Another ruling thread

[Vinodh]

I think some people need to remember that this ruling was made in a £50 tourney which has been held specifically to encourage as many grass-roots players as possible to play in the event, and that a little more leeway might be allowed for some rulings especially when dealing with players who might be perceived by a TD as being relatively insexperienced.

I also think that the ruling might well have been different had it happened in a £1K Monte Carlo type tourney where players are expected to be a lot more sophisticated when playing at that level.

Completely disagree this one Karibiner,I consider myself as a grass root player/rec player,I have never bought in directly into any tournament so far, only through satellites, Also I have never played anywhere outside of DTD till date and I love the club to bits...
whether this a 50 tourney/500 tourney, rules are rules I guess and it shouldn't be any different.

[kinboshi]

The rules aren't different, but maybe the way they are implemented is different.

This is an interesting situation, as my first thought was it HAS to be a call for 6k. Them's the rules. But it's also good to see common sense being applied as well - if it's applied correctly.

It does seem that there are times when common sense isn't applied, for example when someone goes to bet and accidentally knocks a chip in that lands first and then the player is made to bet that amount (or call if there's a bet before, etc.).  We don't want people to be angle-shooting with string bets, but 99.9% of the time it's a mistake rather than an angle, and if common sense is used in these situations then the dealer could tell the player to take the chips back and give him his options (again, only if there's no chance of an angle being played).

The rules are there to make the game run as it should, not the other way round.

[MANTIS01]

I understand it's a good thing to encourage grass roots players. That said the consequences of making a mistake aren't really that terrible in the grand scheme of things. You lose a few chips and you learn your lesson. What if a new player calls thinking he has a flush but due to the lighting, misreading the board or whatever they don't have a flush? Do we give chips back in order to be lenient? I think the best approach is for new players to understand straight away that paying attention in poker is kinda important. If players can keep calling for a ruling because they meant to do a, b, or c rather than what they actually did there would be chaos.

[doubleup]

If players can keep calling for a ruling because they meant to do a, b, or c rather than what they actually did there would be chaos.

villain did what he meant to do - call 1500

So many drama queens in this thread -- it was a considered ruling in particular circumstances, there will be no rampant angle-shooting or chaos as a result.  The sky hasn't fallen and the children will be safe.

[Ironside]

If players can keep calling for a ruling because they meant to do a, b, or c rather than what they actually did there would be chaos.

villain did what he meant to do - call 1500

So many drama queens in this thread -- it was a considered ruling in particular circumstances, there will be no rampant angle-shooting or chaos as a result.  The sky hasn't fallen and the children will be safe.

as you said that my dish just landed on the oap next door but missed the kids phew

[outragous76]

I lost some brutal pots when I was learning the game due to my mistakes! Pretty quick way to learn thou.

I totally disagree with "friendly" rulings for newbies

[MC]

Ruling has to be wrong/bad, based on OP's info.

Also, the next time I see someone write "would of" ITT I think I'm going to crack!

[celtic]

Ruling has to be wrong/bad, based on OP's info.

Also, the next time I see someone write "would of" ITT I think I'm going to crack!

Agreed james, why people just can't learn that it's would off ffs. It's not hard!

[TightEnd]

Simon Trumper will be posting on this thread this afternoon...his view of the ruling, thoughts on the issues involved etc

(lets hope he does now I have trailed it!)

[Alverton]

A DTD td got a ruling wrong!!  I feel dizzy, I'm going to lie down.

[MC]

Ruling has to be wrong/bad, based on OP's info.

Also, the next time I see someone write "would of" ITT I think I'm going to crack!

Agreed james, why people just can't learn that it's would off ffs. It's not hard!

 

[pokerindundee]

No one has really covered this point so far...why exactly did the Cutoff get a penalty? From the information provided the Hero bet 6k, Cutoff made a mistake and thought it was 1.5k and threw in that amount. I can't see why that would be grounds for any kind of penalty.

On the main issue (and based on the information about the situation provided so far) I would say the Cutoff should be made to call the full 6k. In the OP I read that the Cutoff said the word "Call" on the River but from later discussion it seems that he didn't actually say it and just threw in the 1.5k. I don't think that matters and it should still be a call of the full 6k.

The exact details of any ruling situation are important as too often things are missed out when stories are retold. Will be good to hear the TD's thoughts later on.

[gouty]

The TD has ruled that he never verbally said " call"

If had ruled that he said "call" then the 6k is due. Also OP should not of opened his hand.

Nice read tho.

So we can now throw in a few chips silently in the hope hero turns his hand

Seems like a solid rule foundation for future consistency! What if hero insta mucks?

Yes. You can.

If he insta mucks then that is a different ruling. But it's the same situation. Hero should of been on the ball. This thread has polarised views only because the OP and TD differ on verbal action so the the ruling is wrong from OP view but correct from TD. As hero opened his hand he denied the opponent the choice of making up the 6k or passing and leaving the 1500 in?

Chucking a couple of chips in only means a call if the player is all in.

[gouty]

The TD has ruled that he never verbally said " call"

If had ruled that he said "call" then the 6k is due. Also OP should not of opened his hand.

Nice read tho.

At which point should a bettor open their hand then?  When all the chips are in and they then double check that its called and the other player has understood the correct betsize?  Last aggressor has to show 1st, as soon as he is called he should be insta opening it or mucking.  Fucking about and not instantly doing 1 or the other is 1 of several small delays that unnecessarily slow down the game

I would rather have 3 slow rollers on a live mtt than 1 tanking online pro having a go at a live event. Several small delays won't make up for serial tankers.

[dik9]

First of all can I say that I am not posting on behalf of DTD before you all try and shoot me down.

After reading the first 2 pages I was like WTF ...... never? Then after Toms post it became a little clearer.
I think only 1 person (Gouty) has touched on the proper reason in this instance.

Once the bet is called it is then a showdown and the dealer will then ask to see the hands to determine what wins.
In this instance the dealer hasn't asked and the cards were prematurely shown with no inference from the dealer to show.

Regarding the ?call? does the ?caller? believe that he has called or is trying to induce a player to expose prematurely. There are 2 questions here, is it now accepted action (as I Know It states) or is it a mistake or inducing by the caller.

I suspect it is was taken by the TD as a genuine mistake, and didn't feel that the player would have called the 6k (this is where you have to trust the TD).

Regarding the penalty, I don't know the history of the "caller" he may have had previous dubious or the TD may have given the penalty to ensure that if it happened next time it will be considered "accepted action" or to give a harsher punishment if it happened again and he thought it was a stroke.

I don't know the full circumstances and not privy to the TD's information as most of us aren't. But rulings are not made for the sake of it. As long as you believe the TD is fair, non bias and has the interest of the game at heart then you should be happy playing in a comp run by them. If you don't think the TD is up to the job or is incompetent then when you sit down, you accept what befalls you. But in my experience ALL TD's at DTD are fair, non bias and have the interest of the game at heart so would be happy playing there.

As an addendum if the caller had stated "call" he/she would be held to that action.