not doing some sort of deal. No offence to you personally actionman but if I had been in that final I would not have played- I would rather walk away from the final with a clear conscience.