S3mper
Poker Not Checkers
Loyaler
dealio96
The LAG Monkeys
Silver Level
Yes Riffle you are correct... You are not allowed to check the nutz on the river if you are last to act. I also saw Darvin moon do this a few years back and got penalized.. Goes to show how much he knows poker..
As far as Maria Ho saying that was a good check... I don't believe it.. That girl knows what she's doing and I highly doubt shes gona miss value just to see opponents hand.
dealio96
The LAG Monkeys
Silver Level
When it comes to the wsop... You are not allowed to check the nutz on the riv if you are last to act... Trust me.. I've played in ME twice and I should know...
As far as checking the nutz while last to act in a cash game at your local casino... now thats a different story.
S
ssbn743
Visionary
Silver Level
Guys – what the hell is wrong with you?
Yes, you will get a penalty if you do it – and no, it is NOT in the rule book; hence the problem!
That’s what I said – and it is absolute truth!
I’m still waiting for you to show me where this is illegal in the rule book? You might want to read that book, you know, since you’ve played twice in the ME.
and dont forget to post pictures
dealio96
The LAG Monkeys
Silver Level
ahhh... so you put yourself in 2 way predicament just to be right?? first you say its allowed but you will receive a penalty... then you say its not in the rule books?? YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CHECK THE NUTS ON THE RIVER IF YOU ARE LAST TO ACT!!!!! plain and simple pal.. I don't care(nor do i know) if it is or isn't in the rule book. You can't do it unless you want to be penalized.
I'm done with this convo... you can respond but I will be sure not to check back... Good day to you sir.
S3mper
Poker Not Checkers
Loyaler
Okay so here is the only thing I found which doesn't really show the rule but their are so freaking many that I could have very easily skimmed over it..
"Collusion includes, but is not limited to, acts such as: chip dumping; soft play; sharing card information with another Participant; sending or receiving signals from or to another Participant; the use of electronic communication with the intent to facilitate collusion; and any other act that Rio and WSOP deem inappropriate"
but at the same time that pretty much means anything they say lol
"Collusion includes, but is not limited to, acts such as: chip dumping; soft play; sharing card information with another Participant; sending or receiving signals from or to another Participant; the use of electronic communication with the intent to facilitate collusion; and any other act that Rio and WSOP deem inappropriate"
but at the same time that pretty much means anything they say lol
dealio96
The LAG Monkeys
Silver Level
Yes and there ya go!! Checking the nutz on the river when LAST TO ACT = SOFT PLAY(and soft play is a form of collusion) End of argument. Good day all!
S
ssbn743
Visionary
Silver Level
Right, a “Soft Play” is illegal. Absolutely, and the penalty for someone guilty of a “soft play” is not a one round penalty but, ejection from the game and forfeiture of buy-in.
Hence the problem, checking the nuts when last to act is not in the rule book; again! If that scenario is collusion by soft play, then why isn’t it penalized like the rule book says a soft play should be penalized?
This is the problem and the whole issue. It is not a rule, but rather a thumb rule enforced by word of mouth through the TDA.
Yes you will get a penalty if you do it; no it is not in the rule book. Are we on the same page yet?
S3mper
Poker Not Checkers
Loyaler
Idk why your arguing with me lol, I for one am not a fan of the "unofficial rule" I just went and tried to find it and posted the closest thing that I could find.
I don't have a dog in any fight here lolz
but yes I understand what you both mean.
B
BlakeBrown
Rock Star
Silver Level
I actually also started the thread about checking the nuts when you are last to act also... And yes this did happen on the show and no matter how frustrating it is that someone would do that I am glad they didn't call it a penalty thought it is only in certain tournament... And what if everyone mucks? It isn't too great of a tell then, and this Carla lady does not seem good enough to get an actually tell from this
Jacki Burkhart
long winded rambler...
Silver Level
ssbn43...have you ever heard of "making a mountain out of a mole hill"?
give it a rest. it may or may not actually be in the rule book, but soft play IS in the rulebook and most major tournaments are enforcing checking the nuts on the river as a form of soft play with a lesser penalty. It is what it is. I'm sure you could start a petition or something, if you actually want to change it instead of just complain about it....but I doubt your petition will do much because most people don't care as much about it as you.
DON'T CHECK THE NUTS ON THE RIVER, end of story.
give it a rest. it may or may not actually be in the rule book, but soft play IS in the rulebook and most major tournaments are enforcing checking the nuts on the river as a form of soft play with a lesser penalty. It is what it is. I'm sure you could start a petition or something, if you actually want to change it instead of just complain about it....but I doubt your petition will do much because most people don't care as much about it as you.
DON'T CHECK THE NUTS ON THE RIVER, end of story.
S
ssbn743
Visionary
Silver Level
You should care – even if you are never going to check the nuts; I’m not ever going to do that either. Now if you think I’m making a mountain out of a mole hill than you are entitled to your opinion, but this one example is not the only example; how about “Hey let’s just check it down” a phrase that is also not in the rulebook and is clearly a “soft play”. Even when you see this one, it doesn’t get penalized properly; or at all in many cash games.
Just know, that this may seem moot until it works against you, or until you see someone wrongly penalized and technically accused of cheating, like Darwin Moon. In 1995 I became a Jack Binion certified dealer at Binion’s Horseshoe and had to learn all these little idiosyncrasies. Believe it or not, this was an issue even back then; before there was a TDA rulebook and different casino’s interpreted the “thumb rule” differently; Binion’s was the de-facto standard but still, different interpretations existed. The knowledge level of Jacks’ dealers and their knowing these seemingly inconsequential rules and correctly enforcing them and administering the game is what made Binion’s the greatest poker room on the planet – anyone with a gaming license can run a $1/$2 game.
I’d be willing to bet a lot of money that at any room Jack Binion ever ran this rule was not enforced; that’s just the way Jack ran his rooms. And that’s the way the WSOP should be as well; particularly in current times because the correct rule set will filter its’ way down.
It’s not making something out of nothing, it’s making it right. Also, a petition about this issue and others has already been started and denied several times because the TDA doesn’t give f&^%. I’m not going to start a petition myself, I just don’t have the dedication, plus I don’t think it would do any good – that has already been proven by the idiots at the TDA. But it frustrates me when other players are practically willing to fight over their being wrong; obviously “delio96” knows everything there is to know because he played in the ME twice – duh!
S3mper
Poker Not Checkers
Loyaler
Okay, just a reminder to keep it civil guys not saying anyone isn't it's just a reminder that I feel I should say because I am the one who brought this up in the first place by saying. "Isn't it against the rules to check the nuts on the river when last to act"
My person feelings on this are I also do not like this rule at all, all it accomplishes is hurting poker by penalizing amateur players who misread the board.
As I said in the "Does anyone like this rule thread" which link was previously posted no one cheats like this if two people were colluding the person with the nuts would just bet and the other person would know to fold...
The fact that the TDA enforces a rule so unrealistically stupid makes me doubt in the TDA.. I think it's good to have a TDA to better poker and ensure its survival by continually making the game better.. However the TDA should be composed of people preferably poker players who understand poker and how people do and do not cheat.
My person feelings on this are I also do not like this rule at all, all it accomplishes is hurting poker by penalizing amateur players who misread the board.
As I said in the "Does anyone like this rule thread" which link was previously posted no one cheats like this if two people were colluding the person with the nuts would just bet and the other person would know to fold...
The fact that the TDA enforces a rule so unrealistically stupid makes me doubt in the TDA.. I think it's good to have a TDA to better poker and ensure its survival by continually making the game better.. However the TDA should be composed of people preferably poker players who understand poker and how people do and do not cheat.
S
ssbn743
Visionary
Silver Level
Very well said and this is the problem with the TDA. Unfortunately it is run by bureaucrats that found a way to make money off of poker. Still, it’s not a bad thing or organization, and all this could be resolved if they would just add these situations to the rule book; but they can’t do that because it isn’t right and they know it.
Unfortunately, it has become part of poker culture and maybe even poker lore. I love listening to the guy at the table in the Darwin Moon hand tell everyone “You can’t check the nuts on the river – it’s been a rule for a long time”. We know, that’s not quite accurate, but the floor man didn’t and then administered a one hand penalty, one hand after the incident occurred. Sigh!!!! I’ve never even heard of a one-hand penalty, but it’s just like the TDA to make sh*& up as they go.