Vegas & The Aftermath - Diary

[77dave]

How would this affect a rebuy comp?

[RED-DOG]

Erm i was looking at it as 30 of 330 as that is total buyin and 20 of 200, but meh whatever semantics really. They have upped the rake in a sneaky way.

This way, the winning players have to pay the rake on behalf of the losing players.

[jizzemm]

This way, the winning players have to pay the rake on behalf of the losing players.

which is so wrong imo

[77dave]

I worry more & more about the way Tourney Poker is run in this country, & I suppose it's been thrown into contrast because I'm just back from Vegas, where they are not scared to impose penalties on miscreants.

I have seen so many "indiscretions" at the Poker Table this week, & not one of them has been punished, or the player penalised, or admonished, in any way, shape, or form. In one instance, the geezer repeated the offence (broke a House Rule) EIGHT TIMES & still never got penalised! Why have Rules if we can all ignore them?

At Luton on Wednesday, the lovely ambience was well & truly smashed by some guy who decided it would be clever to repeatedly act out of turn, sometimes betting before it was he to act, sometimes just leaving the Table before it "got to him", & thus Passing out of turn. Eventually he pulled a shocking stroke by betting out of turn before 3 others could act. This is against the Rules, for the avoidance of doubt.

So, noting not a word had been said to him, I asked the Dealer what he planned to do about it.

"Do you want the Floor called, & a Ruling?" he asked.

"No, I want you to take appropriate action, it's your job to police the Table, not mine".

"Well I can't do anything then" said the Dealer.

"Eh?"

So he then said to the Player, now on his 4th or 5th "stroke", "please don't do that again", The player smiled. And raked in the pot.

I could have called "Floor", or asked Nina to take action, but this is just not how it should be.

Come on Casinos, get your act together. Players are doing as they please, & the game is descending into anarchy. We see appalling table behaviour, deliberate rule-breaking,  but nobody - nobody ever - gets Penalised in the UK.

What was it Radiohead sung?

"When I am King, you shall be first against the Wall"......

They have this spot on in Vegas. First sign of anyone doing something they shouldn't the dealer will call someone over and the player will be given a warning, 'Do that again and you're on the rail for 10 minutes'. That normally has the desired effect. I'm going tens on it was Seb who was up to the tricks as usual.

I don't know who "Seb" is, but that's not the point, it's nothing personal.

I just think that if we have Rules, they should be enforced. I asked the Dealer what he planned to do, & his eyes glazed over. He's not been trained properly, & that's not his fault. We, in the UK, just never penalise anyone. Why?

Answering other questions on the same topic.....

No, nobody else said a word.

And Jakally's reply was most interesting, as he's a good guy, but clearly was not aware of why acting out of turn is a problem. The players are part of the problem, but it's the Cardrooms that need to do something.

I should add that I've accepted an Invitation to be part of the newly-formed "Players Forum" at Luton. But if they think I will confine my comments to structures & Buy-Ins, well, we are heading for a misunderstanding! I shall insist that Rules are consistent, are applied, players penalised if they transgress, Tourneys start reasonably punctually, & no money is ever deducted from Players Prize Pools. What price I get the tin-tack after the first meeting? Long odds-on, but at least I'd have tried.

Does this mean i have been kicked off the "players Forum"  i feel hurt and insulted.

Who else is it in with you? Was it done by vote or invitation

[Longy]

Erm i was looking at it as 30 of 330 as that is total buyin and 20 of 200, but meh whatever semantics really. They have upped the rake in a sneaky way.

This way, the winning players have to pay the rake on behalf of the losing players.

Hmm not really, a simplistic example. It is just hike in rake.

A £220 tourney with 10 runners 50/30/20

                      Old system (200+20)                  New System (220)

1st                       £1000                                 £990
2nd                       £600                                  £595
3rd                       £400                                   £395

Total Prize pool      £2000                                  £1980 (10% taken off =220)

1st loses £10 and 2nd,3rd have lost £5, they are not paying the other ppls rake.

[Royal Flush]

Erm i was looking at it as 30 of 330 as that is total buyin and 20 of 200, but meh whatever semantics really. They have upped the rake in a sneaky way.

This way, the winning players have to pay the rake on behalf of the losing players.

Exactly the same as in a £330 comp then?

Is this a level or something or do you and Tikay not normally pay the £30 @ walsall?

[byronkincaid]

i think tikays point is that this is the thin end of the wedge it's not that the juice has gone up it's that soon it will be 5% for dealers 2% for valets 1% for carpark attendent etc etc.

i don't understand this winning players paying the rake thing?

[Royal Flush]

i don't understand this winning players paying the rake thing?

You pay 330 to enter a tournament

30 is taken from each player from the pot, so losers it doesnt matter, players who cash are getting ~10% less than they would if it was all in the pool

[RED-DOG]

i don't understand this winning players paying the rake thing?

Lol, perhaps I'm wrong about that. Maths are not my strong point.

Just out of curiosity though, how much rake are the losers paying?

[scotty2hatty]

Played my first live tourn in months yesterday and was greeted by a new rule where in an all-in situation pre-flop the players don't need to turn their cards over. Was told this is UK-wide now, say it isn't so?!

it's not so..name the venue/chain please?

Dundee Gala

[scotty2hatty]

Played my first live tourn in months yesterday and was greeted by a new rule where in an all-in situation pre-flop the players don't need to turn their cards over. Was told this is UK-wide now, say it isn't so?!

Any Venue, up to a point, can formulate their own Rules as to these things, (until Rule Unification arrives) so they were "entitled" to do it if they so chose.

But I don't know a single Venue in the world which impose this Rule, & I fancy that.....

a) They are unique

b) It was a mistake/misunderstanding.

a) is the correct option here.

It was ridic. My table was self-dealt but the regulars at the table agreed with the dealer when I complained so must be standard practise there.

[gatso]

i don't understand this winning players paying the rake thing?

Lol, perhaps I'm wrong about that. Maths are not my strong point.

Just out of curiosity though, how much rake are the losers paying?

exactly the same as the winners. 10% taken from the prizepool is exactlly the same as 11.11% rake, it's purely semantics. the only time that different people will be paying different amounts of rake is when/if they start removing a % of the prizepool in a r/b tourney

[boldie]

Played my first live tourn in months yesterday and was greeted by a new rule where in an all-in situation pre-flop the players don't need to turn their cards over. Was told this is UK-wide now, say it isn't so?!

it's not so..name the venue/chain please?

Dundee Gala

All Galas are a joke.

[Newmanseye]

Played my first live tourn in months yesterday and was greeted by a new rule where in an all-in situation pre-flop the players don't need to turn their cards over. Was told this is UK-wide now, say it isn't so?!

it's not so..name the venue/chain please?

Dundee Gala

All Galas are a joke.

QFT

[Geff.H]

A few simple facts.

Now one cared about the Falkland islands before it was pinpointed by Thatcher as a tool to save herself in the Conservative party and increase her popularity with the British public.

Most amusing was the fact they had offered the Argentines SHARED ownership of the islands just 2 years before, such an important colony yet they were willing to divide it's rule.

 The military was only dispatched after the US reluctantly agreed. Of course this meant we had to bend over backwards for them. So to keep the US sweet we had to train Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge forces;  followers of the country’s genocidal former leader Pol Pot.

So the irony is that to justify the war on the Falklands  Thatcher starting harping an about human rights of the Argentine government (something they didn't complain about previously for the
military coup in 1976) yet trained known genocidal military to keep the US happy and not to voice opposition to it.

I am not sure what I can say to “God bless Maggie for making the world a safer place”.  It heralded in a period in which war returned to the centre of the system and the world was clearly not safer. Her tough stance on Ireland really worked well?

We have a lot to thank Thatcher for in the Uk. Who needs society after all eh?

Agreed