PokerTDA
POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Suggestions for new TDA rules and amendments to existing rules READ-ONLY ARCHIVES Pre-2015 Summit => Topic started by: Nick C on January 09, 2015, 03:57:08 AM
-
Mike,
Any chance we can get a heads up on possible changes to some of the current TDA Rules? The great majority of members are unable to attend, but I believe it would be a good idea to at least listen to what they have to say.
In 2013 TDA # 29 was the big talked about addition (At Your Seat)...what's the verdict on that one? Last I heard, it was not going to be used at the WSOP.
In 2011 Current TDA # 46 Accepted Action was introduced ::) That, too proved to be a most controversial addition.
Any chance of changing these, or eliminating them? What better way to get feedback than the TDA Forum?
My vote for needed changes: TDA # 29 At Your Seat, #46 Accepted Action, and #37 Verbal Bet Declarations / Acting In Turn / Under-calls Both A & B.
I really feel these need some work before we entertain any idea about introducing another unpopular "new rule."
-
I was squarely against the "at your seat" change at the summit, but once I implemented it I found it to be a major improvement in keeping players from walking around between hands or dealers slowing down the last card to the button so a player could get in their chair in time. I hope it stays and I hope more TDs adopt it in their rooms.
-
Brian,
That's fine, use it as one of your "house rules" but do you know if the WPT or the WSOP has adopted it? Last I heard, they were not.
-
Nick:
I am confused (so what's new 'bout that?)
In the past you were ranting (may be commenting is a better word) about the major venues that don't adopt TDA Rules. Now you appear to be taking the opposite tack and saying that unless the major venues adopt a particular rule, the TDA should get rid of that rule.
Which side are you on?
and by the way, I agree with Brian with the "at your seat" rule and for the reasons he stated.
Chet
-
Chet, happy new year!
What I'm trying to do is get the TDA rules to become the standard rules that card rooms (worldwide) will adopt. There are serious issues that need to be addressed before we introduce another "new" controversial rule in 2015.
In the past, any player that was not in their seat (or within earshot) when the final card was dealt on the initial deal, had a dead hand. Common sense, if you ask me. I don't know of anyone that got trampled in the last 50 years, or so...that would warrant a "new rule" to prevent players from running through the casino to look at their hand! ::)
I don't like the rule, and you do. That's okay. I just don't see it as a "RULE." I think the casino has their own set of rules that govern the actions of all patrons.
If you'd like to continue our conversation, we can bore each other further by sending a private message. ;D
-
The intent of the rule was threefold:
A) To prevent the possibility that a player who is making his way back to the table would see a live player's hand, sit down in his seat and then be able to play his hand still. This happens when a player in early position (who would also have been dealt his card(s) first starts to look at his hand right away, then the player who is in later position walks behind him, sits down, and has a live hand after having gained that info. Player at the table must protect his hand from being seen by other players table, but when that other player can be standing right behind you it may become an unfair situation.
B) To keep players from sweating action at other tables in between hands at their own table. They don't have that buffer of knowing that the cards are being dealt and they have several second buffer from first card until last card to get back in their seat. Keeping players in their seats helps keep tournaments under control. People know that they can't wait til 0:00 left on clock and start running back. They know there is no point to running because they see the cards in the air and know there's no chance to get there in time.
C) To stop that situation that we've all seen dealers do where the player is rushing back and they slooooow doooooown theeeeiiirrr piiitccch to give that player a chance to sit down in time. Some dealers feel like a jerk if they keep dealing their same speed when a player is yelling "I'm almost there" and some players give dealers flack for not slowing down. This can slow the table down and/or cause animosity between dealer and player(s). I've found that the dealers won't ever wait to deal the first card once we made that change.
-
Brian,
That's fine, use it as one of your "house rules" but do you know if the WPT or the WSOP has adopted it? Last I heard, they were not.
Not a house rule, it's TDA...
-
Over 1800 members and that's the response ??? I'd be more pissed, if a dealer dealt me in and then told me I could not play my hand because I wasn't seated when the first card was dealt.
Ridiculous!
-
Nick: It is no more ridiculous than if the same thing happens when the last card is dealt.
The rule is there for a number of reasons, others have already stated. You (and others) may not like it, but it is a TDA Rule and until changed should be given consideration as such.
Personally, I like the rule one reason being that it helps prevent delays to the game. If you can't be at your seat when the dealing starts too damn bad, I will NOT hold up the game because you are tardy. The reason for being tardy doesn't matter. You are NOT going to get any support from me on this one.
Chet
-
Chet, really, so what's new? :D Can anyone tell me if the WSOP or the WPT use this rule? I asked this simple question a couple times with no reply. I find that strange, especially since we have TDA members affiliated with these tournaments on the board of directors. Furthermore, any time a rule calls for a change in simple time tested dealer procedures I will speak up.
-
It was used at the PCA, and there were no major issues that I saw. Players were at their seats in a timely fashion!
-
Nick: How do you address the dealer that slows down, looks around for a missing player or pauses dealing because a "good customer" is late coming to his/her seat? I used to see that happening all the time. This rule change eliminated that problem.
Sorry, but just because something has "always been done that way", just isn't a good enough reason not to make a change in my opinioin.
Chet
-
Chet:
All of your reasoning looks good on paper, however, the big difference between the way it used to be (and should remain) is when the last card was dealt to the button, and the seat was empty, all we had to do was reach out and kill the hand. Now dealers have to arm wrestle with the guy that sat down before he even received his first card! When this rule was first introduced, I thought it might be best to deal the "dead" hand into the center, and continue dealing the "proper card" to the other players. At least then, the player was unable to look at his pocket aces!
I was told; that was not the procedure that would be used. I immediately went to the set of Dealer Procedures that I wrote, and added what I thought were possible options. Before anyone explained exactly how this "new rule" was to be carried out...I heard that the WSOP was not going to adopt it! ???
Stud could be even more complex, with the "forced bring-in."
If you like it, that's fine... I don't! I have every right to voice my opinion, and my opinion is supported by the reasons I've listed. I have never seen a dealer kill the hand of an absent player until the final card was dealt on the initial deal...that's because there is no card room within a 200 mile radius that adopted it! :D
-
Hollywood Penn National adopted it, which may be within 200 miles, but you are right that a number of rooms did not. If you review the 2013 Summit tapes you will see me arguing vehemently against this proposed change on the mic, yet after having done it for one week in practice I am now one of the biggest supporters of that rule change. It was actually one of the biggest tournament improvements I've seen after a summit. Only rule I've liked more is the 4-card flop rule :)
So TDs out there, please take it from me, this rule change is great, please instill it.
-
Brian:
Do you at least understand my concerns? Being an instructor requires more information to pass along to my students. How would you feel about dealing the absent players cards to the center of the table, as I suggested?
It is not my intention to keep all rules the way they used to be, but I have a problem with any change that is not accepted by the majority. This particular change effects dealer procedures, and that's my main concern.
I'm glad the rule works for you, I just find it hard to believe players accept it without complaint.
-
I didn't think they would accept it either, but it turned out the change went perfectly smooth. I thought it would be complaint a minute, but you'd think it was that way from the start.
Dealing to the center is fine if you want to instruct dealers that way. I personally did not train them to deviate from how they were dealing, just to take note of any absent seats at the start so that they remembered to muck the hands.
The thing that helped the transition the most was making clear in the reading of the tournament rules what the change was and then standing in the tournament area when breaks were almost over to make sure it was being enforced by all dealers. I did have to point to a couple hands and say "that's a dead hand" a few times but they got it quick.
-
And I absoutley understand what you're saying Nick. I think the worst thing we can do as an organization is have a rule in place that we all vote on, pass, and then don't enforce uniformly. I'm sure this will be revisited at the 2015 Summit and I'm sure many more TDs and Managers will voice why they have and have not instituted this rule. I'm sure there's a 50/50 it goes back to last card after June, but I hope I and others can convice the people who are still on the fence that this was a positive change 100%.
-
I implemented first card after the last summit, and people were much more accepting that you would think. I also agree with Brian that it made things better.
-
I implemented first card after the last summit, and people were much more accepting that you would think. I also agree with Brian that it made things better.
I really truly believe that anyone who tries it will see the benefit. I was easily the MOST hesitant at the summit and was on the mic for 10+ minutes advocating against the proposal. This year I'll be advocating for it.
-
There was no such rule in the 2014 WSOP... and I see nothing in the rules for 2015 either.
-
Would love for WSOP to adopt it, that would give it the push it needed. Do we know what poker tour or what room this rule originated from? I can't recall how the proposal came about.
-
EPT has done it that way for a while, I believe it came with Neil.
-
Neil hasn't posted one time in nearly two years of being on the board. It would have been nice to hear from him once in a while.
-
I was squarely against the "at your seat" change at the summit, but once I implemented it I found it to be a major improvement in keeping players from walking around between hands or dealers slowing down the last card to the button so a player could get in their chair in time. I hope it stays and I hope more TDs adopt it in their rooms.
Are you talking about "at your seat" or First Card Off?
Just curious because "at your seat" does not keep players in their seats as effectively
-
Thomas: TDA #29 At Your Seat...isn't that the same as "first card off"?
-
Thomas: TDA #29 At Your Seat...isn't that the same as "first card off"?
The phrase "At Your Seat" does not in and of itself mean "First Card Off". However I see how it is listed as the heading of Rule #29. That's where my confusion lies. The Rule heading should be changed and completely reworded. It's a novel of a rule.
-
Thomas: Knowing that you are as confused as I on some of these rules is encouraging. I truly respect your opinion. :)
-
Just to clarify further.......
What these terms mean to me and what I tell players.
At your seat: Means you must be at your seat to be eligible to play a hand. <----- This meaning is generally associated with Last Card dealt to the Button (WSOP rules) and Action in Turn events.
First Card Off: Means at the start of each new hand you must be at your seat when the first card is dealt to be eligible to play a hand. <----- This meaning is generally associated with all PokerStars events and WPT's and those claiming to use TDA rules.
Some people say interchange "to be able to play a hand" and "to be eligible to receive a hand", but that is not true in tournament poker as all chipstacks receive a hand with or without a player present and that does not necessarily mean you will be allowed to play the hand.
Maybe I should be a paralegal. :-\
-
Thomas, You're overqualified...you're a Poker TD! ;D
-
I personally love this rule. People accepted it very fast. We deal the cards in front of the dealer so there is less chance of confusion. Most dealers got this very fast some struggled for a little while. Our tournament regulars seem to like it better this way.
-
EPT has done it that way for a while, I believe it came with Neil.
I believe this rule is from Toby Stone. Pretty sure that's what Neil told me.
-
And I absoutley understand what you're saying Nick. I think the worst thing we can do as an organization is have a rule in place that we all vote on, pass, and then don't enforce uniformly. I'm sure this will be revisited at the 2015 Summit and I'm sure many more TDs and Managers will voice why they have and have not instituted this rule. I'm sure there's a 50/50 it goes back to last card after June, but I hope I and others can convice the people who are still on the fence that this was a positive change 100%.
As some may recall... I was pretty vocal and in favor of the adoption of First Card Off in 2013. I since wrote an op-ed for MattGlantzpoker.com discussing the pluses and minuses of the rule. Sadly that site is now defunct. If I get a chance I'll post the article up again on another site.
But the gist of the article was this: If you're not in favor of always using First Card Off from the start of the tournament, then perhaps it will better serve your tournament if you use it when the tournament goes hand-for-hand and continuing into the money.
-
This is my response to the recently introduced TDA Summit Survey. I tried to submit it but it was too long:TDA SUMMIT PLAYER SURVEY
1) I would like players to be allowed to converse at the table, especially when the action is head to head.
1a) I would like dealers to have more control at the tables.
1b) I would like a forced showdown of all called hands…no muck when in for all bets. In other words: enforce TDA #13 Tabling Cards & Killing Winning Hand by making a “must show” mandatory.
2) The current rules that bother me the most are: (in numerical order) TDA #15 Face Up For All-in’s forcing a “must show” at showdown; would eliminate or combine, TDA #’s 15, 16, 17 and 18. This could also have a positive effect on numerous other rules; such as TDA #’s 12, 13, 14 and even #21.
2b) #46 Accepted Action…More protection is needed for players that; are given the wrong information from the dealer, or are mislead by a player.
2c) #29 At Your Seat (First Card Off)…I prefer last card
2d) #37 & 38 Action OOT…More protection for skipped players, and the right for the out of turn player to retract an obvious mistake and back it up to the proper bettor.
2e) #41 b Raises: 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….there needs to be more clarification regarding a player that checked.
3) I have briefly explained suggestions for change on #’s 1 & 2 above.
4) I am not bothered by excessive decision delays
5) Yes…I think the house should be able to call the clock
6) Yes…why not allow the players to ask the floor to call for the clock, ultimately, the final decision is with the floor
7) Strongly prefer Last card Off LCOTD
8) The action should be backed up and be made right on the current street
9) Should have some protection. The situations are so varied in this department that it is almost impossible to generalize. I would take into consideration; a very possible misunderstanding, and the possible lack of experience of the players involved or even the “history” of the player
10) I don’t see player A having any right to touch those chips, a verbal declaration of fold, call, or raise must be made.
11) Electronic devises seem to be under control
12) Not a problem
13) Upstate NY, (USA)…. Nearly 60 years….live only….Very few lately….
14) The best way to improve this survey is to ; look to the forum, and follow through with “fixing” existing rules, rather than create new ones.