Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2 rulings on the bubble

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

    2 rulings on the bubble

    Couple of real situations discussed during the EPT live stream that I thought were interesting:

    1) Bubble of a major tourney, short stack shoves and a big stack folds Aces face up saying he is making way more chips abusing the bubble than he will knocking out the shorty: having shown his hand, should he now be forced to call?

    2) Again, bubble of big tourney, very short stack SB shoves, big stack BB, who is friends off the table folds: does folding any hand here when it's ~1% of your chips to call represent collusion and should BB be forced to call?

    #2
    Originally posted by Kie Diddy View Post
    Couple of real situations discussed during the EPT live stream that I thought were interesting:

    1) Bubble of a major tourney, short stack shoves and a big stack folds Aces face up saying he is making way more chips abusing the bubble than he will knocking out the shorty: having shown his hand, should he now be forced to call?

    2) Again, bubble of big tourney, very short stack SB shoves, big stack BB, who is friends off the table folds: does folding any hand here when it's ~1% of your chips to call represent collusion and should BB be forced to call?
    In both these spots the player should not be forced to call. The player has payed for these chips and can do what they like. However, if anyone believes there may be a spot of collusion, the floor should be called and they will assess the situation and penalise players if necessary.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Doyler92 View Post
      In both these spots the player should not be forced to call. The player has payed for these chips and can do what they like. However, if anyone believes there may be a spot of collusion, the floor should be called and they will assess the situation and penalise players if necessary.
      Paying for chips has nothing to do with this you still have to follow the rules of the game. The player in hand 1 should get a penalty for folding the nuts.

      Hand 2 player can do what he wants.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Donk Magnet View Post
        Paying for chips has nothing to do with this you still have to follow the rules of the game. The player in hand 1 should get a penalty for folding the nuts.

        Hand 2 player can do what he wants.
        of course you can fold AA pre flop - stack size/paying for chips/bubble all irrelevant.
        twitter
        moneybookers

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Donk Magnet View Post
          Paying for chips has nothing to do with this you still have to follow the rules of the game. The player in hand 1 should get a penalty for folding the nuts.

          Hand 2 player can do what he wants.
          sure its not the nuts until the river is dealt.

          Comment


            #6
            In both situations the big stack player is in breech of the no soft play rule. example A is blatant and example B is more subtle.

            In each case there is grounds for giving the player a penalty.

            Example A, while it is tactically more sound to hoover chips in this manner players are obliged to eliminate others from the event. Not doing so will incur penalties up to and including expulsion from the event.
            Force him to call? no, but certainly give at least one round of penalty (I would go stricter, others may not but it should be at least 1 orbit)

            example B this is collusion, not playing against a friend or partner to eliminate them from the tournament is a breech. for around 1% of your stack then it is an extreme breech. For a bet that low then I would be leaning towards very strict punishment. If it was more of a difference, such as 15% of his chips and the big stack held very poor cards I may allow a warning. I would need to judge each situation differently. For any repeat offense then punishing the small stack would also be considered.

            You are required to play hard against all players, at all times and in tournament play this means you need to attempt to eliminate others from the event. The bubble doesn't really matter, as you are required to play hard at all stages of the event. Being on the bubble just makes it more high profile and volatile.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by thegreatiam View Post
              In both situations the big stack player is in breech of the no soft play rule. example A is blatant and example B is more subtle.

              In each case there is grounds for giving the player a penalty.

              Example A, while it is tactically more sound to hoover chips in this manner players are obliged to eliminate others from the event. Not doing so will incur penalties up to and including expulsion from the event.
              Force him to call? no, but certainly give at least one round of penalty (I would go stricter, others may not but it should be at least 1 orbit)

              example B this is collusion, not playing against a friend or partner to eliminate them from the tournament is a breech. for around 1% of your stack then it is an extreme breech. For a bet that low then I would be leaning towards very strict punishment. If it was more of a difference, such as 15% of his chips and the big stack held very poor cards I may allow a warning. I would need to judge each situation differently. For any repeat offense then punishing the small stack would also be considered.

              You are required to play hard against all players, at all times and in tournament play this means you need to attempt to eliminate others from the event. The bubble doesn't really matter, as you are required to play hard at all stages of the event. Being on the bubble just makes it more high profile and volatile.
              What if it was the bubble, and the big stack moved in from the SB and then the short stack folded AA face up? Should be get a penalty?

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Flushdraw View Post
                What if it was the bubble, and the big stack moved in from the SB and then the short stack folded AA face up? Should be get a penalty?
                Short stack can't knock the big blind out. Folding seems viable for him to stay in the game.
                Its not the content of the hand that makes it soft play it's the fact that the big stack has chosen to not play when it is such a small part of his chip total either to extend the bubble or to keep his mate in.

                Folding aces to stay in the game in the hope of lasting one more round and maybe make it to the money would be more than valid tactic.

                Comment


                  #9
                  This is only even an issue due to the fact that he showed the hand face up in the first instance. Had he just folded without showing the outcome is exactly the same. LOL at people thinking he should be penalised. LOL at him folding AA too. The mind boggles.

                  In scenario 2 I am confused. Bubble of a big tourney and shortie moves all-in. Lets assume shortie has ~10BB's. If this represents ~1% off BB's stack then BB must have ~1,000 BB's. I'd love to know what 'Big Tournament' this is ?

                  Why am I even reading this....Happy St. Patricks Day.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by thegreatiam View Post
                    In both situations the big stack player is in breech of the no soft play rule. example A is blatant and example B is more subtle.

                    In each case there is grounds for giving the player a penalty.

                    Example A, while it is tactically more sound to hoover chips in this manner players are obliged to eliminate others from the event. Not doing so will incur penalties up to and including expulsion from the event.
                    Force him to call? no, but certainly give at least one round of penalty (I would go stricter, others may not but it should be at least 1 orbit)

                    example B this is collusion, not playing against a friend or partner to eliminate them from the tournament is a breech. for around 1% of your stack then it is an extreme breech. For a bet that low then I would be leaning towards very strict punishment. If it was more of a difference, such as 15% of his chips and the big stack held very poor cards I may allow a warning. I would need to judge each situation differently. For any repeat offense then punishing the small stack would also be considered.

                    You are required to play hard against all players, at all times and in tournament play this means you need to attempt to eliminate others from the event. The bubble doesn't really matter, as you are required to play hard at all stages of the event. Being on the bubble just makes it more high profile and volatile.
                    Well according to the people telling the anecdotes, in both cases the 'big stack' in question was forced to call, essentially for the exact reasons outlined quite eloquently above.
                    This said, the consensus of the people discussing it (Lex Veldhuis & others) was that in instance A, the player should be allowed to fold as his strategy for the tournament should be his own and he should have all his options open to him but that indeed in (B) it is essentailly colluding and a penalty was in order (although forcing a call seems a little too interventionary to me)

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by PokerPiper View Post
                      This is only even an issue due to the fact that he showed the hand face up in the first instance. Had he just folded without showing the outcome is exactly the same. LOL at people thinking he should be penalised. LOL at him folding AA too. The mind boggles.

                      In scenario 2 I am confused. Bubble of a big tourney and shortie moves all-in. Lets assume shortie has ~10BB's. If this represents ~1% off BB's stack then BB must have ~1,000 BB's. I'd love to know what 'Big Tournament' this is ?

                      Why am I even reading this....Happy St. Patricks Day.
                      Sorry for confusing you please don't feel the need to go all columbo on the exact details-there is no conspiracy - we have been to the moon!
                      also please rememeber what happens when you assume......

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Kie Diddy View Post
                        Well according to the people telling the anecdotes, in both cases the 'big stack' in question was forced to call, essentially for the exact reasons outlined quite eloquently above.
                        This said, the consensus of the people discussing it (Lex Veldhuis & others) was that in instance A, the player should be allowed to fold as his strategy for the tournament should be his own and he should have all his options open to him but that indeed in (B) it is essentailly colluding and a penalty was in order (although forcing a call seems a little too interventionary to me)
                        Who has said he would be forced to call? I didn't see the live commentary but I can't see any floor person ruling that he is forced to call. There are too many consequences of that action. You'd essentially be knocking the small stack out, which is something floor people would want to avoid. Even if it just to avoid the screaming aftermath.
                        Regarding if it punishable. Then it would be down to ratio of how much he has at that stage vs the blinds and how much the small stack has. If the all in is barely a raise then I would be punishing regardless of his cards. The players hand in the vast majority of rulings is the last factor to consider. Floor people are there to interpret the rules not dictate strategy.
                        If the all in is a larger amount then it would probably be a warning to remind him he should be taking situations like this to knock players out.

                        Example b. A 10 big blind all in wouldn't be something to be suspicious of. If the SB ships and the chip leader BB install folds then I wouldn't instantly assume collusion but I would be monitoring any future pots they play together. If it is 3/4 big blinds then I would be wanting explanations and would be thinking of punishment. Any less than 1/2 big blinds then it would be almost mandatory to punish a fold.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by thegreatiam View Post
                          Who has said he would be forced to call? I didn't see the live commentary but I can't see any floor person ruling that he is forced to call. There are too many consequences of that action. You'd essentially be knocking the small stack out, which is something floor people would want to avoid. Even if it just to avoid the screaming aftermath.
                          Regarding if it punishable. Then it would be down to ratio of how much he has at that stage vs the blinds and how much the small stack has. If the all in is barely a raise then I would be punishing regardless of his cards. The players hand in the vast majority of rulings is the last factor to consider. Floor people are there to interpret the rules not dictate strategy.
                          If the all in is a larger amount then it would probably be a warning to remind him he should be taking situations like this to knock players out.

                          Example b. A 10 big blind all in wouldn't be something to be suspicious of. If the SB ships and the chip leader BB install folds then I wouldn't instantly assume collusion but I would be monitoring any future pots they play together. If it is 3/4 big blinds then I would be wanting explanations and would be thinking of punishment. Any less than 1/2 big blinds then it would be almost mandatory to punish a fold.
                          I'm pretty sure it was neil johnson (pokerstars big wig rule wise) who said they were forced to call (not would be) Interstingly the discssion continued on this weeks berlin stream (same people discussing same rule and same hand) and apparently the SB shoved for a <1 bb more...and the BB openly said he didn't want to bust the guy as he was a friend :/ question is therefore- force to call or allow fold and penalise...although I realise this extreme of a situation is so unusual not really worth debating

                          Comment


                            #14
                            You should be able to play however you like. You paid for those chips.

                            However, having said that, anyone who folds aces face up or actually admits they're folding because the raiser is a friend deserve a stupidity penalty.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Kie Diddy View Post
                              I'm pretty sure it was neil johnson (pokerstars big wig rule wise) who said they were forced to call (not would be) Interstingly the discssion continued on this weeks berlin stream (same people discussing same rule and same hand) and apparently the SB shoved for a <1 bb more...and the BB openly said he didn't want to bust the guy as he was a friend :/ question is therefore- force to call or allow fold and penalise...although I realise this extreme of a situation is so unusual not really worth debating
                              Ill ask him later, he is fairly knowledgeable about rules, but wouldn't be the person I would automatically go to with questionable rulings.

                              Nothing wrong with debating the extreme, however the conclusion cant always be applied in other situations.

                              In this situation, the hand is over he's folded. The small blind made it through. Forcing the hand to play out just because it should've been a call risks forcing someone out, or vindicating the offender when the player remains. Either way the ruling is going to have a direct impact on the following hands. Floor people usually try to avoid this.

                              Making a definitive precedent like this in such a high profile situation would also be risky.

                              Comment


                                #16
                                Originally posted by Kie Diddy View Post
                                Couple of real situations discussed during the EPT live stream that I thought were interesting:

                                1) Bubble of a major tourney, short stack shoves and a big stack folds Aces face up saying he is making way more chips abusing the bubble than he will knocking out the shorty: having shown his hand, should he now be forced to call?

                                2) Again, bubble of big tourney, very short stack SB shoves, big stack BB, who is friends off the table folds: does folding any hand here when it's ~1% of your chips to call represent collusion and should BB be forced to call?
                                1) I had this conversation with some players in Monte Carlo.... They're point was that in certain situtations they would not take advantage of an oppertunity to eliminate a player on the bubble because long-term it would be more profitable to extend the duration of the bubble if you're on a table with players who have tightened up on the bubble. This makes sense and is not cheating... It's a strategy to gain more chips.

                                2) We can never force any player to put chips into the middle of the table. If soft play is suspected we can look at a players cards and if it's determined that a player folded a hand that he really should have called with then a penalty will be given.
                                sigpic IPO 2019, 23rd to 28th October - Irelands favorite Poker Event. More info Here

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X