gg Mansion Poker Dome - Page 5

okterrific · #41 03-07-2007, 02:09 AM

Ive never understood the entire no cursing rules. I think if someone curses AT someone and calls someone a name then fine give penalties. But if a guy goes "[censored] ya! or "oh [censored]" or "god [censored] hates me what a bad beat" i think it should be forgiven. I mean a guy pays 10k to enter a tournament (not this one i think?) and he says one thing and it could cost you so much.

I mean poker is a tough game and its laughable that it gets treated like its being played in a church. Who do they think they are kidding? "he said the "f word" - yuk who gives a [censored] if someone said the [censored] "f word" lets play some [censored] poker boys.

That said the show is garbage poker and i dont know why anyone who enjoys poker would watch it but that sucks for that guy. How much did first pay btw?

YTV · #42 03-07-2007, 02:52 AM

[ QUOTE ]
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 ]

EXACTLY. I have no idea what a tournament directors job duties entails. But if it has anything to do with interpreting the rules as they see fit, that would be complete [censored]. I would rather have established black and white rules to go by then depend on wether some tournament director is shady or not, or wether he would see things my way or the way of the majority. Having black and white rules completely dismisses all these possibilities. Jesus, I cannot even see how anyone would want this. What if the blinds are super huge and the tournament director decides wow this game has turned into a crap shoot so he lowesrs the blinds 80%? Would you feel the same way?

[ QUOTE ]
There is a great saying in sports

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

[/ QUOTE ]

Great saying or not, it has absolutely nothing to do with this situation. The player is 100% at fault and there is no question about it.

lsuplayer · #43 03-07-2007, 03:17 AM

I think what most people are trying to say, and which I agree with, is that regardless of the tda's responsibilities or the rule book, first and foremost, the guy lost b/c he couldn't play. The game was not won by the big guy but more like a third-party forfeiture by the tda for the little guy. Regardless of rules and descretion and a million other things you could argue about, the game was not fairly won, and it casts a dark light on poker. To think that the rules would want or even allow those is simply atrotious. I know I would not want to play in a game that if I slipped up and made a mistake, like a foul in basketball, or an out-of-bounds shot in golf, I instantly forfeit. It's not plausible to think that those actions warrant forfeiture, why should a similarily minor error result in forfeit.

Matt Savage · #44 03-07-2007, 03:53 AM

I have said it a few times but there still seems to be some confusion. This ruling was back and white because it was clearly stated before the tournament.
1. I did not like giving him the penalty and think it was brutal
2. I do not like the "F-word" penalty and do not use it in the majority of tournaments I run.
3. I saw a problem long ago about timed penalties and we changed it as soon as we could. Which happens to have been the February 20-21, 2007 TDA Summit attended by 116 TD's and CRM's.
4. We could not invoke the new penalty format yet because others in the same series have been penalized for swearing.
5. The new penalty rule will be in place for all TDA member casinos starting March 15th except for Bay 101 in which we will start March 11th when our Shooting Star event begins.
6. Thevis accepted the penalty and admitted that he was wrong which proves him to be both informed of the consequences he faced and gentleman for apologizing when he did not need to.
7. The other player went out of his way to both point out the swearing and then play as fast as he could to burn Thevis' chips.

Matt Savage
www.SavageTournaments.com
www.PokerTDA.com

Rottersod · #45 03-07-2007, 03:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what to make of your answer. You can call it a game show or a reality show or a sitcom for all I care but everyone knows what it is, especially your advertisers who I'm sure were less then thrilled to be associated with such a crappy ending that left a sour taste in the mouths of a lot of viewers. Your show needs all the ratings help it can get so what do you do? You screw an "average Joe" player out of the chance of a lifetime and give him one of the harshest penalties of any televised poker (oops..game show) show in history. One that was completely out of proportion to the "technical" violation.

That would be like Wheel of Fortune disqualifying a player for uttering a curse word while taping. Oh wait...WoF is a game show. Just like yours is purported to be. How odd. Yet no one has ever been disqualified or penalized this way on their show and they have network lawyers up the whazoo, as well as Standards and Practices employees. So how can that be? Because they know that short of a violent outburst by a player they can edit out any extraneous language in post.

Rottersod · #46 03-07-2007, 04:12 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I have said it a few times but there still seems to be some confusion. This ruling was back and white because it was clearly stated before the tournament.
1. I did not like giving him the penalty and think it was brutal
2. I do not like the "F-word" penalty and do not use it in the majority of tournaments I run.
3. I saw a problem long ago about timed penalties and we changed it as soon as we could. Which happens to have been the February 20-21, 2007 TDA Summit attended by 116 TD's and CRM's.
4. We could not invoke the new penalty format yet because others in the same series have been penalized for swearing.
5. The new penalty rule will be in place for all TDA member casinos starting March 15th except for Bay 101 in which we will start March 11th when our Shooting Star event begins.
6. Thevis accepted the penalty and admitted that he was wrong which proves him to be both informed of the consequences he faced and gentleman for apologizing when he did not need to.
7. The other player went out of his way to both point out the swearing and then play as fast as he could to burn Thevis' chips.

Matt Savage
www.SavageTournaments.com
www.PokerTDA.com

[/ QUOTE ]

Matt,

As CaryDarling pointed out your show is not a tourney. The players don't buy themselves in as they do at every other open tourney. The payouts are generated by advertising which is not the case for every other open tourney. The sole purpose of this show is to sell advertising space. It's a game show in the guise of a tourney. Your arguments that TDA rules should apply are inappropriate. You are basically a game show host there to make sure that things run smoothly. Your producers could have done anything they wanted and would not have had to worry about losing any lawsuits. I'm sure that every contestant has signed a waiver.

CaryDarling · #47 03-07-2007, 04:19 AM

Rottersod, I don't think anyone is going to be able to make you happy...so many have pointed out the legal ramifications of just letting this one slide while others were punished in the same manner.

We'll all have to just agree to disagree, but somehow I just don't think you can do that...LOL.

CaryDarling · #48 03-07-2007, 04:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Matt,

As CaryDarling pointed out your show is not a tourney. The players don't buy themselves in as they do at every other open tourney. The payouts are generated by advertising which is not the case for every other open tourney. The sole purpose of this show is to sell advertising space. It's a game show in the guise of a tourney. Your arguments that TDA rules should apply are inappropriate. You are basically a game show host there to make sure that things run smoothly. Your producers could have done anything they wanted and would not have had to worry about losing any lawsuits. I'm sure that every contestant has signed a waiver.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have only worked a handful of shows, and I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of the legalties...but common sense here will hopefully prevail.

From my understanding during the poker school..even tho' this is a "game show," the rules for the tournament / game are applied by following the TDA rules...so yes they do apply...but as I said in my previous post...you won't be happy you're just here to be an internet thorn in the side of a really nice guy who has done more for this game than you'll ever be able to fantasize doing.

Matt Savage · #49 03-07-2007, 04:30 AM

Wheel of Fortune is not live or live to tape.

Matt

private joker · #50 03-07-2007, 05:30 AM

Matt,

You have addressed every point except one:

[ QUOTE ]
My rule about abusive language is simple, if it is offensive to or aimed at any other player, dealer, or tournament personnel that a penalty will be assessed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thevis' cursing was obviously not aimed at any other player, dealer, or tournament personnel. It's clear. He said it to himself, as an expression of dismay, not abuse towards another person. The second time it was buried under his breath at the felt. All evidence points to this *NOT* being abusive or aimed at another player/personnel.

So why did you assess the penalty?