Was Hachem being unethical?

[Miles Ahead]

[ QUOTE ]
I consider that part of poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely.

[Jedster]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I said in my original post that what he did is not against the rules. My question is was it unethical. The way swapping large percentages is unethical.

(Edited to take out an example that acutally is against the rules)

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, it might be against the rules depending upon what rules they are using and how strictly they are interpreting them. But Rule 37 of the TDA states:

[ QUOTE ]
Verbally disclosing the contents of your hand or advising a player how to play a hand may result in a penalty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly, Hachem did advise another player how to play a hand. But given that there is a TD right there I think he should have stepped in and reminded the players that they cannot disuss their hand or advise others what to do. But it would have to be an outright abuse of the rules for a player to be penalized on a final table of an event like this.

[/ QUOTE ]

In reading this thread, it seems pretty clear to me that the rules aren't very clear and aren't followed very consistently.

It's hard to argue that in the broadest sense Hachem wasn't "advising a player how to play a hand." But this happens all the time. What Hachem did is not much different than a player asking another player if he wants a call, or asking another player if he has a big draw and getting a response. We see that all the time in real life and on TV (remember when Matusow told Andy Black to fold his KJo against Tex Barch?). If it's okay in those situations, it seems okay in this one. Who the advice helps is not super-relevant as long as the advice isn't clearly designed to help the adviser's friend gain an unfair advantage.

Also, rule 34 says:

"Players, whether in the hand or not, may not discuss the hands until the action is complete. Players are obligated to protect the other players in the tournament at all times. Discussing cards discarded or hand possibilities is not allowed. A penalty may be given for discussion of hands during the play."

If "discussing a hand" means discussing a specific hand, then there is no rules violation, but if you take a broader interpretation you could conclude there was a violation. However, if you do that, then you'd have to ban all table talk about the hand in play. Even musing aloud about what does your opponent have would not be allowed. Remember Sheikan (sp?) jumped up in reaction to the flopping of an ace and Matusow flipped out at him? As I recall, he got a penalty despite not using any words (and MM got a F-bomb penalty).

It seems to me that the only way to enact any rule stopping all but the most egregious violations would be a total ban on talking. On a selfish level, I would benefit from a rule that required silence during a hand. Verbal communication when I'm in a hand has never been one of my strengths. But that rule would take a lot away from the game of poker, both for people who can use talking as a weapon, and for TV coverage.

[troymclur]

[ QUOTE ]
Andrew Black's coffeehousing with Neverwin during the WSOP while there was a third player involved in the hand (who happened to have been holding the winner and might have actually played the hand further if Black didn't start blabbing) was a prime example of how a Buddhist douchebag could possibly influence the outcome of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of tournament equity.


[/ QUOTE ]

Buddists don't douche, much less accumulate a bags worth. Think on your feet boy.

[wadea]

[ QUOTE ]
So it's ok that he told Lee watkinson to fold but not Minh Ly?
By the way, if Watkinson calls Hachem is not a 4 to 1 favorite.

[/ QUOTE ]

He didn't "know" what Ly had, so he couldn't possibly advise him without stating his own hand.

[popimp3333]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought that he verbally trapped Dannerman in the last hand of the main event. Taking advantage of Dannerman's naivity and good nature. It's Hachem style of play and his sense of etiquette or lack of it. I'm with you, I'd just rather play cards and find that bullsh*t offensive. It brings up the question "when does gamesmanship cross the line" Should you be allowed to say anything to your oppenents in the middle of a hand? Then again, how can you legislate it?

[/ QUOTE ]
what you guys dont always think about is that this is a game of people playing cards not the other way around.. there are many people out there (myself included) that use communication before during and after the hands are dealt to get some extra info that isnt always expressed through betting, the board, etc. i dont believe that any sort of talkin to another player should be considered unethical unless your just slamming a guy for making a bad call or bet or if your giving away information about your cards or someone elses. saying you know what someone has is usually just a scare tactic. and it works more than you would think. let people talk if they wanna talk. some give away information about themselves that way.

[andyfox]

It is part of poker, I agree. But I too have mixed feelings. When it's head-up, no problem. Whatever anyone says only affects the other guy. Saying something to a player who has not yet acted seems unfair to others who are in the hand and already have, as it gives the appearance of collusion.

[TxRedMan]

Nah. Table talk is permissible. Nothing wrong with this.


Tex

[DesertCat]

How did the cards roll out? Maybe losing Lee's chips cost Joe the tournament?

[TheBlueMonster]

[ QUOTE ]
I care because I don't think that's poker and I came there to play poker.

[/ QUOTE ]
if you want to play poker without annoying (but not illegal)table talk, then go online and turn off chat

[Beavis68]

[ QUOTE ]
There's no rule about who you have to talk to at the poker table and who you don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a rule about discussing your hand during play. This is pushing it and would have pissed me off. People like Danny N regulary cross the line, but dealers will not enforce it if no one speaks up.

Not only that, but this is collusive since a player is already all in. I would have complained.