WSOP player Loses chips to someone NOT in the WSOP event?

http://www.dustyschmidt.net/dusty_schmidt_blog/

I rarely put up links to my blog here at Cardschat, but thought this one might be of interest to some people. Mods, if you would rather copy paste the contents from my blog, feel free. I'm not sure how it's done here.

Cliff notes:

1. Friend who I am staking enters wsop event
2. Friend loses chips and nearly busts to the guy sitting next to him
3. Turns out the guy next to him was NOT even registered in the event
4. WSOP floor rules that my friend's chips were lost "in good faith" to the man NOT registered in the event and none of the chips my friend lost were given back to him.

That's Unreal...

How did the dealer deal that guy in with no chips in the first place??? Completely the dealers thought!

So...the chips are just gone? The unregistered guy leaves and your friend is pretty much gone too? Basically like a free entry fee for the organizers, heheh.

That's pretty messed up.

I would have to assume by the way they ruled that had your friend won a bunch of chips he would have been allowed to keep them? Did the unregistered guy get to keep the chips he won for the tourney he was supposed to be playing??? Whose chips was the unregistered person playing with anyway? Just really really strange all around.

not sure what the guy hoped to accomplish, bc he would have been found out eventually. but to the point.....not sure it can be entirely the dealers fault. a better question might be how did the guy get chips any way? and of course, what kinda of a ruling is that??? he lost the chips in good faith?? say what???

I'm guessing he probably sat down at the wrong event?

absoluthamm said:

I'm guessing he probably sat down at the wrong event?

Click to expand...

Yep.. he was registered for a shootout event that was actually the following day and showed up at the wrong event.

Mortis said:

Yep.. he was registered for a shootout event that was actually the following day and showed up at the wrong event.

Click to expand...

Could you imagine that. I think that's insane how the actually sat in for another player in order to obtain chips for play.

Leatherass said:

http://www.dustyschmidt.net/dusty_schmidt_blog/

I rarely put up links to my blog here at Cardschat, but thought this one might be of interest to some people. Mods, if you would rather copy paste the contents from my blog, feel free. I'm not sure how it's done here.

Cliff notes:

1. Friend who I am staking enters WSOP event
2. Friend loses chips and nearly busts to the guy sitting next to him
3. Turns out the guy next to him was NOT even registered in the event
4. WSOP floor rules that my friend's chips were lost "in good faith" to the man NOT registered in the event and none of the chips my friend lost were given back to him.

Click to expand...

think of the children!

Anyways, although in that situation the ruling seemed unfair, on a scale overall that is a decent call. thanks for the link to your blog, i really enjoyed it. Like you said though, think of what would happen if he won the money from the guy, same thing.

Keep on writing, i'll keep on reading, from one honest bloke to the next,

Isaac

http://www.dustyschmidt.net/2010/06/follow-up-to-the-bizarre-wsop-ruling-against-my-friend/

Posted a follow up. Crazy stuff.

"I guess next time the November 9 come back for the main event final table their fiercest competition may just come from the rail. One of them might jump onto the table and check raise someone out of a big pot!"

That is as bad as how someone stole the persons chips next to them and got banned from WSOP forever.

What i dont understand is how their was more people PLAYING the event then actually registered. doesn't anyone even count?

Was it the first hand this guy played?

The only logic I can see to the ruling is if he had been playing for a while and been involved in a few pots.

Although your friend may have lost quite a bit to him, if he had won a few small pots earlier then reimbursing your friend and not the others would have been equally controversial. So perhaps the ruling was made because it was impossible to be fair to everyone who had lost money to this player.

If however this was the first pot the guy was involved in, then it really dosent make any sense because it would be very easy to give everyone concerned their money back.

Would be great if the guy had made it to where he'd have cashed.

C'mon, he won "in good faith", pay up!

did the guy who won the chips take them with him to his proper tourney the next day ?

That is the biggest bunch of BS crap of a ruling I have ever heard. How can anyone think this is remotely fair? So John's chip are lost, and what happens to the chips that are won by the genius that showed up on the wrong day? Does he take his huge stack to the event the next day? lol No, those chips were reserved for someone, and should be returned to the dealer. Will the guy whom the seat was reserved for get there late, and be pleased to learn he is chip leader at the table? No. What happens to the stack?

Here's what should have happened, IMO. If play at all tables cannot stop, then at the very least, the clock should have been stopped immediately (freezing the blind levels) until the whole business was squared away. The spycams should have recorded all the play, right? Not sure what would be the fairest way to equitably redistribute moneys won or lost, and to whom. Perhaps start again from sctrach, like they just sat down, with a new bag of chips. Just as it is unfair for John to lose 1/2 or 3/4 of his stack to this guy, isn't it also unfair to John that others at the table may have have actually won a hand or 2 against same guy, and can now bully John?

Here is one thing that is inarguably fair. Everyone at that table should have been offered their buy-in back (although I'd like to make that double the buy-in - it's only 4 stinkin' people). The dealer is their employee, and he screwed up.

Stu_Ungar said:

Was it the first hand this guy played?

The only logic I can see to the ruling is if he had been playing for a while and been involved in a few pots.

Although your friend may have lost quite a bit to him, if he had won a few small pots earlier then reimbursing your friend and not the others would have been equally controversial. So perhaps the ruling was made because it was impossible to be fair to everyone who had lost money to this player.

If however this was the first pot the guy was involved in, then it really dosent make any sense because it would be very easy to give everyone concerned their money back.

Click to expand...

I understand the logic of this but I would feel aggreived either way its a bit of a shambles that this happened in the first place but this seems a bit of a strange rule to me in this situation where it sounds like the former happened Stu.

Wonder if this is the first time this has happened, it sounds like but you never know it could have happened before and would be intresting to see if it had what was done.

The dealer is their employee, and he screwed up.

Click to expand...

If we've learned anything about these sitautions though, it's that it doesn't matter if the dealer gets up, punches you in the eye, rips your hole cards up and throws your chips in the trash, you'll still get told that there's nothing they can do to help you. Your hole cards are now mucked, your chips are now forfeit and you'll have to take care of that eye on your own.

Bovinity said:

If we've learned anything about these sitautions though, it's that it doesn't matter if the dealer gets up, punches you in the eye, rips your hole cards up and throws your chips in the trash, you'll still get told that there's nothing they can do to help you. Your hole cards are now mucked, your chips are now forfeit and you'll have to take care of that eye on your own.

Click to expand...

Sure, the dealer should have every right to punch any player in the face for any reason, but the rest makes no sense. Seriously, one example is not similar to the other. Can a dealer rip your hole cards with a chip protector on it, and too bad? Can he ship the chips the wrong way on a HU all-in? More on point, not sure what the house rules are when you register, but there ought to be some fairness, for the sake of 'good business' - and IMO, err on the side of the customer. The Rio can afford it. Poor John is not responsible for doing the dealer's job, checking registration receipts and ID.

Leatherass said:

http://www.dustyschmidt.net/2010/06/follow-up-to-the-bizarre-wsop-ruling-against-my-friend/

Posted a follow up. Crazy stuff.

Click to expand...

Your friend's name is really John McClain?






Yippe-Ki-Ay Mother****er!!







I'm sorry. I apologize for that.

Mortis said:

Your friend's name is really John McClain?






Yippe-Ki-Ay Mother****er!!

I'm sorry. I apologize for that.

Click to expand...

This is awesome. He gets that about 9 times a day lol. Shoot, I even say yipee kay yay mother ****er to him from time to time.

Can a dealer rip your hole cards with a chip protector on it, and too bad?

Click to expand...

Well, yes. Card protector or not, if the dealer grabbed your cards and threw them in the muck, your cards would be mucked. Doesn't matter if you put a cinder block on top of them, if the dealer grabbed them and threw them in, you're screwed.

I realize that has nothing to do with this situation, I was merely replying to the person that made the point about it being the dealers mistake. Unfortunately, just because the dealer made the mistake doesn't mean it's going to get fixed, that was my point.

Bovinity said:

Well, yes. Card protector or not, if the dealer grabbed your cards and threw them in the muck, your cards would be mucked. Doesn't matter if you put a cinder block on top of them, if the dealer grabbed them and threw them in, you're screwed.

I realize that has nothing to do with this situation, I was merely replying to the person that made the point about it being the dealers mistake. Unfortunately, just because the dealer made the mistake doesn't mean it's going to get fixed, that was my point.

Click to expand...

this happened last year when the dealer took the players cards

http://www.worldpokerexpress.com/estelle-denis-vs-jc-tran-shocking-wsop-2009-ruling/

katymaty said:

this happened last year when the dealer took the players cards

http://www.worldpokerexpress.com/estelle-denis-vs-jc-tran-shocking-wsop-2009-ruling/

Click to expand...

As was discussed pretty heavily back when that happened, she should have protected her cards. Not an excuse for the dealer being a doofus, but you have no recourse. She shoved and left her cards unprotected out in front of her stack, the dealer mis-heard or whatever and mucked her cards. Had she protected her cards with her hands, a chip, or anything else it could have been prevented.

The floor did attempt to find her cards (AA iirc) on top of the muck, but apparently the dealer had already mixed them because they didn't find what she told them.

I can only imagine the hell that would break loose should a dealer grab someone's cards from under a card protector...

This Dusty Schmidt that never posts except in his same thread...the absurd story that he described...and his friend whose name is john McClain.
The whole article could be a bogus. A fabricated story with a secret reward set for the first member of cardschat that finds out the truth.

the truth is out there