POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS > Suggestions for new TDA rules and amendments to existing rules READ-ONLY ARCHIVES Pre-2015 Summit
Substantial action: How should it be defined?
Guillaume Gleize:
The substantial action definition had been cut shorter some years ago letting now a FOLD + CALL being a substantial action (for exemple) ... And it's too fast! Way too fast in my opinion!
I understand the definition had been shortened to fight some angling or any abuse BUT now I have a rude time applying this rule to most of case were the players are innocent of those angling.
I hate when a rule is made against 1% of sheaters but actually anoy and punish 99% of the rest straight players. I think even in many high standing tournament the "new general spirit" is to soften the rules to free those 99% players (even if sometime to time an angling UGLY one escape from our watching) but let's keep the #1 special rule together with our professional instinct to catch them sooner or later without anoying the clean players with those rude rules.
I would vote to go back to "2 actions including chips" (at least ... ;)
In my Arrogant Opinion.
Regards,
GG
Nick C:
Hello GG,
I remember being at the 2011 Summit when Matt Savage defined Substantial Action as any three actions or two actions both involving chips. Somewhere between the Summit and the release of version 2.0 it was changed. I actually went on a radio podcast with Chris Cozenza and Scott Long, (The publishers of Ante up Magazine) and discussed Substantial Action. The problem was, it was changed and I was giving the wrong information to anyone that was listening.
I'm with you on this one, I'd rather see two actions (both involving chips) as opposed to the current ruling.
WSOPMcGee:
Being discussed at length, at least IMO in this thread http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=1103.15 (See page 2)
We discussed this in heated debate in 2011 when the TRUE rule was adopted.
2011 version - Substantial Action is defined as either: A) any two actions involving two player each putting chips in the pot (bet, raise or call); or B) any combination of three actions (Check, Bet, Raise, Call or Fold).
I am completely bewildered at how it got to the 2013 version. I don't remember this topic being brought up at all. I think someone made a tragic typo and put it in print.
2013 version - A) any two actions in turn, at least one of which puts chips in the pot (i.e. any 2 actions except 2 checks or 2 folds); OR B) any combination of three actions in turn (check, bet, raise, call, or fold).
The 2013 version is COMPLETELY ASININE!!! No one in the history of poker ever defined substantial action as one bet and a fold. NO ONE!!! NOT EVER!!!
Don't feel like your being rude GG. Follow your instinct and know that you are right to follow the 2011 version. The 2011 version would have been best written as:
Substantial Action is:
A) any two actions in turn that involve putting chips in the pot (i.e. any bet and call or 2 calls or raise and a call in turn); OR B) any combination of three actions in turn (check, bet, raise, call, or fold).
Somewhere somehow someone or some group got very confused. I'd pull my hair out, except I have none.
MikeB:
Just to clarify....
The 2011 Poker TDA Rule on Substantial Action was ultimately modeled largely on the then-current 2011 WSOP Rule 81 on Substantial Action (which was in effect at the WSOP prior to the TDA Summit), and which reads:
Rule 81..." Substantial action is considered: three folds, three checks, two or more calls, a fold and a call, or a bet and or a raise or a call and or a fold"
You can view the 2011 WSOP Rules here: http://www.wsop.com/2011/2011-WSOP-RULES.pdf
There was some initial misunderstanding of the Substantial Action proposal as it was discussed on the floor of the 2011 Summit, as it was vaguely defined in part as "two actions with chips". Some initially interpreted that to mean that BOTH actions had to involve chips. It was finally clarified partly in light of the then-standing 2011 WSOP Rule above, to mean two actions at least one of which involves chips.
The clarification also took into account significant discussion on this forum after the Summit in 2011 as to what was intended on the floor, including this thread from July 2011:
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=437.0 You can see from that discussion that several participants at the 2011 Summit strongly argued in favor of the current language as being the actual meaning at the time.
Four years later, the TDA Substantial Action Rule 35, and the WSOP Substantial Action Rule 87-C continue to be of similar language. 2015 WSOP Rule 87-C reads: If substantial action occurs, a misdeal cannot be declared and the hand must proceed. Substantial Action is either: A) any two actions in turn, at least one of which puts chips in the pot (i.e. any 2 actions except 2 checks or 2 folds); OR B) any combination of three actions in turn (check, bet, raise, call, or fold). [/u]
Hope this helps as to the history of the current rule. Like all rules, it will be open for debate at Summit VII
Nick C:
Gentlemen:
In regards to Substantial Action...At the 2011 Summit the rule that was decided was NOT the current rule.
http://www.pokertda.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Poker_TDA_Rules_2011_Version_1.0_Handout_docx_redline_changes.pdf
If you go to the TDA Summit 2011 Day 2 you will hear Matt Savage clarify what we decided the day before. There are other treads from way back (2011) that covered this error. As Thomas stated, somewhere between Versions 1 & 2, it got changed. You can listen to Matt on Day 2 about 8:30 into the discussion. Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC56txeJd5M
One other note: A fold and a call would only pertain to pre-flop...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version