Author Topic: Rule 4 Amendment  (Read 8458 times)

DCJ001

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Rule 4 Amendment
« Reply #15 on: February 15, 2011, 04:33:43 PM »

We are olbigated both morally and ethically to make REASONABLE efforts to accomodate those players' with special needs.
It can be managed into acceptable forms. A mirrored box to allow an individual to illuminate and magnify the cards can be outlawed if it offers an unfair advantage to the player with special needs-so redesign it. A calculator at the table would not be appropriate during the actual play of a hand any more than a computer or a private tutor- so what does help the person? A person who signs to communicate cannot have an assistant sittiing behind you signing. They may stand away from the table to relay tournament announcements and they can use written notes. Accomodate, but not at the expense of the other players.

The point: Common sense reigns, you cannot make your hold'em table eight-handed just because two or more people are obese.

Hopefully, Dave's logic will be understood and used so that tournaments and cash games can be managed responsibly, without unnecessarily offering an advantage to some players.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Rule 4 Amendment
« Reply #16 on: February 15, 2011, 07:49:50 PM »
I'm still with Stuart, Jasper too, Chet and Andy. Why not put it to a vote?

Stuart Murray

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 639
    • The Nuts Poker League
Re: Rule 4 Amendment
« Reply #17 on: February 16, 2011, 10:32:01 AM »
I'm sure it will be discussed at the next TDA Conference, let them argue it out there.

Regards
Stuart
Stuart Murray
The Nuts Poker League
South Scotland &
National Tournament Director

DCJ001

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Rule 4 Amendment
« Reply #18 on: February 16, 2011, 03:01:39 PM »
Maybe I am getting a little thick or maybe Dave is being facetious.  All I know is that I don't understand what he said.
Now I'm confused, does that mean if I suffer from Dyscalculia I can bring my calculator to your cardroom or not Dave, in fact my head hurts lol

Regards
Stuart

It's unfortunate that at least two people do not understand Dave's opinion, as he posted it, with regard to people using calculators while playing in poker tournaments or cash games for money.

My understanding of Dave's opinion is that allowing anyone to use a calculator at a poker table is unfair to everyone else in the tournament or at the table in a cash game.

It's also unfortunate that at least one person in this thread who trains dealers does understand Dave's opinion, but he feels that calculators should be allowed anyway.

I'm sure it will be discussed at the next TDA Conference, let them argue it out there.

Regards
Stuart

Discussing this topic at the TDA conference would be a distraction and a complete waste of time.

Stuart Murray

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 639
    • The Nuts Poker League
Re: Rule 4 Amendment
« Reply #19 on: February 16, 2011, 05:42:19 PM »
DCJ001,

I would love to see you standing at the bench of the European Court of Human Rights or a similar court across the pond saying that discussing this rule is a "waste of time"
Stuart Murray
The Nuts Poker League
South Scotland &
National Tournament Director

DCJ001

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Rule 4 Amendment
« Reply #20 on: February 16, 2011, 09:07:39 PM »
Perhaps Dave's explanation left too much room for interpretation.

When Dave said:
Quote
We are olbigated both morally and ethically to make REASONABLE efforts to accomodate those players' with special needs.

Dave stressed the word "reasonable." Having players make room for an overweight player or a player in a wheelchair would be a reasonable accommodation. In my opinion, allowing one person to use a calculator would not be reasonable because it opens the door to allow everyone to use a calculator which, in my opinion, goes against one of the fundamentals of the game - players should use their intellect as a part of the competitive process.

Dave also said:
Quote
A mirrored box to allow an individual to illuminate and magnify the cards can be outlawed if it offers an unfair advantage to the player with special needs.

In my opinion, allowing one player, and not the rest of the field, to use a calculator offers an unfair advantage to the one player.

Dave also said:
Quote
A calculator at the table would not be appropriate during the actual play of a hand any more than a computer or a private tutor.

In my opinion, Dave suggests that calculators, computers, and private tutors at the poker table are inappropriate.

And Dave said:
Quote
Accomodate, but not at the expense of the other players.

I should not need to explain what this means to anyone who speaks and understands the English language. But, after reading the responses of some of the individuals in this forum, I wonder if an explanation should be necessary. And I wonder a logical explanation would be understood.

Dave also said:
Quote
The point: Common sense reigns, you cannot make your hold'em table eight-handed just because two or more people are obese.

"Common sense." In this example, rather than reducing the number of players who should be at the table, which would not be a reasonable accommodation to the overweight players, because it changes the fundamentals of the game, the standard number of players should adjust their seats apart from each other or slightly away from the table so that the standard number of players has enough room, which would be a reasonable accommodation.

pokerfish

  • TDA Founding Member
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 93
    • cardplayercruises.com
Re: Rule 4 Amendment
« Reply #21 on: February 16, 2011, 09:48:23 PM »
Hi,
Sorry I haven't been keeping up with this thread, I apologize. Of course this makes perfect sense. As an example, my dad is 88 and plays regularly. He doesn't see well at all and every T worth their salt assigns him a middle seat (as long as he lets them know) and it is perfect. We tend to think of physical needs as wheelchairs etc. We shouldn't stipulate the need but rather that we'll do our best to accommodate everyone. It will be duly noted for the upcoming 2011 Summit.
Thanks,
Jan Fisher
TDA Board.
Jan Fisher
TDA - Board of Directors
http://www.cardplayercruises.com

Brent Carter

  • TDA Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Rule 4 Amendment
« Reply #22 on: April 25, 2011, 12:37:19 AM »
color blind players. is that a physical handicap?
So many tournaments have chips that so close in color that even normal vision players have great difficulty.
One places uses dark red, dark blue and dark purple all in play at the same time.
A serious and unneeded disadvantage for players with even mild colorblindness.

chet

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 733
Re: Rule 4 Amendment
« Reply #23 on: April 25, 2011, 06:42:34 AM »
Brent:  Are you serious?  You know as well as anyone that color blindness is a physical handicap. 

Unfortunately, I have no idea what the TDA could do to remedy the situation you describe.  Adoption and adherence to any Rules (other than Gaming Authority) much less TDA Rules is totally optional.  The only possible thing would be education.  The problem relates to dollars.  Chips cost money and replacing a whole set of "T" chips would be a significant expense.

Chet