Genting to repay £70,000 to WPT London players & dealers!

[GreekStein]

May seem silly but I hope the people who are pursuing this seriously have screenshots of Simon Tompsett's posts on here and of the WPT site so that things can't be edited/deleted/amended etc at a later date.

[doubleup]

'm equally curious about allowing Alternates into the Comp on Day Two. I don't disapprove of it, not one bit, but Grosvenor, DTD, & afaik all other Casinos in the UK refuse to allow Alternates to buy-in beyond the first 2 or 3 Levels, & I've often been told that is because the GC don't approve of the practice. If nothing else, then, the WPT have shown that to be false, & hopefully the practice can become standard from now on.

Since the gaming board was replaced by the gambling commission, I thought that all the rules about poker went in the bin?

I'm curious as to why you think day 2 entry is a good idea?  Half the field can go out on day one(s), not sure that allowing ppl to have a look at who's been eliminated, who's chipped up etc, before deciding to play is really fair on day one entrants.

   

[Claw75]

'm equally curious about allowing Alternates into the Comp on Day Two. I don't disapprove of it, not one bit, but Grosvenor, DTD, & afaik all other Casinos in the UK refuse to allow Alternates to buy-in beyond the first 2 or 3 Levels, & I've often been told that is because the GC don't approve of the practice. If nothing else, then, the WPT have shown that to be false, & hopefully the practice can become standard from now on.

Since the gaming board was replaced by the gambling commission, I thought that all the rules about poker went in the bin?

I'm curious as to why you think day 2 entry is a good idea?  Half the field can go out on day one(s), not sure that allowing ppl to have a look at who's been eliminated, who's chipped up etc, before deciding to play is really fair on day one entrants.

   

can't personally see a problem with that in principle as long as everyone is aware of the cut off for alternates.  would be up to each individual then whether they sign up at the start or prefer to risk joining later with significantly less than average chips and the additional information they would be able to glean before entering.

[tikay]

'm equally curious about allowing Alternates into the Comp on Day Two. I don't disapprove of it, not one bit, but Grosvenor, DTD, & afaik all other Casinos in the UK refuse to allow Alternates to buy-in beyond the first 2 or 3 Levels, & I've often been told that is because the GC don't approve of the practice. If nothing else, then, the WPT have shown that to be false, & hopefully the practice can become standard from now on.

Since the gaming board was replaced by the gambling commission, I thought that all the rules about poker went in the bin?

I'm curious as to why you think day 2 entry is a good idea?  Half the field can go out on day one(s), not sure that allowing ppl to have a look at who's been eliminated, who's chipped up etc, before deciding to play is really fair on day one entrants.

   

In truth, I'm not THAT fussed either way, to be honest. But I actually think that players are entitled to the choice though, assuming they have the nous to weigh the pros & cons. I AM more fussed about the whiole idea that we have been told by all UK Venues that Alternates are "illegal" beyond Level 2 or 3, & all of a sudden it's changed - but only at Palm Beach, & for the WPT, afaik. I'd just prefer clarity & consistency on that.

Clarity & consistency on that, & whether Prize Pools can be messed with seems quite important to me. Arguing the toss after the Event is futile, I'd rather everyone knew where they stood for the future. 

[dik9]

In truth, I'm not THAT fussed either way, to be honest. But I actually think that players are entitled to the choice though, assuming they have the nous to weigh the pros & cons. I AM more fussed about the whiole idea that we have been told by all UK Venues that Alternates are "illegal" beyond Level 2 or 3, & all of a sudden it's changed - but only at Palm Beach, & for the WPT, afaik. I'd just prefer clarity & consistency on that.

Regarding the cut off for alternates: When guideline 3 was the "Law" for cardrooms, it stated that all players must be present on the premises at the start of the tournament. It also said that all players must be entered before the start of the competition. Some venues misinterpreted the "guideline" and said all players must be seated at the start of a tournament. When the gaming board were approached about alternates they said absolutely not.

When guideline 3 disappeared it effectively allowed cardrooms to run it how they wished, as there was now no reference to how it should be run.

It also stated that ALL entry monies MUST be paid out in prizes.

In 2000 a legal bod for grosvenor noticed that an unrelated part of the act said, games of equal chance could take a registration fee of no more than 10% of the entry money with a cap of £50. Hence reg fees. Gala then pursued this further and found that for the use of casino equipment the casino could charge a participation fee (uncapped and as frequent as you like ( which was already known as that was more commonly known as session fees). This was then applied to competition play!

The first I can recall was Gala leicester that had a £10 freezeout with a £1 reg fee (10%) and a participation fee of £5 which effectively meant 60% juice on a £10 freezeout.

I digress lol, cardrooms can now charge anything and regarding alternates and late entries it is entirely a "House Rule" it was and is commonly agreed that 3 levels is the accepted norm for late reg and alternates. So you as the punter, should be able to vote where to play with your feet if you feel uncomfortable. In order for you to do this, it should be clearly stated what the House rules are in an accessible for all to read place.

[tikay]

In truth, I'm not THAT fussed either way, to be honest. But I actually think that players are entitled to the choice though, assuming they have the nous to weigh the pros & cons. I AM more fussed about the whiole idea that we have been told by all UK Venues that Alternates are "illegal" beyond Level 2 or 3, & all of a sudden it's changed - but only at Palm Beach, & for the WPT, afaik. I'd just prefer clarity & consistency on that.

Regarding the cut off for alternates: When guideline 3 was the "Law" for cardrooms, it stated that all players must be present on the premises at the start of the tournament. It also said that all players must be entered before the start of the competition. Some venues misinterpreted the "guideline" and said all players must be seated at the start of a tournament. When the gaming board were approached about alternates they said absolutely not.

When guideline 3 disappeared it effectively allowed cardrooms to run it how they wished, as there was now no reference to how it should be run.

It also stated that ALL entry monies MUST be paid out in prizes.

In 2000 a legal bod for grosvenor noticed that an unrelated part of the act said, games of equal chance could take a registration fee of no more than 10% of the entry money with a cap of £50. Hence reg fees. Gala then pursued this further and found that for the use of casino equipment the casino could charge a participation fee (uncapped and as frequent as you like ( which was already known as that was more commonly known as session fees). This was then applied to competition play!

The first I can recall was Gala leicester that had a £10 freezeout with a £1 reg fee (10%) and a participation fee of £5 which effectively meant 60% juice on a £10 freezeout.

I digress lol, cardrooms can now charge anything and regarding alternates and late entries it is entirely a "House Rule" it was and is commonly agreed that 3 levels is the accepted norm for late reg and alternates. So you as the punter, should be able to vote where to play with your feet if you feel uncomfortable. In order for you to do this, it should be clearly stated what the House rules are in an accessible for all to read place.

Thanks Rich.

Do DTD have any plans to allow "you may enter at any stage of the Tourney" do you know?

[dik9]

Can't say for 100%, but I believe they are happy with 3 levels. If you do allow alternates on a never ending basis it would be a logistical nightmare.

[George2Loose]

but but if u didnt allow it Jake Cody wouldnt be WPT Champ!!!!!

[AlrightJack]

Tikay, who specifically from a UK casino has told you it is illegal to accept alternates beyond the first 2 or 3 levels? I simply so not believe that you have been told this by ALL UK venues. It is purely down to each company's policy and has been since the law changed. Grosvenor started accepting them the day the law changed and a set number of levels was determined as a company policy so as to ensure (or try to) consistency at each of its 20+ venues that offered poker. At the time, the policy mirrored that of the most worldwide poker tournaments. It is only relatively recently some major events have started extending the late entry period into day two, or even day three. If it turns out to be a popular trend then I am sure that UK companies/poker organisers will make decisions about whether to follow suit or not, but it is early days. There are plenty of people who don't like this idea and might not wish to play if things were changed to allow it, so its not just a case of players having the right to choose when to enter. There are also logistical issues to consider about whether it is appropriate to allow post day one entries in some venues (staffing, space requirements, capacities for side events, etc).

[tikay]

Tikay, who specifically from a UK casino has told you it is illegal to accept alternates beyond the first 2 or 3 levels? I simply so not believe that you have been told this by ALL UK venues. It is purely down to each company's policy and has been since the law changed. Grosvenor started accepting them the day the law changed and a set number of levels was determined as a company policy so as to ensure (or try to) consistency at each of its 20+ venues that offered poker. At the time, the policy mirrored that of the most worldwide poker tournaments. It is only relatively recently some major events have started extending the late entry period into day two, or even day three. If it turns out to be a popular trend then I am sure that UK companies/poker organisers will make decisions about whether to follow suit or not, but it is early days. There are plenty of people who don't like this idea and might not wish to play if things were changed to allow it, so its not just a case of players having the right to choose when to enter. There are also logistical issues to consider about whether it is appropriate to allow post day one entries in some venues (staffing, space requirements, capacities for side events, etc).

You are quite correct John, my mistake, I apologise. My earlier comment, same thread, was more accurate, when I said.....

I'm equally curious about allowing Alternates into the Comp on Day Two. I don't disapprove of it, not one bit, but Grosvenor, DTD, & afaik all other Casinos in the UK refuse to allow Alternates to buy-in beyond the first 2 or 3 Levels, & I've often been told that is because the GC don't approve of the practice

I'm quite sure plenty would like the option, & plenty would not, I'm simply curious as to what the actual position is as to that, & deducting money from the Prize Pool.

[tikay]

There is so much that is unsatisfactory about this, & my worry is that it sets a precadent, but to a degree, if players don't object, or query the prize pool, at the time, then it's always going to be unsortable.

Clarity & consistency on that, & whether Prize Pools can be messed with seems quite important to me. Arguing the toss after the Event is futile, I'd rather everyone knew where they stood for the future. 

There was no opportunity to object at the time. 15 mins into the tournament when the seating arrangements were replaced on the screen by the clock and when the prize pool made its first appearance to the players, I said (and Will Martin and the others at my table will be able to vouch for this) "they're only adding £4800 per player into the prize pool". There were a few frowns and disgruntled replies, but nobody did anything about it. We were playing a £5k tournament, we have a more pressing commitment to the £4800 that did make it into the prize pool that we need to concentrate on. This is why these things should be made clear before the tournament (it wasn't) and why I don't think it is "futile" to make a fuss about it afterwards.

Maybe not, but you agree that clarity BEFORE the Event makes more sense, & that's my line, too. It goes without saying that it is "highly unlikely" that anybody is going to get their £200 (or whatever) refunded AFTER the fact.

Once we pay the Entry Fee, that's that really, we are stuck with it, like it or not, so I think it makes sense to know in advance. The lesson needs to be learned, & by both parties.

[RED-DOG]

Forgive me if this question has already been answered, but what happened to the £200's?

[AndrewT]

Forgive me if this question has already been answered, but what happened to the £200's?

Seems to have got added to the £300 juice to make £500 which went to the organisers.

[AlrightJack]

Forgive me if this question has already been answered, but what happened to the £200's?

Phil Ivey blew it on the craps table.

[RED-DOG]

So basically, they took some money the players didn't know they were taking, on the pretext of doing something with it that they didn't actually do?