Author Topic: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules  (Read 11012 times)

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #15 on: August 03, 2011, 01:01:46 PM »
Further on this topic of Accepted Action there's more heavy lifting that will come up on this topic. And it's a good idea to discuss this. It was brought up at the 2011 Summit but left for future resolution.

Case: Player A bets all-in and pushes out remaining chipstack, say 125k, but for whatever reason it is under-counted as 95k and Player B calls and pushes out 95k
What does Player A receive if he wins? 125k or 95k?
What does Player B receive if he wins? 125k or 95k?

Some in the more lenient camp proposed that if Player B made reasonable efforts to have the stack counted, that Player B would receive 125k if he won, but pay only 95k if he lost. Not only is that what they proposed, but in fact is what they say they are doing in situations where Player B made reasonable counting efforts.

Others felt this was an untenable situation where a player could win more than he can lose and that provided Player B made reasonable counting efforts, he should win or lose 95k and the 30k extra should be taken out of circulation rather than awarded to Player B if he wins. But then some felt that was bad to take chips off the table.

Others in the strict camp felt the problem was solved because Player B would win or lose the full 125k. Yet another reason why they support strict accepted action.

Nobody proposed that Player A would not be considered all-in. i.e. that if Player B wins, he only gets 95k and the other 30k is returned to A who can continue playing.

So, bottom line, if you are prepared to make a ruling other than strict Accepted Action in the case of what you rule to be a gross miscount when the caller made reasonable efforts to get a count, then you have to have a policy as to what happens to the difference if the caller wins in an all-in situation... does it go to the caller or is it removed from the table? Hopefully this issue can be explored at the next Summit also.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2011, 02:14:53 PM by MikeB »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #16 on: August 03, 2011, 02:12:37 PM »
Chet and Mike:
 If I thought that I would have to wait for the next summit I would have rode off into the sunset with the damn horse. I brought up all of the new rules that I thought should be re-evaluated, IMO. I was under the impression that we were going to go over them and possibly make some changes if we ALL felt there was a need. Chet, if you think that the majority don't agree with me maybe we should wait for more than 3 people to respond.

 Why not ask some of the TDA members for some feedback, and see what they think. After all over 90% of the members were not at the summit. I'll bet that, if given some options, the current rule would be changed.

 I've made my suggestions, and I've started some discussion..haven't I?

By the way....This is the one I like:
Some in the more lenient camp proposed that if Player B made reasonable efforts to have the stack counted, that Player B would receive 125k if he won, but pay only 95k if he lost. Not only is that what they proposed, but in fact is what they say they are doing in situations where Player B made reasonable counting efforts.
 I would only award Player B the 125k if he had enough to cover the bet. The other option is to remove the extra chips of Player A (if he looses) because no player should have chips to play another hand after going all-in and losing the pot to any player that had him covered.

« Last Edit: August 03, 2011, 04:06:42 PM by Nick C »

chet

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 733
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #17 on: August 03, 2011, 07:12:06 PM »
Nick: 

The TDA Rules and any changes thereto are proposed, discussed and voted on at the bi-annual Summit.  That is the way it has been for as long as I can remember.  It is unfortunate that more members could not attend, myself included, but that is the way it is.  Unless there is a real serious technical, practical or legal problem with a TDA Rule, I don't know of any material changes that have been adopted OUTSIDE of the Summit process and in my opinion that is the way it should be. 

Yes, only us 3 have been involved in this discussion to date and input from others is certainly welcome and desirable. 

As I said previously, I believe that since the rule was adopted by a majority of the members present at the Summit, it should stand as is.  It has been in the WSOP rule book for several years and it doesn't seem to me that there has been any significant problem associated with it. 

How about if you take up a Homework assignment due at the next Summit?  Monitor the Forum and any other forms of input for serious poker players, TD's and other card-room folks and keep a record of the activity regarding this subject.  You can post your findings from time to time and we can discuss in 2013. :)

Finally, I know that almost every event I have ever attended that uses the TDA Rules makes some changes in one or more rules.  I see no reason that this rule should be any exception.  What I am saying is that if you are running an event and advertise that you use TDA Rules you still can make an exception here and there and not include the wrath of whomever monitors such things.  On the other hand, don't be surprised if you have a big bru-ha-ha about incorrect chips and no rule to cover it. 

That said, I cannot remember any time I have ever been involved in such a problem as a player or a TD.  'Course, that may be due to the fact that I have never been involved in any event where you started with more than 10,000 chips and had more than 50 players.  I just don't see this being a significant problem in the smaller day to day events around the world. 

Chet

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #18 on: August 04, 2011, 06:02:40 AM »
Chet:
 I was at the summit. It was a heated debate and one of the more popular suggested rules was from the Venetian. You weren't there but you can still watch it. We were  also told that in 2009 after the summit 1.0 was modified and there were changes made before they came up with the final draft.
 I feel that this is the perfect way to voice my opinion. If you are not interested in my input, that's okay.

 I want to see every poker room around the world adopt the TDA Rules.Rule #42 is not going to bring any new rooms to the table.

 In my opinion, (the following might be offensive to those in favor of #42):
  1.) It shifts the responsibility from the bettor to the caller and it should be shared. Per TDA #37. (in part) it is the player's responsibility to make his intentions clear.
  2.) It is too lengthy
  3.) It is the only TDA rule that necessitates adding rule #1 (which automatically applies to all rules).
  4.) It could raise thoughts of collusion between players and dealers.
  5.) It is not necessary.

Chet,
 You say that this rule has been used in the WSOP for years. I see nothing in the written rules prior to 2011 that defines accepted action. Perhaps I've missed something. I would like to see it.

Finally: There is NO valid reason, to keep any rule on the books for two years if we can make it better.

chet

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 733
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #19 on: August 04, 2011, 10:24:50 AM »
Nick: 

Continued discussion between us is not going to solve this and it shouldn't.  I have said everything I have to say on this topic for the time being.  If other members wish to chime in with different details or points of view, I may have more to say, but for now I see no point in continuing.

It will be very interesting to see how this issue plays out in the future.

Chet

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #20 on: August 05, 2011, 06:08:26 AM »
Chet,
 You don't know how much I appreciate your participation and your opinion. Even when we don't agree. Whithout you on this forum, it would not exist. There must be other members that have something to say.
 Jasper you mentioned on another post, that you were still evaluating this rule. How do you feel now that we have brought it to the table?

 Stuart? DCJ001? Bart185? Spence? K-lo? Brian V? Anybody? You are the ones that will have to tell some players that they are no longer in the tournament because the amount they just called was actually 25,000 more than they were told!
« Last Edit: August 05, 2011, 06:28:53 AM by Nick C »

JasperToo

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 328
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #21 on: August 05, 2011, 03:52:15 PM »
I want to jump in here a bit and say that the horse is likely dead but I must confess to have a small problem with the rule myself.

It just seemed to me that this rule will end up slowing the game down a Bunch because you are going to have POTENTIAL callers wanting an exact chip count and, who knows but that some of them won't get up and go around the table to make sure there isn't a chip under the rail.....

I have been a victim of "gross misunderstanding" and feel like there is a place for a ruling that takes it into consideration in some rare circumstances.

The stealthy reference to rule 1, I think, gives enough room for those rare circumstances so I can certainly live with things that way.  I still think we are going to get a bunch of squabble from some players too.

That being said, Mike's point that we have had a chance to flesh out the meaning I think it is CLEAR that the rule can be used soft or hard in a way that most of us should be able to live with.


"Hey, Pardner, I think it's eye twitched....kick it again"

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #22 on: August 05, 2011, 06:57:06 PM »
Thanks JasperToo,
 I feel a pulse. I know there are others out there. ;D

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #23 on: August 07, 2011, 09:21:02 AM »
Mike B and Chet:

 I have gone through all of the posts since the new rules have been posted. There are questions, and suggestions for several of these new rules. There is always the mention of a possible change when version 2.0 comes out....EXCEPT FOR #42 ACCEPTED ACTION, for that we have to wait until the next summit?  ::)

chet

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 733
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #24 on: August 07, 2011, 03:07:34 PM »
As I understand it, changes are made by the TDA BOD.  Since I am not a member of the BOD (and I don't think I should be) I don't have input into that process.  I am sure, based on what I can remember from the 2009 process that they will give careful consideration to items that need a "correction".

Personally, if I were on the BOD, I don't think there has been enough interest in ANY particular rule or part of a rule to this point to generate a change.

While Nick and I have been pretty vocal, especially about #42, I don't hear the wheel squeaking enough to warrant any additional grease, but that is just my opinion.

Chet

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #25 on: August 07, 2011, 04:03:22 PM »
Chet,
 Maybe no one cares. I haven't heard anything against my suggestions either.
What difference does it make when you have good old Rule #1

pokerxanadu

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 14
    • The Principality of PokerXanadu
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #26 on: August 14, 2011, 08:55:21 PM »
Here is my input, as a lowly member, in regards to #42:

It is the calling player's responsibility to determine the bet amount of a player.  If the player wants an accurate count, he must ask the dealer.  If he doesn't, it is the player's fault and he must always be liable for the full amount of the call.  (Maybe one exception:  all-in player has some hidden chips found after.)

If the player asks the dealer for a count, it is the dealer's responsibility to provide an accurate count and the player's responsibility to make sure the dealer does an actual count.  Plus, it is the betting player's responsibility to ensure that all his chips are accounted for.  So each has some shared responsibility for an accurate count.  

For speed of the game and simplicity, most of the time players don't need an exact count.  But that determination falls on the player calling the bet.

So the player calling a bet has a choice:

1.  Accept an approximation of the bet amount.  In this case, it was the player's choice and any shortfall he should make up for.  A gross mistake invoking rule #1 should only be something extraordinary (like hidden big denomination chips, a standard rules violation).

2.  Ask the dealer for an exact count.  In this case, it falls to the dealer to provide an accurate count and the betting player to make sure he isn't shorted.  In this case, the player calling should always only be liable for the amount stated by the dealer, no matter what.  The betting player should make a correction before the action is complete if he thinks it isn't correct.

So I think the rule should be:

Poker is a game of alert, continuous observation. It is the responsibility of all involved players to determine the correct count of any bet or call. A player may request of the dealer when it is their turn to act a physical count of another player's bet.  If he then receives an incorrect count from the dealer and acts on it, the player is liable for only the stated amount, but the player who made the original bet may correct the amount stated by the dealer before the other player acts.  If a player does not ask or wait for an exact physical count by the dealer before acting, the player is liable for the full amount of the bet even if it differs from any approximate or partial count given by the dealer or the other player.  Any uncalled chips are pulled back by the player except in the case of an all-in.

« Last Edit: August 14, 2011, 09:08:54 PM by pokerxanadu »
-Martin

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3080
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #27 on: August 21, 2011, 07:38:50 AM »
Martin,
 I agree with most of what you wrote. That makes two of us that don't agree with TDA Rule #42.

I want to bring up another rule that I thought was going to be changed at the summit but, it remains the way it was from 2009. The only change was from #31 to #38. The last line needs to be changed.

pokerxanadu

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 14
    • The Principality of PokerXanadu
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #28 on: August 21, 2011, 08:18:42 AM »
Thanks, Nick.  And I agree with you about rule #38 - the wording of the last line should be somewhat reworked.  Actually, the last line of #38 is not completely incorrect, as it is not the all-in raise that reopens the betting to someone who originally checked.  It is actually the bet of the player that is being raised by the all-in that reopened the betting.  I think something like this would cover it:

In no-limit and pot limit, an all-in wager of less than a full raise does not reopen the betting to a player who has already acted, although an earlier or later player's bet or raise in the same betting round may do so.

Of course, that leaves begging the question of whether or not a check-raise of an all-in that is less than a full bet is kosher, when every other player has just checked, folded or called the all-in.  I believe such a check-raise should be valid, just like any other check-raise.  In this case, the final form of the rule could be:

In no-limit and pot limit, a raise that is an all-in wager of less than a full raise does not reopen the betting to a player who has already acted, although an earlier or later player's bet or raise in the same betting round may do so.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2011, 08:21:27 AM by pokerxanadu »
-Martin

K-Lo

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 869
  • @AskTheTD on Twitter
    • Ask the Tournament Director
Re: Questions about 2011 Poker TDA Rules
« Reply #29 on: September 01, 2011, 07:20:08 AM »
I have a quick question regarding the last point in Rule 8:

"Play will halt on any table that is 3 or more players short."

Am I right to assume that "short" means "short of the max number of players at any other table"?  E.g. if we are down to 21 players, playing 7 per table, and one table loses 3 players, we are halting even though we may have been playing 8-handed for the entire tournament up till then. 

What if there are 3 tables left, at 8-7-7, and the last table loses 2 players, so now it is 8-7-5... Does play halt at the table with 5 players (until the tables are balanced)?

Thanks!