Am I Horrible For Doing this? Would you have done the same???

[Royal Flush]

phatomch is a top TD, when i read this thread i assumed he can't have been working that day as he would never give such a bogus ruling, now it has become apparent he was told (rightly or wrongly) that the AJ was never tabled so he is spot on with his ruling.

What does surprise me is that he was having dinner, i didn't think someone so thin could possibly eat anything!

[ariston]

so if the hand was tabled before the river was dealt then "mucked" after the river the hand would still have won. The fact that the TD wasn't told the hand had been tabled looks to me like someone was cheating/angle shooting/being a horrible person (here we go again lol)

[I, Zimbra]

It is entirely possible that I've missed something here, but for me it is impossible to cheat accidentally.

The concept of "cheating" in this case implies that one knows the rule, and lies about it deliberately to try to exploit the ignorance of others. If one is ignorant of the correct rule, one cannot cheat it.

This was a rookie comp, it's been said, JJ thought he was acting within the rules to ask for the TD to make a decision when the card hit the muck. Now he knows different.

Whichever way you spin it, it cannot be called cheating, or angle shooting - both of those concepts surely require a player to know the rule and pretend not to in the hope of getting a favourable (albeit incorrect) decision from the TD.

[tikay]

It is entirely possible that I've missed something here, but for me it is impossible to cheat accidentally.

The concept of "cheating" in this case implies that one knows the rule, and lies about it deliberately to try to exploit the ignorance of others. If one is ignorant of the correct rule, one cannot cheat it.

This was a rookie comp, it's been said, JJ thought he was acting within the rules to ask for the TD to make a decision when the card hit the muck. Now he knows different.

Whichever way you spin it, it cannot be called cheating, or angle shooting - both of those concepts surely require a player to know the rule and pretend not to in the hope of getting a favourable (albeit incorrect) decision from the TD.

At last, someone understands!

[MANTIS01]

Ref: My earlier posts

Posted by: jjandellis
Well! All my christmases have come at once.....have a chance for some sweet revenge on this fella!

Posted by: jjandellis
I believe I would not have been so stubborn over the ruling had the game been played out in a good nature prior to the incident. I might even have let it go.

I also refute the cheat/angle shooting accusations. But what I have said is that "Bob" controlled how JJ weighed-up "the spirit of the game" and now he is reflecting upon what sort of person this makes him. My ideal is to have a consistent game ethic that is immune to peer pressure and other outside factors.

If JJ says that this is his stance regardless of game conditions I wouldn't knock that. But what he's saying is that his stance here would vary according to other people and how they have behaved towards him. This is what interests me.

[I, Zimbra]

Yes, the first post was a little ambiguous, it could be interpreted that he knew the rule and lied about it to get revenge. But he debunked that idea on page two:

... as is becoming clear, I was not 100% sure of the ruling myself. Hence why I advised him to call for the TD; beckoned him over myself. If the TD had awarded in his favour I would have dropped the issue without a seconds thought.

I have always been told that as soon as the players cards hit the muck then they're mucked. I was also aware that rules seem to vary from venue to venue, which is another reason I asked/advised for a ruling....

What I will do when I next see 'Bob', is apologise and tell him that the wrong ruling was given...

When he says that he wouldn't have been so stubborn about it in a good-natured game, it sounds more to me like he felt he had the right to appeal, but would have waived that right under better circumstances; to a player who doesn't know the exact rule, wouldn't that sound entirely reasonable? It sounds reasonable to me!

It seems he let the guy get to him in the heat of the moment, I think it's forgiveable. He badly wanted the rule he thought he understood to be true, but it wasn't and now he knows it.

Also, at a rookie game it would be understandable if not all the facts were presented (by either party) in an exact enough fashion for a TD to accurately assess what had happened. It doesn't necessarily mean that anyone lied to get an advantage.

[KingPoker]

It is entirely possible that I've missed something here, but for me it is impossible to cheat accidentally.

The concept of "cheating" in this case implies that one knows the rule, and lies about it deliberately to try to exploit the ignorance of others. If one is ignorant of the correct rule, one cannot cheat it.

This was a rookie comp, it's been said, JJ thought he was acting within the rules to ask for the TD to make a decision when the card hit the muck. Now he knows different.

Whichever way you spin it, it cannot be called cheating, or angle shooting - both of those concepts surely require a player to know the rule and pretend not to in the hope of getting a favourable (albeit incorrect) decision from the TD.

At last, someone understands!

I pointed this out 5 pages ago!

[MANTIS01]

I agree with everything you say Zimbra.

I don't think jj is in need of anyone's forgiveness. He got a ruling and was awarded the pot...end of. I don't think his morals should be questioned at all.

The part that interests me is the attitude of people to rules and why that might change in a given circumstance. Personally I think rules should be a framework and there needs to be a degree of flexibility within. Or we end up losing our integrity.

You get awarded a pot on a technicality and win a big tournament. You leave the casino at 4:00 a.m. and get pulled over by the police. They bust your balls for doing 32 mph in a 30 zone, give you 3 points and the standard £60 fine. What's your attitude? If you are a stickler for the rules and take this in your stride....fine. If you insisted on abiding by the "rules" in the casino but think that this scenario outside of it is unreasonable then we have ambiguity of character.

In jjs case he says that he takes advantage of the ruling (a perfectly reasonable stance) because of the person inolved. However, even when the ruling is forthcoming he still has the power as an individual to over-rule that judgement if he so wishes. Wouldn't giving the pot back to "Bob" after the rule had been declared made jj untouchable as a player/person? And wouldn't that have been the sweetest revenge of all?

Personally, I give-up the pot to "Bob"....mainly through fear of provoking the "poker gods" into some callous bad-beat campaign against me...but consistently enough I also tell the copper to go swivel!!!

[RioRodent]

It is entirely possible that I've missed something here, but for me it is impossible to cheat accidentally.

The concept of "cheating" in this case implies that one knows the rule, and lies about it deliberately to try to exploit the ignorance of others. If one is ignorant of the correct rule, one cannot cheat it.

This was a rookie comp, it's been said, JJ thought he was acting within the rules to ask for the TD to make a decision when the card hit the muck. Now he knows different.

Whichever way you spin it, it cannot be called cheating, or angle shooting - both of those concepts surely require a player to know the rule and pretend not to in the hope of getting a favourable (albeit incorrect) decision from the TD.

At last, someone understands!

I pointed this out 5 pages ago!

I alluded to this on page 1!! 

[RioRodent]

Personally I think rules should be a framework and there needs to be a degree of flexibility within. Or we end up losing our integrity.

You are not the only one of this opinion...

Copied from Robert's Rules of Poker -

2 - HOUSE POLICIES

DECISION-MAKING

1. Management reserves the right to make decisions in the spirit of fairness, even if a strict interpretation of the rules may indicate a different ruling.

[Bongo]

Wouldn't deliberately disobeying the ruling (by giving the pot to Bob) make him a cheat though?

[dik9]

PMSL , but could you be clearer on the facts then, was it "on their backs"  and what made "Bob" throw his hand away, before you tabled. I did not realise you were a novice and can now comprehend the reason for posting. If this is an experienced player, then can you see how this sounds like a stroke/opportunistic/angle shoot etc. The Spirit of Poker relies on etiquette and honesty, and I know there are many "poker players" who have neither, as a TD it is our Job to uphold the Spirit and in our judgement, make the right call with the fairest outcome. So what actually happened then  

[tantrum]

Answer one question---- the cards are on their backs on the turn---- is a showdown - can you muck them?  I don't think so...

Obviously jjandalis has no idea what the showdown is- bless you child....

Jjandalis very smart of you setting up the scene so people will feel sympathetic to your actions, if it was an old lady - the support would be much lesser.

Child???

LOL

Didn't know the Government employed child soldiers....

Please try not to insult people when posting, its a little childish.

So adult, so mature yet so sensitive;)

[ariston]

jj you seem a decent sort and have obviously made a mistake. You didnt mean to cheat but in effect you did, there is no way you can take it back. There is no such thing as a mistake at a poker table if you learn from it. You have already said you wouldn't do it again and in reflection this post was probably because you felt guilty which means you already have the correct emotions to be a decent poker player/human being. I appologise if I seemed a little off in some of my posts with others but it did kick off a little. Don't appologise for the the thread its been fascinating (if a little fraught)- would rather have a thread like this than a oh no my aces got cracked by a numpty type thread. Good luck at the tables and just try to do unto others etc.

can we stop going round in circles now guys?

[RobS]

This never happens on the internet