I was kicked out of pub poker game!

[Brett Kay]

Hate to go against you Garth, but to allow the ALL-IN bettor to fold in that spot is wrong and against the rules. And this is the very type of situation we are arguing about.

Where in the rules? This is quite simply a table awareness issue. If a player is not aware and makes this mistake and mucks his cards and pick up a side pot, the hand stays mucked. In fairness to 888pl, a lot of players keep to the spirit of the game and allow the player to get the hand back to play against the short stack. Rather than having someone walk away at the end of the night angry because they lost chips through a simple error. In essence we are all trying to improve through our 888pl games, so that when we do move up we are not going to be costing ourselves extra dollars at the casino.

If this happened at a casino, and i was the short stack all in. Then the guy pushes all in to get the other player out. Then mucks his hand. I will be screaming black and blue for the supervisor to come across and give me my money as his hand has effectively been killed.

Poker is a game where the winner is the person who makes the fewest mistakes possible in the game. This is a big mistake but after playing 3 x 12 hour days can happen, it is unfortunate a mistake, but mental mistakes are part of the game.

In some casino's they have the white line around the felt, that demarcates the safe zone - chips and cards and the playing zone. If your chips go into the playing zone they are in play. If your cards go in there they are mucked.

[warboat]

Hate to go against you Garth, but to allow the ALL-IN bettor to fold in that spot is wrong and against the rules. And this is the very type of situation we are arguing about.

Where in the rules? This is quite simply a table awareness issue. If a player is not aware and makes this mistake and mucks his cards and pick up a side pot, the hand stays mucked. In fairness to 888pl, a lot of players keep to the spirit of the game and allow the player to get the hand back to play against the short stack. Rather than having someone walk away at the end of the night angry because they lost chips through a simple error. In essence we are all trying to improve through our 888pl games, so that when we do move up we are not going to be costing ourselves extra dollars at the casino.

anti-collusion rules forbid a player to fold/muck his hand in an all-in contest. I can dig it up but I'm sure any decent TD would agree with me.
The reason we table the cards face up is to make sure the winning hand gets the pot. Player awareness does not, and should not, enter into the equation in this spot.

If this happened at a casino, and i was the short stack all in. Then the guy pushes all in to get the other player out. Then mucks his hand. I will be screaming black and blue for the supervisor to come across and give me my money as his hand has effectively been killed.

No, you would be delighted that you tripled up without the risk of a showdown.
If you were the other player that got pushed out of the pot, then you should seek a ruling to have the player disqualified and the side pot awarded to you.
If the cards are retriveable, they WILL be retrieved at the casino by competent TDs. It will be tabled and showdown will ensue.

Poker is a game where the winner is the person who makes the fewest mistakes possible in the game. This is a big mistake but after playing 3 x 12 hour days can happen, it is unfortunate a mistake, but mental mistakes are part of the game.

In some casino's they have the white line around the felt, that demarcates the safe zone - chips and cards and the playing zone. If your chips go into the playing zone they are in play. If your cards go in there they are mucked.

I agree with most of what you said there, but poker is a game where the winning hand should get the pot. If we allow winning hands to angle their way out of pots they are supposed to win then the integrity of poker is jeopardised and the game is corrupted.

[Garth Kay]

Hate to go against you Garth, but to allow the ALL-IN bettor to fold in that spot is wrong and against the rules. And this is the very type of situation we are arguing about.

No it's not - I do not have to showdown if I have won a pot if I don't want to. Any player has that right, poker is a game of information and in some cases concelaing information is a big win.

There can be sitautions that arise where you may not want to show down your hand simply to keep that information to yourself, if you lose the pot as a result then that is the rule. Now if I have an all in player and the Main is worth 6BB's but the side pot is worth 120BB's then there mayb be value for me to not showdown my hand to claim the main pot (a bit out of the ordinary I know - but it has occurred previously).

If a player folds - they fold. We try to do the best to ensure players dont make mistakes but sometimes its best to enforce the rules - it seems to be the only way players learn.

I was ejected from this event and served with a ban in uncertain terms. While I may have deserved it for escalating the argument at the venue, I don't deserve it for trying to maintain the integrity of the game.

You were ejected from the event because you were unruly and were no longer welcome at the venue. That was the duty manager's decision, as to a ban - I have not enforced one but you certainly have pushed the boundaries of what I consider to be fair and decent behaviour from any of our league members.

While Ernie will tell you his side of the story and say that I acted like a d1ck. I will point out that I did not snap at him to begin with. Ernie was the one who snapped at me. Ernie was out of line as a TD and I was the last person in the world that he could have intimidated in this spot.
His effort at the finals weekend after this incident is commendable but has no bearing on this incident or be used as some kind of excuse.

When I am placed in a situation that comes down to two stories I will always take the word of our TD's as gospel, especially one who has worked for FHG in a senior TD capacity for over 4 years and has quite the loyal fanbase and whose services venues bid for.
irresepctive of that - we will be speaking to the other three players at that final table to qualify any of the allegations or points you have made.

I did PM you directly the next morning about this. I still have not received a personal reply from you about it.

And you probably won't - you copied and pasted this forum post to PM and FB; din't exatly give anyone a lotof time to speak to any of the parties or investigat this further. Whats the point of sending a personal message when you have raised this issue so publicall?. I hardly feel that is fair on Ernie or any of the people following this thread now.

I am sorry to drag Ernie's name thru this and I don't mind my name being dragged thru it with him. I have no ulterior motive. I simply wanted to be heard and I did not want to see this incident be swept under the carpet. Using this forum is the only way I could get unbiased opinion of the situation.

If you are sorry then an apology should be forthcoming, and a very public one at that.
You didn't give anyone a chance to listen to you, you just jumped on here and posted your issue.

And now you insult me by saying that this would have been swept under the carpet?? Do you know how many issues we (and myself personally) address daily? You question MY, and FHG's, integrity NOW?

You certainly know how to push the right buttons.

I know it puts you in a difficult position as the head of the organisation as your interest may be to protect your TDs. I cannot fathom the thought of being punished when I tried to uphold the integrity of the game (even though I may have gone about it the wrong way).
After all, the game is about the players, not the TD.

It's not difficult for me at all:

1.) You were out of the tournament and no longer particpating.
2.) Ernie is a senior TD and one of the best we have going around.
3.) You did not ask questions - you jumped on here and made accusations.
4.) You made this all about the TD, not the players in your OP.
5.) You have asked for a response - you have received one (more than one actually).

Now it is up to you to accept this and move on beyond this incident.

[Garth Kay]

And I am not even going to respond to the last post!

You are entitled to your opinion in regards to rulings and interpretations, but you're wrong.
A hand does not have to go to showdown if the player is not willing! Simple as that.

If that was the case why aren't we making people who fold on the river show down? They could be folding the nuts and chip dumping; that's collusion as well!

[warboat]

Garth, WOW!

I am shocked at your interpretation of tournament rules!

FYI, the "I want to see the hand" rule exists for anyone to invoke in the event that hands go to showdown without all-in. It is there as a measure to prevent chip dumping and collusion.

[Garth Kay]

Garth, WOW!

I am shocked at your interpretation of tournament rules!

FYI, the "I want to see the hand" rule exists for anyone to invoke in the event that hands go to showdown without all-in. It is there as a measure to prevent chip dumping and collusion.

I have worked in this industry for over six years, I have worked with some of the best TD's and poker room managers that Australia has to offer. Be shocked.

I made a sweeping statment with no specifc scenario outlined and you immediately assume that I am incorrect.

Go here - http://www.thehendonmob.com/tournament_director/articles/introduction.html
and read these articles - every TD in the world interprets the rules in a way that is different to each individual.

These are some of the best TD's in the world and even they cannot agree 100% on the correct ruling to apply in some situations.

[warboat]

It makes sense to me that you backed Ernie's position since you take this stance with regards to all-in hands.
If this is standard interpretation in 888 tournaments, then we have a problem.

[Garth Kay]

Your recounting of what occurred and Ernie's account vary dramatically, if I apply a ruling to your scenario then the result is different.

In your scenario:

UTG/DB limps
SB moves all in
BB is all in.

UTG folds

SB thros hand in facedown - techincally a muck - you are incorrect in your OP when you say

Instead of flipping his cards over for the all-in showdown with BB, SB tossed his cards facedown towards the dealer. The dealer was about to pick up the cards when SB reached for his cards and flipped it over on the felt to show everyone Ah3h. The cards had not hit the muck and were technically tabled face up

In any casino in the world this is a MUCK, forward motion and release does indicate intent.

In this case though I would retrieve the hand and table it (as long as the cards did not touch the muckpile and there can be no confusion over the two cards).

I would then run the all in through.

However in Ernie's recounting the BB acted out of turn and the UTG player was all in. The act out of turn is what influences the play here and will stand.

[Garth Kay]

It makes sense to me that you backed Ernie's position since you take this stance with regards to all-in hands.
If this is standard interpretation in 888 tournaments, then we have a problem.

A muck is a muck - in most cases where there is "gross misunderstanding" the hand will be retrieved and there will be a showdown.

If the intent from the player is to muck, or folding action could influence or harm play then the action of folding will stand.

To delcare that every all in hand must be tabled is incorrect, to beleive that every player is trying to collude is worng, to bring into question anyone's integrity is wrong, to mke broad sweeping statments and rulings in the belief that it irradicates collusion is wrong.

Whilst I might not agree with TD's rulings in some cases, I was not present and they made a ruling based on their interpretation of the rules and in the spirit of the game and with the interests of the players at heart. That's all that I care about.

And the fact that none of the final three have lodged a complaint or saw no issue with the final results bears more weight that your continued insitance that you're right and Ernie is wrong.

[Garth Kay]

FYI - you are not suspended in our systems as at 1.30pm today.
Just had a look, so your statment that you were banned was not factual.

I wouldnt mind if you addressed some of the other items I addressed in my long winded response to you.