Another interesting ruling from WSOP

[owen1923]

Her action had been taken away from her, she wasn't given the opportunity to make the call.

It may appear fair to the guy making the mistake, but it was the complete opposite to the utg.

She was also not given the opportunity to fold to the all-in.

You are quite right, but at least she should have been given the opportunity.  An opportunity that was through no fault of her own denied her.

My view is that all the benefits of this decision fell for the all in guy.

He put all of his chips into the pot, he mucked his own cards, he was given most of his chips back, he forfeited 2BB, when if fact it should have been a minimum of 3.  He made the mistake and got the benefits of the decision. 

She lost all ability to continue in the hand, which indirectly impacts on the remaining players as well.

[dik9]

I must be wrong then

[jackinbeat]

I must be wrong then

I'd expect a bit more from someone who advertises card room manager in their signature. How would you now rule, giving the opinions expressed here?

[dik9]

I must be wrong then

I'd expect a bit more from someone who advertises card room manager in their signature. How would you now rule, giving the opinions expressed here?

LOL Exactly the same as Jack Effel as I think I have explained

[I KNOW IT]

I must be wrong then

You are not

[Cf]

Ruling seems fine to me.

To those that say you could angle shoot... Yes, of course you can. This is where we use our discretion. If we suspect there has been angle shooting then we can rule differently.

[jackinbeat]

I must be wrong then

I'd expect a bit more from someone who advertises card room manager in their signature. How would you now rule, giving the opinions expressed here?

LOL Exactly the same as Jack Effel as I think I have explained

So no penalty for the player, sigh, maybe there is a need for that new book on the rules of poker. The 'I must be wrong' statement wasn't meant to be taken literally then, was hoping from some insight into the thoughts and details taken into account when making this kind of decision, especially in the biggest (well 2nd now in money), tournament in the world.

Personally I believe it was the right decision in this case, but not warning the player and issuing a penalty, why would the TD not do that?

[Doobs]

I must be wrong then

I'd expect a bit more from someone who advertises card room manager in their signature. How would you now rule, giving the opinions expressed here?

LOL Exactly the same as Jack Effel as I think I have explained

So no penalty for the player, sigh, maybe there is a need for that new book on the rules of poker. The 'I must be wrong' statement wasn't meant to be taken literally then, was hoping from some insight into the thoughts and details taken into account when making this kind of decision, especially in the biggest (well 2nd now in money), tournament in the world.

Personally I believe it was the right decision in this case, but not warning the player and issuing a penalty, why would the TD not do that?

He made another big error yesterday and was given a one round penalty.


From under the gun, Andras Koroknai raised to an unknown amount and Fabrizio Gonzalez reraised from the next seat to 305,000. Play folded back to Koroknai and he moved all in for approximately 2.4 million. According to Paul Volpe, Gonzalez asked for a count, but Koroknai thought he said call and turned his hand over to reveal the  . The floor was called and it was ruled that Koroknai would be given a one-round penalty. Gonzalez folded his hand.
 
This is the second big mistake Koroknai has made deep in the 2012 World Series of Poker Main Event. Yesterday, he missed action in front of him and moved all in when he didn't see Gaelle Baumann raise before mucking his hand before she had acted. No penalty was given then. This time around, he'll have to sit out for the next orbit.

Read more: http://www.pokernews.com/live-reporting/2012-world-series-of-poker/event-61-no-limit-hold-em-main-event/day6/chips.38860.htm

[Cf]

Warn the player what exactly? They will have already realised they messed up. They've lost some chips. Don't really see the need for further action in this instance, though I wouldn't argue it had a penalty been given either.

[jackinbeat]

I must be wrong then

I'd expect a bit more from someone who advertises card room manager in their signature. How would you now rule, giving the opinions expressed here?

LOL Exactly the same as Jack Effel as I think I have explained

So no penalty for the player, sigh, maybe there is a need for that new book on the rules of poker. The 'I must be wrong' statement wasn't meant to be taken literally then, was hoping from some insight into the thoughts and details taken into account when making this kind of decision, especially in the biggest (well 2nd now in money), tournament in the world.

Personally I believe it was the right decision in this case, but not warning the player and issuing a penalty, why would the TD not do that?

He made another big error yesterday and was given a one round penalty.


From under the gun, Andras Koroknai raised to an unknown amount and Fabrizio Gonzalez reraised from the next seat to 305,000. Play folded back to Koroknai and he moved all in for approximately 2.4 million. According to Paul Volpe, Gonzalez asked for a count, but Koroknai thought he said call and turned his hand over to reveal the  . The floor was called and it was ruled that Koroknai would be given a one-round penalty. Gonzalez folded his hand.
 
This is the second big mistake Koroknai has made deep in the 2012 World Series of Poker Main Event. Yesterday, he missed action in front of him and moved all in when he didn't see Gaelle Baumann raise before mucking his hand before she had acted. No penalty was given then. This time around, he'll have to sit out for the next orbit.

Read more: http://www.pokernews.com/live-reporting/2012-world-series-of-poker/event-61-no-limit-hold-em-main-event/day6/chips.38860.htm

Kind of makes my point, doesn't always work giving penalties as some people just don't learn, or like to continue angle shooting, but maybe a penalty after the first error would have made for a more thoughtful player. Seems like poker karma paid him a visit here though.

[jackinbeat]

Warn the player what exactly? They will have already realised they messed up. They've lost some chips. Don't really see the need for further action in this instance, though I wouldn't argue it had a penalty been given either.

To take more notice about what's going on of course. And to make it clear his mistake could have cost him all his chips, and he wouldn't be so lucky next time. I feel the french lady got the raw deal here and she did nothing wrong, if she was holding KK that is.

[Cf]

There you go. Penalty for the 2nd offence. Seems fair enough to me. Amy more offences increase the penalty or dq if appropriate.

[Doobs]

There you go. Penalty for the 2nd offence. Seems fair enough to me. Amy more offences increase the penalty or dq if appropriate.

Seems fair to me too.  Two sensible rulings.

Losing all his chips through a first error seems a little dispropotionate.  I suppose jackinbeat is right though, if he had lost all his chips on the first error, he wouldn't have made the second.

[jackinbeat]

There you go. Penalty for the 2nd offence. Seems fair enough to me. Amy more offences increase the penalty or dq if appropriate.

Fair enough, they got their eventually. Did you have to bring my ex Amy into this though...

[dik9]

The second offence is definitely a penalty as he has exposed his cards with a player to act. Not only would he get a penalty for this offence, I would be having a word in his shell about his over enthusiasm. In both cases if he had waited for the dealer he wouldn't be in this situation. I would be making sure that I have explained clearly that his over enthusiasm may cost him his tournament life if it is done again.