Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Checked the nuts

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Checked the nuts

    Super sat for WPT on Thursday night.

    Two players (blinds I think) check a small unraised pot (400 I think) all the way to river. Board shows AKQJx. No possible flush.

    Both players check. Then players show 10x and the pot is chopped.

    The players seemed to know each other well enough but there was no particular reason to think that they were colluding or soft playing until this point.

    There are a few mutterings around the table and the dealer calls the TD and quickly asks... is there a rule for checking the nuts on the river. TD says no.

    First player asks what the fuss is and it is explained to him (by UTG) that his action is not being questioned. Both players start to make comments like... what's the point? I'm only getting called to chop etc. etc. making nothing of it.

    I want to emphasise again that I don't think that there was anything really sinister here. Maybe the BB just had a brain fart and didn't bet. But I am curious as to what players think should be the ruling here.

    My own opinion is that it is not enough to do nothing. I think that the players (or at least the BB) should have been immediately moved to new tables because there is no other word for this than collusion - even if it is tacit collusion - even unconscious collusion.

    Perhaps there should also be a penalty - like one round - for the BB?

    Any views?

    #2
    If he checks closing the action with the nuts then he should be penalised, one round penalty or something like that...

    Remember a few years back in the WSOP Main, Darvin Moon checked the nuts back on the river cos he 'wanted to see what the other guy had' and am pretty sure he got a 1 round penalty for it.

    Comment


      #3
      A round penalty is not enough. One should be moved. If you get two lads who know how to play together they can really exploit a game.

      Comment


        #4
        Bit stupid of TD to say there is no rule for checking the nuts when last to act.

        Normally only results in a warning in my experience. Would be a bit silly to flag yourselves if colluding over such a small pot.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by EssEll View Post
          There are a few mutterings around the table and the dealer calls the TD and quickly asks... is there a rule for checking the nuts on the river. TD says no.
          this show a shocking lack of knowledge of the rules, and a complete misunderstanding of the game and how its played.

          deliberately soft playing the nuts is serious and needs to be treated such.
          sometimes mistakes happen and people don't realise their hand power. sometimes it is genuine stupidity on behalf of the player. and a little sense by the td is needed to enforce the correct balanced punishment

          the majority of the time it is a player not wanting to take chips of another player for whatever reason. this needs to be met with severe penalty. I lean on the side of expulsion from the event, other simply give a round penalty. somewhere in the middle is probably correct here.

          Comment


            #6
            Any TDs or tournament organisers have a view on this ... what would your ruling be?

            I presume there was a list of rules for the WPT - anyone have access to them now? I'm curious as to whether the TD just couldn't be bothered (it was only the super sat) or whether there really is no rule.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by EssEll View Post
              Any TDs or tournament organisers have a view on this ... what would your ruling be?

              I presume there was a list of rules for the WPT - anyone have access to them now? I'm curious as to whether the TD just couldn't be bothered (it was only the super sat) or whether there really is no rule.
              "Only the super sat"? The super sat was on average a €400 game. Any any game played as part of a WPT festival deserves to be run properly.

              Anybody closing the action and in doing so, checks with the nuts, deserves to be penalised by at least 1 lap of the table. If I was TD and I thought the 2 players were soft playing each other at this early stage, i would move one of them as well.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by EssEll View Post
                Any TDs or tournament organisers have a view on this ... what would your ruling be?

                I presume there was a list of rules for the WPT - anyone have access to them now? I'm curious as to whether the TD just couldn't be bothered (it was only the super sat) or whether there really is no rule.
                Yes. Im against it.
                The rule is available anywhere on line. search bobs rules, its laid out in there quite nicely i believe.
                if not roy cookes book has it too i think.

                The wpt may have had a rule book printed out, normally these are non-comprehensive rule book amendments, like the TDA rules, containing 40-50 tournament specific rules. So each specific rule or non tournament situation may or may not be covered. These 'tournament rules' are merely amendments to an existing poker room rule book and are not complete. It is possible that the TD in question simply read those rules and assumed that was all he needed.

                Its a case of someone with insufficient information being in a place to make decisions which directly affect the outcome of the game.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by connie147 View Post
                  "Only the super sat"?
                  Exactly, in fact more exactly! the fact its a satellite makes it more severe because the accused 'colluders' do not need to go as deep as they would in a regular tournament to get an equivalent prize.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X