Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
The Hitman,

 It is an interesting discussion. I like your call. To minimize the financial damage because of the dealer contributing to the unfortunate situation.
12
Event structuring / Re: KO + R/A
« Last post by Dave Miller on July 26, 2018, 07:29:06 AM »
I once played in a charity event with a rebuy option, but here's the twist: You only give up your bounty if you choose to not rebuy (or after the rebuy period). It was VERY unpopular. After all, a player could be making a play in hopes of winning the bounty, then when the short stack loses, have the option of not surrendering that bounty? I never played at that charity's events again.

I.E. If you're felted, you must give up the bounty. If you then elect to rebuy, you must also buy a new bounty chip.

Moto: I don't see your system being popular at all. Plus it's a nightmare in keeping track of the bounties. How can you tell which bounty chips are those the player won and can keep vs those that are part of an add-on which must be surrendered? Additionally, a player with multiple live bounty chips becomes a bigger target.

No. I'll repeat what I said before: Add-ons are only allowed when buying in, or at the end of the re-buy period. And they don't include an additional bounty.
13
That is a creative solution.  So then, the players were allowed to bet after the flop?  Other options would be to simply chop the pot and proceed to the next hand.  Or, run out the board, face-up, without further betting.

Basically yes. My thinking was to minimize the dealer's mistake and the impact he could have had on the tournament's life of both players. So I consider a call from the SB and a "mandatory face-up check" from the BB, and then give them back all options on the flop.

Once again, thank you for your comments!
14
General discussion of poker industry topics / Re: Using the rules for angle shoot
« Last post by Nick C on July 26, 2018, 01:59:26 AM »
Motobaka,

 I wouldn't even let him play in my cardroom. Who needs action like his?
15
I was at a LAPT in Uruguay as a blogger for PokerStars having breakfast at the hotel getting ready to start working.  The restaurant had a decent number of players at that time when Freitez entered the room.  I was not sure if he was the same person, but I was reassured immediately by the reaction of the other players.  Lots of disgusted faces.  One of those silences. 
16
Event structuring / Re: KO + R/A
« Last post by Motobaka72 on July 26, 2018, 12:25:25 AM »
We used to run a KO with rebuys, but it was not very popular.  Each rebuy gave a new bounty.  For example, if a person had a buy in they got a KO chip and if they bought a rebuy while they still had chips they were given an extra KO chip.  A player could then have a lot of KO chips. 

Player with buy in 1 KO chip

Player loses some chips, so he may rebuy then he gets a second KO chip
Players now has 2 KO chips

Player loses enough chips to be able to make a new rebuy, so he gets a third KO chip
Player now has 3 KO chips

If he does not lose all his chips he can continue to accumulate KO chips.

If he loses all his chips and makes a rebuy then all his previous KO chips go to the person that won his chips. 
17
My decision is off the grid as I said: I chose to give back the all-in bet to BB and play face up, in order to let them decide what to do from the flop.

That is a creative solution.  So then, the players were allowed to bet after the flop?  Other options would be to simply chop the pot and proceed to the next hand.  Or, run out the board, face-up, without further betting. 
18
How to handle situations where vast majority of the error is caused by the house. Situations where players follow dealer instructions to expose cards prematurely is subject of the following thread:
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=1507.0
19
... I would first ask the SB to make a decision to either call or fold.  If the SB chooses to make the call, then to compensate for the house error, perhaps I would use Rule #1 to give the BB a choice to alter the bet to either a min-raise or to leave it as all-in.
If you give the BB that option, it must be before you ask the SB his decision.

All of this is Rule 1, but I agree with the above because why ask the SB if he calls a bet that you might revoke? Further, asking the SB first gives the BB ALOT of information he's not entitled to. If the dealer gives me the option to retract the bet after I know the SB wants to call then on average I'll want to have a stronger hand than if I'm unsure of the SB's action.

As to Nick's question about Accepted Action, IMO it doesn't apply here as nobody has called, there's just been premature exposure. Accepted Action applies to the amount of a bet not whether a bet and call has occured.

As to the other point about giving the SB the right to re-raise, it's an interesting question as to whether you first allow the BB to retract and just check his option with his cards exposed. In that case there is no re-raise possibility for the SB. If you force a min-raise on the BB then absolutely I'd give the SB the re-raise option. Again, all Rule 1 so there's no 100% perfect solution but I personally tend to favor allowing the BB to either check or all-in, but not make any wager in between.

Very interesting discussion, worth considering for the 2019 Summit.
20
I disagree.

In my opinion, the BB failed to protect his hand when he exposed it. True, he exposed it because of dealers instructions, but he should have waited for the SB to put his chips in. TWICE! Once when he went all in before the SB finished making the initial action, and then again when he exposed the cards before the SB made his indication to call by putting chips it.


But I also see your point regarding the unusual ruling invoking Ruke 1.

However, I would hope that if you give the BB that option to reduce his bet to a min raise, you then give the SB the option of a reraise.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10