PokerTDA
POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General => Topic started by: MrPick80 on August 05, 2015, 08:05:47 PM
-
this is another unusual situation:
Player A is chipleader of the table, raise 250K (not All-in) and is going away from the table. Player B call all-in 90K. What is decision to make?
-
Per 2013 TDA Rule 30: A player must remain at the table (whether he's all-in or not) as long as betting action remains on the hand. Player A should not leave the table while B is contemplating his bet.
-
Player A is going away before any player make any action. He must pay 90k (all in of player b) without playing the hand?
Any other suggestions?
-
Player A has bet, and has B's 90 all-in covered... so A's hand isn't dead. But A may be penalized for leaving the table.
-
Player A has bet, and has B's 90 all-in covered... so A's hand isn't dead. But A may be penalized for leaving the table.
Agreed. Who are these people who just take off in the middle of a hand and why isn't the dealer trying to stop them?
-
I agree with MikeB and K-Lo. Player A is in violation of #30 but still has a live hand. He is denying the remaining players the opportunity to get a read on him while sitting at the table. Interestingly, he is also failing to protect his hand. As has been discussed in the forum on other occasions, merely placing a card protector on your cards is not necessarily considered protection.
-
I also agree...I don't know about you but if I'm all-in, I'm hanging onto my cards for dear life! ;D There's no way I'm going to leave my hand unprotected! ::)
-
Player A is in violation of #30 but still has a live hand. He is denying the remaining players the opportunity to get a read on him while sitting at the table.
This is an important unstated rationale of rule 30, but the association has not found agreeable language for including it. Twice "must remain at the table and face his opponents" has been shot down. Not the best language, but it addresses the idea
... perhaps something like > "Leaving the table is incompatible with protecting hands, following the action, and allowing active players to observe one another"
Thoughts?
-
I don't think it's something that needs to be addressed by the TDA to be honest.
Any televised final table will have people walking away from the table when they're all in to go be with the rail crowd.
-
I agree with Uniden...not a good rule for poker. There are far too many great players that have emerged from online poker. I doubt staring at a player, or watching him squirm helped them in any way. ;D Being seated is mandatory to protect your hand. That should be good enough.
-
We are almost always discussing hold'em or Omaha, but in stud, hole cards are considered "protected" by the up cards. Making a rule, that insists on active players remaining in their seats during the showdown. This is when I'd support "at your seat" ;)
Just thinking out loud!
-
The rule is very clear and I cannot think of anything to add that would have a chance of passing a majority. Unless Player A makes this move often he is unlikely to be penalized and probably never if the camera is rolling. His actions are louder than anything that Player B could observe had Player A remained sitting calmly at the table. In a tournament Player A can count on his hand being tabled whether or not he is in his seat. If he has a protector on his cards, it is hightly unlikely that his hand will be mucked. He's putting Player B to a very tough decision while grand standing. Player B could have the floor called to evaluate the situation regarding #30 while he is making what could be his final decision. But, unless he calls Player A bet with his all-in move and wins the pot, that would probably have little to do with the future actions of Player A.
-
Bill,
How can you say the rule is very clear and then say that unless Player A makes his move often he is unlikely to be penalized? He left the table before Player B went all-in. I will assume the action was head to head. After the all-in, Player A gets 160K returned to him and the cards must be tabled, correct? Who tables Player A's cards if he does not return immediately? Don't tell me it's the dealer, because no dealer should ever turn over a players cards.
Forget that bull about "He is denying the remaining players the opportunity to get a read on him while sitting at the table." I see player's wearing costumes to hide their eyes and their beating hearts! >:( Now that's something for discussion.
If you leave the table, with action pending, you indicate a lack of interest in the game! You should be penalized just to discourage the same from becoming a regular occurrence.
Isn't that the purpose of TDA #30? Let's look at it again: A Player with a live hand must remain at the table. Why not just say: A player with a live hand must remain at the table until the showdown is complete!
-
Forget that bull about "He is denying the remaining players the opportunity to get a read on him while sitting at the table." I see player's wearing costumes to hide their eyes and their beating hearts! >:( Now that's something for discussion.
Sorry, it may be bull to you, but most players would prefer contemplating a bet against a player present at the table rather than one who is nowhere to be seen.
Why not just say: A player with a live hand must remain at the table until the showdown is complete!
That is what the new language reads.
-
Who tables Player A's cards if he does not return immediately? Don't tell me it's the dealer, because no dealer should ever turn over a players cards.
I'm pretty sure Player A would return after the action is complete. But still, to provide a couple answers to your question please see:
http://www.thehendonmob.com/tournament_director3/player_leaves_table_when_all_in (http://www.thehendonmob.com/tournament_director3/player_leaves_table_when_all_in)
-
Thanks for the link. It does confirm what I said. They all agree that in a cash game the dealer can never turn over the absent players cards. Jack Effel did say that the cards must be tabled in a tournament but never disclosed who would turn them over. I know this...when I deal, there's no way I'm going to turn those cards (of the absent player), without explicit orders from the floor!
Taking it a step further, lets say the absent player left the room, (we've had this discussion long ago), what then? I would kill the hand expose it and if it were the winner the chips could be removed from play or the pot would go to the remaining player. Because of tournament rules, I see no better solution.
-
Nick, I'm not sure what article you read but here is the Hendon Mob verdict on the article that I sent you.
Looks like our six Tournament Directors are in agreement with this one. In a cash game the absent player’s cards are mucked and in a tournament they are turned over at the moment the pot goes heads up with no more betting. As Jeff says a player’s cards are their own responsibility and no one else’s.
-
Bill,
I read the same article as you. Who turns over the cards of the absent player? That was my question. And while we're at it, why do all of the members of the TDA board of directors find the time to reply to The Hendon Mob, but can't answer a single question in over a year on this Forum?
I'm not trying to be difficult, I believe there must be a logical answer...anyone?
-
Why not just say: A player with a live hand must remain at the table until the showdown is complete!
That is what the new language reads.
30: At the Table with Action Pending
A player with a live hand must remain at the table if any further betting action remains in the hand. Leaving the table is incompatible with a player’s duty to protect his hand and follow the action, and is subject to penalty.
Question: Did Player A assume that all betting action was complete as the only action left was for Player B to call or fold?
Apparently, the new language will rectify this problem. I look forward to seeing the new version ... this week?
-
Bill,
I'd have to say that Player A was fully aware that action was not completed. There were only two players in the hand, he should have remained seated until Player B called or folded...he did neither.
TDA #30 At the Table with Action Pending
A player with a live hand must remain at the table if any further betting action remains in the hand. This does not prevent the a player from bolting from the table when both players are all-in and more board cards are still to come. Leaving the table is incompatible with a player’s duty to protect his hand and follow the action, and is subject to penalty. The new "language" would correct the problem because the players are directed to remain at the table until the completion of showdown .
-
Penalize him but don't kill his hand.