PokerTDA
POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General => Topic started by: W0lfster on February 03, 2011, 04:51:20 PM
-
A bit random, but intriguing,
My girlfriend has Dyscalculia and struggles with counting. She really likes poker and I was wondering if you are allowed a calculator while in a hand. I do not see anything wrong in it lol but it isn't really standard practice.
Any thoughts.
Thx. ;D
-
There are rules against certain electronic devices in all casino poker rooms. I think if you explain the situation before playing, your girlfriend will probably be allowed to use her calculator. It would have to be a calculator with no other capabilities. Phones or texting are definitely forbidden.
-
Poker is a competitive game in which people compete for money. Casinos do not allow electronic devices to assist players in competing against the house while playing blackjack. Similarly, electronic devices such as calculators are not allowed at the poker tables of any reputable poker director of any reputable casino to assist players in competing against other players.
Knowledge of the game, experience, and intelligence are factors that some players use to gain an edge. But if calculators are allowed, where does it stop? Some smart phones have PokerStove applications that are levels beyond simple calculators.
Someone of NickC's experience should know better than to allow/encourage using electronic devices at the poker table.
If anyone disagrees with anything that I've said in this post, possibly you should ask Matt, Jan, or someone whose opinion you respect who has extensive knowledge and experience of the ways that things should be done in poker.
-
DCJ001,
Considering the condition of his girlfriend, I stand by my belief that she would be allowed to play in any tournament as long as the device was a calculator only. I don't trust the table cams that are used for every major tournament, but that's not going to make them go away, is it? You are constantly making reference to the intelligence required to play this game. Are you telling me that a player of your intelligence would feel compromised by this girl using a calculator? Let's get real.
I resent you telling me that I should know better than to allow, or encourage someone using electronic devices at a poker table. People submit questions and are looking for answers. I will assume that all members have read the TDA Rules. If all of the answers were in the rules, they wouldn't be asking for advice.
-
I'll bet that one of the attorney types that follow this forum from time to time would LOVE to have a case in the US of Wolfster's GF being denied the use of a calculator if her condition can be documented. In the US there is a whole section of law that revolves around and covers persons with disabilities. If the use of a simple calculator, no phone, no camera, no poker related software of any kind, etc., as Nick said was denied, the casino, cardroom is opening themselves up to a serious lawsuit, which they will very likely lose.
What is different about her situation than the blind player who is allowed to have another person next to him who 'reads' his hole cards and the board cards and tells him the value and suit?
If she has a documented disability and brings 'proof' of that disability to the casino, the casino has a legal obligation to make all 'reasonable accommodations' to allow her to compete as though she had no such disability.
The proper action for the casino is to verify the existence of the disability and if she brings a calculator, to verify the device falls within the allowable limits. If so, then the floor and/or dealer should announce that she will be allowed to play with the device. They DO NOT have to say why, in fact, it may be a violation of the ADA to explain the why.
Hope this helps!!
-
I am with Nick and Chet, if the situation is discussed with the cardroom manager first I don't see any issue with it being used, again providing it is just a calculator, but then you know what UK Casinos are like with their no mobile phones at the table rule, many allow texting/facebooking just not calliing.
Regards
Stuart
-
I am firmly in the camp of "let use it". As stated she would have to find a way to demonstrate the nature of her disability. I am actually surprised to hear someone so opposed. Hell, if you are going to allow Ipods, sunglasses and the like, what the heck does a calculator do for you?
Actually, I am more interested in how she has to use it to assist her. Is it just counting the pot? Is it somehow to help count her odds? Either way it's not like a calculator would actually make it easier for a Pro without a disability to play the game if they used one. In fact it would likely get in their way.
-
Thanks everyone, yeah I guess the managers of someone would have to be notified first. Well she just needs help counting up the chips to equal the relevant bet, I dont think for now as a beginner she is going to be thinking about odds.
-
Thanks everyone, yeah I guess the managers of someone would have to be notified first. Well she just needs help counting up the chips to equal the relevant bet, I dont think for now as a beginner she is going to be thinking about odds.
In this case, it would be better to get help from the dealer, instead of using a calculator, in my opinion.
-
DJC, the dealer will be of no help, unless it is a pot-limit game
I think what Andrew is aiming at is that his partner has difficulty through no fault of her own at counting the pot, therefore if she has a calculator she can quickly surmise a rough pot count in order that she bets and raises amounts which are proportional.
Regards
Stuart
-
Thank you Stuart, and yes she does have difficulty I mean I've never seen it before not even on TV but do you think it would be allowed also in a televised final table? I say this because TV shows like to show players understand what they are doing if you get me, and it wouldnt look very professional.
-
Thanks everyone, yeah I guess the managers of someone would have to be notified first. Well she just needs help counting up the chips to equal the relevant bet, I dont think for now as a beginner she is going to be thinking about odds.
DJC, the dealer will be of no help, unless it is a pot-limit game
I think what Andrew is aiming at is that his partner has difficulty through no fault of her own at counting the pot, therefore if she has a calculator she can quickly surmise a rough pot count in order that she bets and raises amounts which are proportional.
In Andy's post, he specifically made reference to his girlfriend's inability to "count up the chips to equal the relevant bet." The dealer could assist with that. At no point did Andy nor I make reference to counting the pot.
-
This is actually a rule in the TDA and WSOP rules, although not spelled out as such. The rule specifically revolves around "seating" but I think you could make a case to broaden the rule to encompass this and other situations.
TDA rule #4 # Random Seats
Tournament and satellite seats will be randomly assigned. Accommodations for players with special physical needs will be made when possible.
This rule only states accommodations for physical needs, but you certainly can't exclude mental needs IMO.
From the WSOP rules and the R.O.P.E. rules
Arrangements for seating will be made whenever possible for players with special needs.
These rules again revolve around seating, but are a little more broader in terms, allowing for accommodations for special needs.
Perhaps a bit of a rewrite is in order here.
-
That is true DCJ however, considering we only play no limit you are not allowed to get the dealer to count the pot anyway as explained in the rules as oppposed to pot limit, this is only for counting out what to bet and IMO getting the dealer to help count out her chips which he/she would need to do very regularly due to her condition. I can only see it wasting time for the dealers and tournament as a whole this is why I think a calculator would really come in useful in speeding up the game.
-
If someone came to me and explained their situation like this I would have no problem with it. McGee I love your addition of using the accommodations rule #4 that's an excellent interpretation of that rule which I have never considered before, well done.
Andrew, even it is was the final table of the WSOP I can't see Jack Effel having an issue with your girlfriend being at the final table, calculator in hand.
McGhee with regard to your rule #4 revision all would be required would be to drop the drop 'physical' so it read 'special needs'
Regards
Stuart
-
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.
-
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.
-
I don't agree with Dave and DCJ001 or anyone else that thinks there is something wrong with a calculator at the table. I think there should be at least one at the table for calculating how much is in the pot (for pot limit). I actually had a waffer thin calculator valcroed to the top of the rake slide to assist the new dealers in counting down their poker table bank. When I have my own poker room, you can all bring your calculators. I'd rather sit between a couple players using a calculator than some of the foul mouthed, foul smelling, intoxicated, obnoxious characters that frequent some card rooms. As long as it doesn't slow down the action, I see nothing wrong with using a calculator. I see no advantage whatsoever.
I have to say that I am surprised at Dave's answer to this question. How does a calculator compare to a computer, or a private tudor? The answer is not clear. In my opinion, that is one of the problems with some of the written rules. Adding calculators to the list of forbidden items, along with cell phones and other electronic devices is simple enough. Then, we can show players (in writting) that using calculators is against the rules. When they're on the list, the players won't bring them. Oh, and don't forget to check your firearms at the security office before entering the cardroom.
Dave, that does raise another interesting thought. What would you do if you had six or seven 300lb players at a table? Hmm........
-
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.
-
I am saying that, when standardizing tournament rules, we want to make common sense decisions when dealing with special needs circumstances. It is counter-productive to believe we could create policies or procedures for handling all of the exceptions that occur in poker.
-
AMEN, Dave!!
-
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
-
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.
-
Perhaps you did not read the clarification that Dave posted which I quote below"
I am saying that, when standardizing tournament rules, we want to make common sense decisions when dealing with special needs circumstances. It is counter-productive to believe we could create policies or procedures for handling all of the exceptions that occur in poker.
I see nothing in this statement that can be even remotely considered to PREVENT someone from using a calculator, if the TD determines that such use does not give this person an advantage over the rest of the players AND if the TD determines that such use is the best way to make a reasonable accommodation to a player with a special need.
A general discussion of how to meet the needs of a player with a documented special need would NOT be a waste of time at the next summit. In fact, I think it would be very beneficial to ensure that TDs and cardroom owners/managers are aware of their responsibilities in this area AND it makes no difference if you are a US TD or a TD in another country. As Stuart indicated somewhere along this thread, there are laws similar to the US ADA in other countries.
-
Perhaps Dave's explanation left too much room for interpretation.
When Dave said:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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.
-
DCJ001,
I believe you will find the questions are directed at Dave by others and myself on the last few threads, unless you are his PA or Deputy TD, or are otherwise authorized by him to comment and reply on said threads, perhaps we should wait on his reply to his interpretation of the discussion, rather as having a member quote a founding member with their own interpretation of what one has quoted.
-
Having joined this thread rather late (and I apologize for not seeing it until now) I understand everyone's frustration with this situation. I agree with (and understand) Dave... I think. I believe that something as rare as this situation (where there may be a "reasonable" need for a calculator) should be handled individually and by the cardroom in question. In my 30 years in the poker world, I've never seen this come up. That said, I can't see where a TDA rule is needed for it. Common sense should prevail. If there truly is a need for this to allow someone to compete and using it doesn't slow down the game then it should be addressed privately within that cardroom and with that player. I've had events where someone has needed a special piece of equipment to pick up his cards (he was a quadriplegic) and not only was it allowed, but he always was given the one seat and the players and dealers all were happy to assist him. It is my opinion that when it is approached in a proper and reasonable manner, we can arrive at a common goal of having a level playing field that accommodates everyone, including those with special needs. There are many infirmities I've not heard of.... that doesn't mean they aren't real nor should we try to do the right thing by anyone who is challenged. My only caveat is that these accommodations may not take away from the fairness to the others.... as in Dave's example of playing 8 handed to accommodate obese players. That would not give the same event to these players as the other tables. Reasonable and common sense need prevail IMO.
Jan Fisher
TDA BOD
-
The specific topic here is 'use of a calculator' in a hand, at the table or otherwise out of a hand. I almost feel like some of the positions being posted are at worst short sighted. While others are outlandish and extreme. Normal course of politics. ;)
Nevertheless, it reminds me of the PGA Tour vs Casey Martin. The PGA's stance that allowing Martin the use of a golf cart during tour events would be an "unfair advantage", is against the rules of the PGA and allowing such would alter the fundamentals of the game. Martin argued that under Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), that it requires entities operating “public accommodations” to make “reasonable modifications” in its policies “when … necessary to afford such … accommodations to individuals with disabilities, unless the entity can demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of such … accommodations,”
Like the PGA Tour events, all current poker tours are both publicly participated in AND held in public accommodations.
Bottom line is, the use of a calculator at any time, is no more of an unfair advantage to anyone at the table than Martin's cart is in golf. Martin's case boiled down to one thing. Despite the PGA's "walking rule", would the use of a cart alter the fundamentals of game?
The court ruled 7-2 that it did not. Likewise, you have to ask yourself would the use of a calculator alter the fundamentals of the game of poker? IMO, no. The fundamentals are: Use of 52 card deck, hand rankings, betting action, number of players per table, etc.
Summary of the Supreme Court Findings (http://neuro.law.cornell.edu/supct/search/display.html?terms=Americans%20with%20Disabilities%20Act&url=/supct/html/00-24.ZS.html)
Article from SI (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/golf/news/2001/05/29/martin_decision_ap/)
So to answer your question do we need to make a specific rule for it? No... it's already been decided for you by the Supreme Court.
-
once again an outstanding response with some excellent reasoning and supporting information, thank you for your contribution to this post wsop, It is very interesting reading the judgment which ties in with the ADA act of the US. Some good reading.
Regards
Stuart
-
I really didn't want to post in this thread again because some people, apparently, do not listen to reason. And it appears that, no matter how much common sense is used to justify a point of view, may people still look for any excuse to rationalize their position.
With regard to Casey Martin, and his effort to use a cart in the PGA, it was ruled that the use of the cart is a "reasonable accommodation" that allowed him to compete in the sport of golf, and that walking the course is not a fundamental aspect of the game.
When wsopmcgee said:
The fundamentals are: Use of 52 card deck, hand rankings, betting action, number of players per table, etc.
he overlooked the facts that poker is not as simple as the use of 52 card deck, hand rankings, betting action, and the number of players per table. He also said "etc," which means "and other things." Other things that are fundamental aspects of poker include the ability to calculate the possibilities of possible hands existing based on the given board at any time, calculate pot odds in which the chance that a potential hand will be achieved compared to an amount to call a bet divided by the current pot, the ability to calculate of the size of the pot, at any point in a given hand, while considering other factors of the game, etc.
In Casey Martin's case, he was not granted authorization to be assisted in standing during his effort to strike the golf ball. Nor was he awarded the opportunity by the court to have a "do over" in case he lost balance, due to his disability, causing him to hit a bad shot because these elements are essential to the sport of golf.
Keep in mind that, in Andy's original question, he simply said that his girlfriend "has Dyscalculia and struggles with counting" and that "she just needs help counting up the chips to equal the relevant bet." A "reasonable accommodation," which is all that the ADA affords, is the minimal assistance to "count up the chips to equal the relevant bet," which may not be a fundamental aspect of the game. If the player who needs assistance needs the dealer to add up the chips when a player calls or raises, there should be no problem in doing that.
But allowing the use of a calculator, which may be used to keep track of the size of the pot, calculate the possibilities of possible hands existing based on the given board at any time, or calculate pot odds would be assisting the competitor in some of the fundamental and essential elements to the game of poker, which cannot be done.
-
So finally we have some solid answers. Andrew it looks like your girlfriend will be good to use a calculator in around 5 out 7 casinos/cardrooms, based on the feedback from others, in Europe, cardroom Managers will be more than happy to accommodate with the ever powerful European Act on Human Rights and the UK Disability and Equality Act 2010. Stateside, the ADA governance and ruling of the supreme court of the Casey Martin v PGA Tour does, IN MY OPINION support your girlfriend in using a calculator, and if I was challenged with allowing your girlfriend to use her calculator at my tables, I would cite this supporting information as reasonable grounds to allow the use, whilst it was created in another country, I believe it's reasoning and judgment are solid enough to be used wordwide, and I think a European Court would rule for Casey just the same.
"she just needs help counting up the chips to equal the relevant bet" could be taken in multiple contexts, I chose a different interpretation of that piece of information, which was confirmed by Andrew a posts later in that I said "I think what Andrew is aiming at is that his partner has difficulty through no fault of her own at counting the pot, therefore if she has a calculator she can quickly surmise a rough pot count in order that she bets and raises amounts which are proportional." which was replied to by Andrew "Thank you Stuart, and yes she does have difficulty" which affirmed my interpretation of what he was wishing to convey.
I know one thing, if you speak the the majority of TD's who are reasonable, open and worth their weight they will have no problem letting your girlfriend sit at the table, calculator in hand. Don't let her be put off playing the game by TD's who are flippant towards her needs, and more so towards legislation designed exactly for these situations.
Regards
Stuart
-
And my FINAL ANSWER to this question is as follows:
Andrew: If your girlfriend wants to play and a TD, Cardroom/Casino refuses to consider any accommodation for her, she should then leave the poker room and shift to the favorite American Passtime. SUE THE BASTARDS!!! She will make a LOT more money with a LOT less work. There will be any number of high powered attorneys/barristers willing to accept her case on a contingency basis. Of course, we certainly hope this doesn't come to pass.
-
The key here - as several people have pointed out - is how reasonable it is. For what it's worth, provided that the calculator is used only to allow the chips to be counted, I would allow it in my games; however, if this created a consistent slowing down of play at one table of a multi-tabled tournament I may well rule differently.
Dyscalculia symptoms - as defined by Wikipedia - include:
Frequent difficulties with arithmetic, confusing the signs: +, −, ÷ and ×.
Often unable to grasp and remember mathematical concepts, rules, formulae, and sequences
An inability to read a sequence of numbers, or transposing them when repeated, such as turning 56 into 65
May have trouble even with a calculator due to difficulties in the process of feeding in variables.
As politically incorrect as it may seem my response to the request would be: 'Of course she can use a calculator provided that it does not interfere with the smooth running of the game'.
-
Thank you so much for the replies everyone! I agree with Stuart to not allow is pretty much ludacris as it is a breach of Human Rights and is an act of discrimination which I take no tolerance to. I agree Chet Sue the lot! haha, thanks again :)
-
Never say never!
I would never make a rule that says players may use calculators as a normal policy. I would never close my thinking to the point of say that I would never allow a calculator, show me the special circumstances...
If I write anymore replies that create as much confusion about what I am saying as this one thread, just pull my TDA license and censure me from further posting. :-X
-
Dave,
That could be the worst thing to happen to poker and the TDA. We all have differing opinions but no one is respected more than you. The calculator question was one that I actually criticized because I thought that there would be no response....so what do I know? It is something that will probably not happen in any cardroom that you work in. We really need more of your input. I have corresponded with you on other poker related issues (via email) and I will always remember, and value, the advice that you gave me. There are over 1200 members in the TDA, we have heard responses from less than 2%, so if we had more participation your opinion could be the overwelming concensus. Not allowing a calculator is way down on the list of priorities for a TD.
-
I really didn't want to post in this thread again because some people, apparently, do not listen to reason. And it appears that, no matter how much common sense is used to justify a point of view, may people still look for any excuse to rationalize their position.
With regard to Casey Martin, and his effort to use a cart in the PGA, it was ruled that the use of the cart is a "reasonable accommodation" that allowed him to compete in the sport of golf, and that walking the course is not a fundamental aspect of the game.
When wsopmcgee said:
The fundamentals are: Use of 52 card deck, hand rankings, betting action, number of players per table, etc.
he overlooked the facts that poker is not as simple as the use of 52 card deck, hand rankings, betting action, and the number of players per table. He also said "etc," which means "and other things." Other things that are fundamental aspects of poker include the ability to calculate the possibilities of possible hands existing based on the given board at any time, calculate pot odds in which the chance that a potential hand will be achieved compared to an amount to call a bet divided by the current pot, the ability to calculate of the size of the pot, at any point in a given hand, while considering other factors of the game, etc.
I too didn't feel the need to post here again..... but.... too clarify. No I didn't forget any facts. No etc does not mean "and other things" as you describe. Fundamentals do not mean, the ability for someone to calculate possible hands or pot odds. Those are skills. Not fundamentals. Fundamentals are the strict requirements (rules) of what makes a card game. The fundamentals of poker are: a 52 card deck (sometimes 53 with a joker), specific hand rankings, defined betting action, order of the betting action, order of the deal, number players allowed, direction of the button, which players are the blinds, number of cards per player, number of board cards, eliminations, re-entries, rebuys..... I'd put etc here somewhere, but someone might elaborate..... ok etc. Those are fundamentals. If you change any one of those things for any player, then it's a different game and therefore, you have changed the fundamentals in the eyes of the court. Giving someone a calculator doesn't do that. Even if you think that it does, the individual still has to press the correct buttons to calculate the correct odds and there's no guarantee that they could even do it correctly.
I'm spent ;)
-
Mr. Dave Lamb:
I will agree that your TDA license should be pulled and you should be censored for posting your thoughts, just as soon as Hell freezes over for the third time!!!
Chet
-
Mr. Mcgee: I may have a hard time sometimes getting my feeble remaining brain cells to fully understand what you are saying, but SIR, you keep on keepin' on. I will worry about my comprehension problems, you keep givin' me somethin' to comprehend!
Chet