|
Post by grattan23 on Jun 27, 2009 9:31:24 GMT
Scenario
The BlackCheat plays fast and loose early next week and loses 18k in the first 10 mins. He realises he only has 7k left and has 7k in his pocket. He says nothing and someone raises into his big blind where he has AA. He then magically produces an extra 7k and says all-in. What Is his all-in bet:
a) 7k b) 12k c) 14k
I would expect the answer to be (a). But based on the ruling the last night it would be (b).
|
|
|
Post by muscles on Jun 27, 2009 12:46:46 GMT
Scenario The BlackCheat plays fast and loose early next week and loses 18k in the first 10 mins. He realises he only has 7k left and has 7k in his pocket. He says nothing and someone raises into his big blind where he has AA. He then magically produces an extra 7k and says all-in. What Is his all-in bet: a) 7k b) 12k c) 14k I would expect the answer to be (a). But based on the ruling the last night it would be (b). Calling someone a cheat is way out of line here for a start. Also i took Eamon's 2k bonus chips out of play. The 5k extra can be bought up until the end of Level 1 so i allowed these to stay in play. To suggest that Eamon would try and get away with what you suggest in the above scenario is frankly ridiculous to anyone that knows him.
|
|
|
Post by grattan23 on Jun 27, 2009 17:24:31 GMT
Can you show me where I referred to Eamonn as a cheat, I gave a hypothetical scenario with a hypothetical name which is similar to Eamonn's username. The crux of the post was to ascertain peoples reaction to the ruling the last night, there was only ever one person called a cheat on this forum and when clarification was sought on boards.ie it was the general consensus that the wrong ruling was made. www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=20553136I felt it was an incorrect ruling and that all the chips should be taken off the player which was your first statement. I did not argue the point as I was afraid of another over reaction.
|
|
|
Post by muscles on Jun 27, 2009 18:14:08 GMT
Can you show me where I referred to Eamonn as a cheat, I gave a hypothetical scenario with a hypothetical name which is similar to Eamonn's username. Oh come on. So you just came up with Black Cheat out of the blue?? Link not working. What over reaction?? What are you on about?
|
|
|
Post by bobflatley on Jun 27, 2009 20:01:22 GMT
The crux of the post was to ascertain peoples reaction to the ruling the last night, there was only ever one person called a cheat on this forum and when clarification was sought on boards.ie it was the general consensus that the wrong ruling was made. www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=20553136Don't think anyone has ever been called a cheat on this forum (with the possible exception of Doyle Brunson on one thread). People have been accused of angleshoots and bad etiquette but the term 'cheat' hasn't been used to my knowledge. The above may be considered as forms of cheating but they are shady forms at that. Those areas have no cast iron set of rules across the board which is why players can wriggle through loopholes on those issues(should said players opt to defend their actions). There are certain issues which defo fall under the category of cheating such as interfering with the deck on deal or carrying an Ace up your sleeve. These are cast iron cheat moves. For my part I don't believe that Eamonn was trying to gain any advantage from this incident. Most players put their bonus chips in their pockets until the game starts as they don't know until the start of the game what seat they will be at. I'm pretty sure this was a lapse of concentration rather than an intentional angleshoot. To open another can of worms lets look at this hypothetical scenario; Player enters Hanley's in time to collect his/her bonus chip. At that time the player does not know what seat they will be at. As the draw is being made player is absent, this could be for any number of reasons. Seat placement is set and TD calls players to their seats. Player returns and finds where his seat is but first hand has been dealt. Player has bonus chips but are these now void? Technically I assume that they are. My best suggestion on this issue (though probably an unpopular one) is to do away with the early bird entirely to avoid confusion. Also, Muscles should go back to his original method of doling out the E5 bonus. This would entail TD offering this option to seated players only during level 1. Any thoughts on these suggestions?
|
|
|
Post by grattan23 on Jun 27, 2009 20:59:15 GMT
Bob, I dont believe for one second Eamonn was trying to gain an advantage or cheat. My issue was with the ruling and maybe my tongue in cheek mythical person was too close to the bone.
This situation could arise and did arise in the past, incidentally it was a player who took chips out of his pocket to call an all-in by me. A rule was made on this occasion and in my opinion if the shoe was on the other foot the last night my 7k would be declared dead.
This is what muscles said first and then he had a change of heart. Rules cannot be held strictly for some and loosely for others. This has and is my big issue with how the game is run .
|
|
|
Post by culchie on Jun 28, 2009 1:21:48 GMT
Bob, I dont believe for one second Eamonn was trying to gain an advantage or cheat. My issue was with the ruling and maybe my tongue in cheek mythical person was too close to the bone. This situation could arise and did arise in the past, incidentally it was a player who took chips out of his pocket to call an all-in by me. A rule was made on this occasion and in my opinion if the shoe was on the other foot the last night my 7k would be declared dead. This is what muscles said first and then he had a change of heart. Rules cannot be held strictly for some and loosely for others. This has and is my big issue with how the game is run . On one hand, if the above info is correct, you have a fair enough point. I don't think the extra 5k should have been allowed. However on the other, your use of the word 'cheat' was highly inflammatory and is just about the worst insult you can call a poker player. You should withdraw it and apologise as a first step, and then articulate your point. I would be safer in the knowledge of getting repaid a loan from a poker player than from just about anyone else. There is an unwritten code of conduct and honesty that reaches far beneath the surface of angle shoots and hand by hand deception. Those bonus chips are a pain in the ass anyway. I regularly forget to take from pocket when sitting down, and hand them back to TD when I go into pocket for the price of a pint, and find it sitting there.
|
|
|
Post by grattan23 on Jun 28, 2009 1:46:40 GMT
|
|
fish
New Member
Posts: 30
|
Post by fish on Jun 28, 2009 11:24:26 GMT
OMG I can't believe something like this has happened again, I think its time for the friendly pub game element to go out of this tournament/cash game. A defined set of rules that need to be unambiguous, have to be put in place or else these incidents are going to become a serious threat to what has always been a great tournament and one I look forward to getting back playing.
|
|
|
Post by bobflatley on Jun 28, 2009 11:27:19 GMT
The opinions on boards.ie just back up what I was saying about loopholes in the 'rules' of the game. It shows that rulings will be made on peoples interpretation of the rules not because there is a cast iron rule for a lot of these shady aspects of the game. Generally speaking players take the ruling of the dealer but our game is self deal which causes problems. I'm not suggesting that we need to get fully dealt tables as this would result in a higher reg fee to cover dealer fees and thus there are always going to be issues because of the format of the game. On the bonus chip issue I agree totally with Mick, they're just a pain and an issue waiting to happen. My suggestion on bonus being offered to seated players at level 1 has merit but how long would it be until an all-in situation occurs in 1st hand on a table that hasn't been offered this option yet or where one of the players has taken up the option and the other hasn't? The bonus rule probably needs looking at anyway.
|
|
|
Post by bobflatley on Jun 28, 2009 11:39:43 GMT
BTW I don't have an issue with the 'Blackcheat' reference as I was taking it as tounge in cheek. We're supposed to have a bit of fun and slagging on here. I'm pretty sure had the shoe been on the other foot that you would have been subject to similar 'abuse' from Eamonn. I didn't consider the comment as malicious, I'd say more a bit of needle between the lads.
|
|
|
Post by paddyjoe on Jun 28, 2009 20:47:06 GMT
Oxford English: Cheat: act dishounstly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage; deprive of something by deciectful or unfair means; avoid by luck or skill. Where was the "Black Cheat" trying any of the above? every post of rules for poker say: TD has final say.... dictactor or not ~IMO TD is law
|
|
|
Post by theblackthing on Jun 29, 2009 0:25:34 GMT
Ok I thought I better put up a post on this because it seems to be going a bit ott.
For those of you who weren’t there on the night, this is what happened:
End of the first hand I realised that I hadn’t taken the bonus chips out of my pocket. I said “Jesus I nearly forgot my bonus chips” and put them on the table, Enda said “No, you can’t introduce chips in the middle of a game”, big mischievous smile on his face and immediately called over for a ruling. I gave Enda the mean eye look and just started smiling because I knew that he was just having a little go at me for the craic, and I knew there was probably no point argueing because there was probably a ruling against it. Muscles came over and deemed that I wasn’t allowed to introduce the chips so I just threw the 7k over to him, he told me that I could keep the 5k because it was available up to the end of level 1 ( I didn’t realise until the following morning that I hadn’t actually even taken the 5k out of my pocket in the first place).
That was it really, Enda smiled at me and I gave him a fcuk you smile back (it was all good natured, just a bit of niggling between the lads). There was no argument, we just got on with the game and I tried my best not to go on tilt.
I know that Enda referred to “TheBlackCheat” but I’m positive that it wasn’t meant in any way to accuse me of cheating, it was just Enda trying to stir things up for the hell of it.
Just to set the record straight, I’m in no way offended by it and anybody who knows me would know that I would never do anything underhanded in a game of poker.
To sum it all up, I think Enda’s grievance was with the ruling and not with the way I conducted myself on the night.
Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
|
|
|
Post by nutboy on Jun 30, 2009 17:47:30 GMT
"wouldnt do anything underhanded" get real blackcheat.The fact that muscles only took 2k off u shows that u and muscles are in a little kartel of yer owen, u always get favourable treatment and only poor old enda seems to b able to notice it.i think a deduction of points is the correct action here which u should volunteer.A 50 point deduction seems fair
|
|
|
Post by grattan23 on Jun 30, 2009 17:50:57 GMT
I totally agree but I believe he should be deducted all last weeks points for collusion with the TD
|
|