more rulings

[Ironside]

As you well know Matt, APAT took their "own" (STANDARD) rules to a Gala, a Grosvenor, The Broadway, & Aspers, as well as The Fitz. Never had a dispute or contentious Ruling in 5 Events, & everyone knows where they stand. It's not that hard to organise, but you don't 'arf get some flak in the early days!

It helps that most of the players havent played live events before so would just take whatever was said.

MOST players have played live but not huge buy in events

SOME havent played live apart from APAT events

[dik9]

So what does APAT say the rule is on this  , and can you point me to the link please?

[tikay]

It depends in which Casino group or if it was even a legal game...

The only 100% correct answer! All the others are correct too - depending what venue you are in.....

yes..but that doesn't mean it's right....the age old "why can't poker sort its self out?" debate.

And you are not wrong, either. It makes my blood boil when I see that Poker is so totally dysfunctional. Darts - they organised themselves, structure, organisation, & they get huge & GOOD TV Coverage, with money feeding through to the players, & a lively betting market. Ditto RFU, the FA, Premiership, F1, Tennis, Superbikes, Bowls (BOWLS ffs!), Baseball, da de da de da.

And we can't get to agree a standard set of Rules. Until we organise ourselves properly - this is not players v venues, it's the whole chabang - Poker will continue to be the poor relation. When you think how much money sloshes around in the poker economy, it's such a shame we can't get ourselves sorted.

Jeez, I wish I was a few years younger.

Yes, now if only there were an assosiation where the average player could join that would come up with a uniform set of rules regardless of venue...............

 

Hmm, interesting idea. I'm sure it would be warmly received.......

As you well know Matt, APAT took their "own" (STANDARD) rules to a Gala, a Grosvenor, The Broadway, & Aspers, as well as The Fitz. Never had a dispute or contentious Ruling in 5 Events, & everyone knows where they stand. It's not that hard to organise, but you don't 'arf get some flak in the early days!

sorry to pick up a fault tikay but in newcastle there was a dispute over a ruling i was handed the rule book after the ruling was made by Mel, and the ruling made by the TD and Mel was infact wrong by the rule book.
so untill TDs can understand the rules they make how are players expected too

I apologise Iron, you are quite correct, I recall the incident now. We did indeed get the rule wrong on that occasion, & I apologised to the players involved personally.

[tikay]

So what does APAT say the rule is on this  , and can you point me to the link please?

I believe our Rules are on the APAT Website. If not, I am sure I can find a copy & send them to you.

How would you Rule here, Rich?

[dik9]

Again as said before, unfortunately it depends on the venue. The worldpokerrules and the TDA state that on "Breaking" a table you can move into the small blind.

Personally, I am in favour of option 5. I don't think it is fair to have the advantage of the button without posting both blinds, if being sent to balance as the moving Big Blind.

It also depends how a table was broken to whom goes where, and whether they are entitled to move into the sb position. IMO only the moving sb from the broken table should be able to move to the empty sb seat. As with the button. If a table is broken up by a draw, rather than seat arrangement, then they should omit the sb and the button.

The problem with the majority of rules including the TDA etc, there are not many rules, and the way they are worded leaves it open to TD's discression/interpretation. Rulings are very seldom black and white, and a bible is needed to cover most situations, even then there will always be "grey" areas.

Would appreciate them being emailed, thanks Tikay.

[The Sweeney]

Ref options 1 - 5, LOL, none of the above.  They sit down. Seat 1 is button, seat 2 is BB and there is NO SB - seat 3 is dealt in.  Next hand seat 1 still button, seat 2 is SB and seat 3 BB.  It's not rocket science!

P.S.  Do I win a prize?

Seat 4 is going to love being utg, 2nd utg. utg.....

Personally, I'd welcome anything that delayed posting blinds.  Rich, surprised you favour option 5 to my suggestion.  What if seats 4 and 5 have less than the sum of the blinds and it's bubble time?  I don't think anyone would be too happy for 2 and 3 to receive this two hand holiday and then enter in late position.  Had 2 and 3 not entered, button would have stayed on 1 whilst 4 posted both blinds, my way button still stays on 1 whilst 2 posts both his blinds and ALL players are dealt in.

Thoughts please.....

PS My ruling was Grosvenor rule when I was last there(2005).  I believe they were looking into changing it, with players being able to enter on SB.  Whether they have or not, I do not know?

[dik9]

Dave, you been drinking tonight lol

[Ironside]

never enter on SB its just plain wrong and can lead to players having to post the BB twice i know it happened to meon my first big live event when the SB should of sat out and i didnt understand what happened untill after it happened costing me my tourny

[Karabiner]

I was thinking about the exact point that The Sweeney makes as the only loophole in option 5.

What if they were playing hand for hand to get into the money and two low stacks got to sit out for two hands ?

I guess that there will always be one set of circumstances that makes an ass out of any law. 

[Ironside]

I was thinking about the exact point that The Sweeney makes as the only loophole in option 5.

What if they were playing hand for hand to get into the money and two low stacks got to sit out for two hands ?

I guess that there will always be one set of circumstances that makes an ass out of any law. 

iof they were playing hand for hand there would be surely more than just 2 seats open as the money normally starts AFTER a table breaks not before

[Longines]

[
PS My ruling was Grosvenor rule when I was last there(2005).  I believe they were looking into changing it, with players being able to enter on SB.  Whether they have or not, I do not know?

As a semi-regular at Walsall, I'm pretty sure they would go with option 2. You can come in on the BB as your first hand, you can't play your first hand as the SB or button.

[The Sweeney]

Personally, if I was on said table and it was Walsall I'd say.....

"Sod the lot of ya, I'm going to the cinema to watch Ocean's 86.  Call us when you have made a decision!"

[boldie]

Personally, if I was on said table and it was Walsall I'd say.....

"Sod the lot of ya, I'm going to the cinema to watch Ocean's 86.  Call us when you have made a decision!"

but  then they'd call you back in saying you would be disqualified if you left the premises

[Karabiner]

I was thinking about the exact point that The Sweeney makes as the only loophole in option 5.

What if they were playing hand for hand to get into the money and two low stacks got to sit out for two hands ?

I guess that there will always be one set of circumstances that makes an ass out of any law. 

iof they were playing hand for hand there would be surely more than just 2 seats open as the money normally starts AFTER a table breaks not before

The top TWELVE get paid in Bournemouth's main event today making this scenario a possibility