David Singer

[W brad]

[ QUOTE ]
There was never any distinction made between people who were using their phones for innocent actions like silencing the ringer vs. potentially problematic ones like receiving text messages. They said that if you touched your phone during a hand, your hand was dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

Improper enforcement of the rule in the past is not relevant. Rule 82, quoted in the second post of this thread, only makes using the cell phone for voice or text messaging a violation, not turning the ringer off.

[wisehandpoker]

David made 2 mistakes:

1) allowing his hand to be betrayed by his reation

2) Not taking the ruling to a higher power. Why tournament poker players accept any ruling they don't like when there's an appeals process is beyond me.

[Exitonly]

isnt there also a rule that exceptions will come up where the TD has to make judgement calls that could 'technically' go against the rules?

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There was never any distinction made between people who were using their phones for innocent actions like silencing the ringer

[/ QUOTE ]

Improper enforcement of the rule in the past is not relevant. Rule 82, quoted in the second post of this thread, only makes using the cell phone for voice or text messaging a violation, not turning the ringer off.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not how they presented it, that's not how they enforced it. Verbally, they made the rule super-strict (touch your cellphone, hand declared dead), so they wouldn't have to make these distinctions, and hands were killed left and right over the most innocuous cellphone use in 50+ events. Then, during the main event, they take such distinctions really seriously and rule in the favor of doing the sensible thing? Come on, WTF? How is that fair to people like Singer, who were forced to abide by these absurd restrictions for a month-plus, then see the spirit and implementation of the rule get reversed?

Seriously, this just boils to another case of F* Harrah's--they create a half-assed rule with no real gameplan on how to implement it, and it creates disasters when people like Singer get involved.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
David made 2 mistakes:

2) Not taking the ruling to a higher power. Why tournament poker players accept any ruling they don't like when there's an appeals process is beyond me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, what's the appeals process? I've never seen or heard of any such thing outlined. For the longest time, I thought the first floor ruling was final. Anyway, it sounds like Singer DID get an appeal here, so that's not one of his mistakes.

[Cornell Fiji]

re: David getting the gaming commission to give him a refund

[ QUOTE ]
26. Harrah’s employees will use reasonable commercial efforts to consider the best interests
of the game and fairness as the top priority in the decision-making process, with the
understanding that “best interests of the game and fairness” shall be determined by
Harrah’s, acting in its sole and absolute discretion. Unusual circumstances can, on
occasion, dictate that the technical interpretation of the rules be balanced against the
interest of fairness. Harrah’s decisions are final and can not be appealed and shall not
give rise to any claim for monetary damages, as each participant understands that, while
poker is primarily and largely a game of skill, the outcome of any particular hand or
event is dependent on many factors, including but not limited to the cards dealt, the cards
retained and the actions of other participants.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.worldseriesofpoker.com/docs/doc_591_58.pdf

[fizresh]

it's the equivalent of billy martin pointing out the pine tar on george brett's bat.

it's a cheap technicality and beneath the stature of someone like singer. or so i thought.

[Syntec87]

I dont think its unethical at all, and I WOULD do it with his hand. I wouldnt make a fuss if he folded, cause its unnecessary (and in case the ruling goes the other way, I would bring it up only after a call). Its a rule, and so what if it is stupid, if he has to follow it, he has the right to use it to his advantage. Once they make it part of the tournament rules, it should be adhered to, strictly.

[fleece_me]

Singer's hand should be ruled dead as well since he talked about it and told the truth. When the floorman was called over both hands were still live.

[Alex Jacob]

i can understand singer asking to get the guy's hand dead as a desperation move, but i personally wouldn't do it. to actually believe that the guy's hand should be dead and to continue whining about it is absurd. as are most of the responses in this thread.

pressing a button on your phone to stop it from ringing during a hand is completely standard. i guess i have been lucky because i personally have done it in tournaments and in the world series a bunch of times. i have never dreamed that i could get my hand killed for doing this and no one has ever tried to get it killed.

you guys are saying the guy has to let the phone ring through while he's trying to make his decision? the rules are in place to protect fairness. killing a hand should only be done as an absolute last recourse.

-aj