gg Mansion Poker Dome

[AaronO]

All this moral relativism is frustrating. Matt does not have the ability to "interpret the spirit" of the rule. The rule is black and white. Not only is the rule in writing for the players, it was discussed with them prior to the show. Regardless of whether or not you think it is fair, it must be applied evenly to all the players. If there was flexibility the rule would say something along the lines of "if the curse was directed at a player or dealer, a five minute penalty will be assessed. If the curse was not directed at a player or dealer a one minute penalty will be assessed." But that is not what the rule says.

IMO there is much greater harm in applying rules unevenly than applying them despite a perceived lack of fairness. Matt has since taken the right step and corrected the rules so situations like this do not arise in the future. The situation demonstrated a lack of fairness in the rules, and they were subsequently changed.

[Runner Runner]

[ QUOTE ]
All this moral relativism is frustrating. Matt does not have the ability to "interpret the spirit" of the rule. The rule is black and white. Not only is the rule in writing for the players, it was discussed with them prior to the show. Regardless of whether or not you think it is fair, it must be applied evenly to all the players. If there was flexibility the rule would say something along the lines of "if the curse was directed at a player or dealer, a five minute penalty will be assessed. If the curse was not directed at a player or dealer a one minute penalty will be assessed." But that is not what the rule says.

IMO there is much greater harm in applying rules unevenly than applying them despite a perceived lack of fairness. Matt has since taken the right step and corrected the rules so situations like this do not arise in the future. The situation demonstrated a lack of fairness in the rules, and they were subsequently changed.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a bunch of malarky. Of course he can interpret the rule and use his judgement, that's his job.

IMO his #1 concern should be the fairness of the given situation. Sure it is unfair to "bend" the rules now because it would be unfair to previous players, however it is much more unfair to access a penalty which strips a players tournament equity from 90+% to almost 0. As TD he needs to use his judgment to make decisions that keep the game fair.

Basketball referees are involved in similar situations late in games where a "slight" foul may have occured but they don't want the game to end like that so they might call the ball out of bounds off of the wrong team so that the player's team who was slightly fouled still maintains possession but doesn't get the huge edge of going to the line.

Referees and TDs are there to provide a FAIR game first and formost. The enforcement of the rules is part of that job but making sure things are fair is #1.

[holl@b4x]

I happened to catch this on TV the other day, absolutely ludicrous. I've always been against penalties for cursing because you can berate a player and get way out of line without cursing, and you can curse and not be out of line (like in this case).

[UATrewqaz]

There is a great saying in sports

Players win games, coaches lose them, and refs ruin them.

[orensi]

Mansion Poker Dome & Mansion Poker

Who cares??!!

[chicken10der]

^I think that's their slogan.

[CaryDarling]

I know Matt, I also do some fill in work at The Poker Dome running the table...I was not there during this show and this is the first time I've ever heard about it.

Before each show there is about 1 hour of "poker school" where these people are ran through a scripted presentation on what is allowed and what is not by three people..the producer, the guy who runs "card tracker" and Kyle who I work for at "table control."
Then after that, they are then ran through another hour of "dress rehearsal" where we run the show as if it were the one.

These people are told things like "use your time extension," verbalize all actions, no fancy chip splashing etc...and it never fails...even during live production once the cameras are running, and the money is actually on the line so many people freeze up and forget what they are supposed to do next.

The show is also taped and any fixes needed covered right there..the saturday taping is on FSN the following Sunday.

What's my point? I understand the need for the rules, but there is pressure, even on a game show that's a complete free roll...it's not even a real tournament..which is how they got by the NGC and are taping downton on Freemont street...but they do stress that Matt is the TD and just like in all tournaments the TD's ruling is final.

I think it's a horrible situation, I can see both sides of the issues here. No one was really "wrong," just someone was a bit more "right." That was Matt...he stated the rules...the players agreed to them...and then he saw to it that they were applied.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All this moral relativism is frustrating. Matt does not have the ability to "interpret the spirit" of the rule. The rule is black and white. Not only is the rule in writing for the players, it was discussed with them prior to the show. Regardless of whether or not you think it is fair, it must be applied evenly to all the players. If there was flexibility the rule would say something along the lines of "if the curse was directed at a player or dealer, a five minute penalty will be assessed. If the curse was not directed at a player or dealer a one minute penalty will be assessed." But that is not what the rule says.

IMO there is much greater harm in applying rules unevenly than applying them despite a perceived lack of fairness. Matt has since taken the right step and corrected the rules so situations like this do not arise in the future. The situation demonstrated a lack of fairness in the rules, and they were subsequently changed.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a bunch of malarky. Of course he can interpret the rule and use his judgement, that's his job.

IMO his #1 concern should be the fairness of the given situation. Sure it is unfair to "bend" the rules now because it would be unfair to previous players, however it is much more unfair to access a penalty which strips a players tournament equity from 90+% to almost 0. As TD he needs to use his judgment to make decisions that keep the game fair.

Basketball referees are involved in similar situations late in games where a "slight" foul may have occured but they don't want the game to end like that so they might call the ball out of bounds off of the wrong team so that the player's team who was slightly fouled still maintains possession but doesn't get the huge edge of going to the line.

Referees and TDs are there to provide a FAIR game first and formost. The enforcement of the rules is part of that job but making sure things are fair is #1.

[/ QUOTE ]

Speaking in my past self, as a lawyer, I'd be pretty hesitant to "interpret" this rule, that was laid out in absolute terms, in the moment. Let's say I do what you would consider fair, and just have the guy miss 2 or 3 hands. Then, as expected (since he has the dominant stack, the guy-who-cursed goes on to win. Now, the guy who finished second sues the Poker Dome people for cheating him. Since the rule was clear-cut and absolute, it would easily appear to a jury that Matt must have been bought off by the guy-who-cursed, or had some other nefarious reason to not apply the rule as written.

Your basketball analogy is not quite apt. When a slight foul occurs, it is generally debateable whether there was really ever a foul or not. In the case of this poker game, there is nothing to debate except the extent of the penalty. I've never seen a basketball referee call a foul but only award the guy a throw-in from out-of-bounds rather than his free penalty shots. I doubt such a thing could happen.

I think Matt handled this situation as perfectly as possible. He applied the only penalty available to him, and then worked to improve the rule after-the-fact.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
When I said "being abusive towards any player, dealer, or tournament staff" I am talking about other events, not those that are live or live to tape. This is a situation where television makes the rule and I am the one that has to enforce it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Matt,

I see you are skirting the issue again as this is not a live show so the FCC's rules on indecent language don't apply. Any swear word can be "bleeped" out with about 5 seconds of editing on Final Cut Pro or Avid (or whatever editing system they use).

We all know that tourney rules are not always enforced. Just look at what happened to Jamie Gold for exposing one of his cards during a hand at the FT last year: Nothing. Mike Matasuw gets away with abusive behavior all the time. There's typically a rule that the TD has final discretion (That rule would invalidate Greg's theory of a possible lawsuit). If your show failed to put such a rule in place before hand then it it really isn't a well run event.

Your players are not pros. They are amateurs from regular walks of life who almost certainly have had no experience under the lights or playing for that kind of winner take all cash. A swear word done under the breath like that just doesn't call for any sort of penalty heads up at a speed poker tourney. I mean, what were you guys thinking when you came up with a 5 minute penalty for a speed poker event? Didn't anyone have the foresight to realize that HU or 3 way this would be disastrous? Or are you simply OK with going for the low hanging fruit kind of event?

BTW, I think it shows class that you have come on here and replied to our concerns.

[CaryDarling]

[ QUOTE ]
If your show failed to put such a rule in place before hand then it it really isn't a well run event.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is not a real tournament...it is actually a "game show." I mean that in that it's like Deal or No Deal, Jeopardy etc...there is no gambling...we can't wager on the players during production...no one, the commentators and players included can say "I raise twenty-thousand dollars" They have CHIPS...we can never say dollar when discussing the amount of chips in play or that a player has...this is how they get by the NGC.
and their rules probably don't get as much discretion as a tournament...as I'm sure the producers and Fox would not like a game show scandal similar to The 64,000 Question.