ODD SITUATION...TOURNAMENT DISQUALIFICATION?

[scottweb53]

I have a very strange situation that caused a bit of commotion at our poker room and would like some feedback. We have a poker room that is located in a racetrack. The poker room is run by a company that pays rent to the track. In one of our tournaments, during a break, a player was out of the poker room, yet on track premises. He was caught by security urinating outside while smoking a cigarette and was thrown off of track premises for the evening. He did not do anything in the poker room, was not given a penalty by us or asked to leave by us. Because of this, we did not remove his chips from play and we just had him blinded out. The argument here was that if it was a 2 day tournament and a player survived day 1 and got arrested between days 1 and 2, we would still put his chips out and blind him off. some people have disagreed and told us they thought we should have removed his chips from play. thoughts?

[Nick C]

scottweb:

 That's a good one. There used to be a "common code" in Las Vegas that stated: "If you can't win, you can't lose!" It used to apply in Sports Betting but, I think that a good attorney could make a pretty good case on behalf of the accused.

 I guess, in your situation you could consider: How good of a customer the player is? How much would it cost the house if you decided to refund his investment? What you don't want to do is give a player, that has no chance for the money, a way out!

 Removing the chips, or blinding them off is a decision that would depend on the policy you'd like to enforce. Probably not a bad idea to incorporate something into your rules that would protect you in the event similar (unusual) circumstances should occur.

[Stuart Murray]

I often have my own events in Casinos,  Players when they play in that casino they have to adhere to both our Tournament Rules & Conduct and also the House's rules of conduct and etiquette, both tie up nicely now as Genting Casinos also comply with the TDA.  If the casino decides to eject a player, and I am satisfied they will not get back in I will remove the chips from play and eliminate the player, it looks like from your post that there is a uncertainty as to the racetrack staff allowing the player back in, so I would likely leave the chips in play also in your situation, until you confirm with racetrack security the status of that player.

This is the extract of our Tournament Rules regarding the subject:
64 Player Leaving – Where a player leaves the TD shall remove their chips if they are satisfied they are not returning.  Where there is uncertainty they shall remain in play, A player will not receive position of elimination if they do not return before two active players are remaining in the tournament.

Because it's the Racetracks ground you are in a near identical situation to me, you must observe their conduct rules and abide by them.  I see no justification for a player getting his entry refunded because he has been ejected by a third party, I certainly would not refund a player ejected by the casino's security staff, if they had a heart attack or something which was ultimately outside of their immediate control, then yes I may well consider a refund or partial refund.

Remember a player can still be whisked away in an ambulance or be arrested and still make it back in time to continue play.

Regards
Stuart

[Nick C]

Stuart,

 I like your Rule #64 Player Leaving.

 I'd hate to think a player could fake a heart attack to get some money back! Although, there are some characters that will try anything!

[Tristan]

I would have left them to be blinded as well, unless it was certain to be a ban of more than 2 days.  If it was more than a 1 day ban, he has to be considered disqualified. 

Merriam-Webster disqualified definition:  "Eliminate (someone) from a competition because of an infringement of the rules." 

If there was no chance he would be allowed in for day 2, he was definitely eliminated from a competition because of a rule infringement!