Author Topic: TDA Rules versus conventional rules  (Read 420 times)

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« on: July 16, 2017, 05:37:27 PM »
As frequent forum participants must certainly know, the TDA Rules are not intended to be a complete set of tournament poker rules.  Rules that, in general, are considered traditional or common knowledge are not written into the TDA rules.  Should the General Concepts section of the TDA Rules inform readers on this matter?

Regards,
B~

Boris Mauboussin

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2017, 07:31:50 AM »
I would not say it is a set of Rules. I prefer a set of procedures.

To me rules are the basics of poker like :
We play clockwise, each player receives N cards, Flush beats Straight, we burn a card before every street in flop games...
In fact rules are in the little book included when you buy a set of poker. You know the one with the crappy cards and the plastic chips =)


Max D

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2017, 12:15:15 PM »
Yes I have often told people that wanted to develop a complete set of rules to combine TDA with Robert's rules of Poker.
Max D

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2017, 12:36:54 PM »
Rules are necessary. Why omit any? Max, the problem I have is when the TDA conflicts with Roberts Rules...why? If the TDA is intended to supplement existing rules, why change them?

Max D

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2017, 12:44:13 PM »
Rules are necessary. Why omit any? Max, the problem I have is when the TDA conflicts with Roberts Rules...why? If the TDA is intended to supplement existing rules, why change them?
I agree, but it is understandable they would sometime conflict, as TDA is updated at least every two years I don't think RRoP gets updated very often (the one i know about is version 11 from a few years ago).  It is a lot of work to try to replace the "conflicts" in RRoP with current TDA, But I I think it is the only way to get a complete set of rules.

Max
Max D

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #5 on: July 17, 2017, 03:01:52 PM »
max,

 My argument throughout all of my years as a TDA member is why some of the old time tested rules (or procedures) were changed?

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #6 on: July 18, 2017, 01:29:05 PM »
Hey, Max...I want you to know that I typed out a lengthy post and somehow I lost it! ??? I tried going back in my " history" but was unable to retrieve it. I'll cover my topic another time. It pointed out the discrepancies between RR's & the TDA.

Boris, I want you to know that I agree with your recent statement about better defining "rules" by adding "procedures" into the title.

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #7 on: July 18, 2017, 03:16:46 PM »
The introduction to the TDA Rules say:

The Poker TDA is a voluntary poker industry association founded in 2001. The TDA mission is to increase global uniformity of poker tournament rules. TDA Rules supplement the rules of this house. In case of conflict with a gaming agency, the agency rules apply.

Is it expected that house rules cover the conventional rules?  Is the TDA saying that conventional tournament rules are already uniform globally?  My point is simply this:  Should the TDA Rules make clear that it not a complete set of rules?  Would the TDA mission be more successful if some of the conventional rules were included in the TDA uniform set of rules?

There are more than a few forum threads that have discussed TDA rules where one or more conventional rules were somehow an ancillary constituent of the TDA rule.  In some cases, the conventional rule, while assumed to be common knowledge, was handled or interpreted in an inconsistent manner.  Additionally, we often hear players at a table claim: There is a TDA Rule on that. When, in fact, there is not.  For example:  Show one, show all.

Regards,
B~
« Last Edit: July 18, 2017, 03:51:32 PM by BillM16 »

Dave Miller

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
  • Lead dealer / rules guru for World Free Poker
    • Poker For Roulette
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #8 on: July 19, 2017, 07:33:15 AM »
I'd like to see a single, comprehensive set of rules.

No offense to Bob Caiffone. His rules are great, but incomplete. And while he is a great poker authority, having the rules come from a governing body such as the TDA makes more sense. But it needs to be complete if it's gonna get more universal acceptance.

In fact, I'd also like the TDA rules to include a section for cash games. After all, the differences between cash games and tournaments are relatively minor, but important.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown.
But how much does it cost to knock on wood?

Max D

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #9 on: July 19, 2017, 08:28:40 AM »
Hey, Max...I want you to know that I typed out a lengthy post and somehow I lost it! ??? I tried going back in my " history" but was unable to retrieve it. I'll cover my topic another time. It pointed out the discrepancies between RR's & the TDA.

Boris, I want you to know that I agree with your recent statement about better defining "rules" by adding "procedures" into the title.

Nick I know it is a lengthy process it took me months to figure out how to identify which rules where the same, which one were different, etc.  I remember having so many markings in MS Word, different colors, etc.  It was a pain...
Max D

Max D

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #10 on: July 19, 2017, 08:30:05 AM »
I'd like to see a single, comprehensive set of rules.

No offense to Bob Caiffone. His rules are great, but incomplete. And while he is a great poker authority, having the rules come from a governing body such as the TDA makes more sense. But it needs to be complete if it's gonna get more universal acceptance.

In fact, I'd also like the TDA rules to include a section for cash games. After all, the differences between cash games and tournaments are relatively minor, but important.

That would be nice, and the other issue with RRoP I dont think it is being updated as regularly as TDA.
Max D

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #11 on: July 19, 2017, 10:50:11 AM »
Dave and Max,

 What difference would it make if they (RR's) were updated. They're not updated because they are fine the way they are. The TDA is the rule set that keeps changing...and in some cases, changing back again. In my opinion, Robert's Rules has it right.

 Robert's Rules makes a positive mention of the TDA and agrees with most of the rules. The problem I have always had is the TDA rules and procedures that conflict with RR's...and there are many...and they are very significant.

Max D

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
Re: TDA Rules versus conventional rules
« Reply #12 on: July 20, 2017, 08:03:20 AM »
Nick I get your point, but with game evolving there is probably some things that should be reviewed, maybe it is like the TDA, RRoP should be reviewed every few years to incorporate evolution in the game, things like we discussed on the other thread like electronic devices?
Max D