Was Hachem being unethical?

[NicksDad1970]

[ QUOTE ]
Watkinson had over 100k.
If what Hachem did is ok then it's ok for me to tell a friend who is sitting at my table to fold when I have them beat and I know I have them beat and they know I wouldn't lie to them. The whole table can here me thats fine, my friend will still be able to lay down his QQ to my KK, which drastically hurts the EV of the other players at the table because a player who was supposed to go broke and move them up the prize pool didn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I'm reading your chip count right then maybe he knew Minh was calling no matter what. I saw the show but don't remember if Minh had anything invested at that point.

If Minh had anything invested at that point he may have known there was no way Minh was folding.

Another thing I may have missed ...... Do you know that Joe and Lee are buddies? He may hate Lee. But thinking Minh was going to call and Max already in he wanted Lee out so he could get a medium pot instead of losing with his monster hand.

[Dids]

The way I saw this was more like Hachem knew that Waktinson was going to fold and just wanted him to get on with it.

Either way, seemed like something that somebody probably shouldn't be doing.

[Mickey Brausch]

1. Suppose Hachem claims to the guy next to him and effectively the whole table that he (Hachem) holds a pair of Kings. Would that be illegal? Or unethical?

2. Suppose that Hachem reveals his actualy holding a large number of times, in all-in situations, and it turns out that he's telling the truth every time. Illegal? Unethical? Stupid?

3. Suppose thet Hachem does that a large number of times and he's lying every time. Same questions.

4. Suppose he does that and the results vary spectacularly: sometimes truth, sometimes not, nobody can tell. Illegal? Unethical? Game theory-related? Modern Amarillo?

The next step is to frame the above questions with Hachem NOT saying exactly and clearly what he's holding but by cryptically implying it. Same questions.

Mickey Brausch

[Ignignokt]

Essentially, pushing in the first place makes a statement that you have the best hand, so is pushing unethical?

It's pretty clear Hachem has a bit of a fear of bad beats (and having lost at least one bracelet, maybe two this year because of a beat, I don't blame him too much).

He clearly preferred to be heads-up in that all-in situation. And Poker 101 tells us that even with KK, the odds of winning start to decrease significantly as more players enter the pot.

He didn't reveal his hand, or what he put Watkinson on before the fold. He didn't even suggest anything but the fact that he had the best hand.

And if WSOP officials are going to allow Scotty to say "I raise with my aces" when he actually has aces, Hachem's play is clearly, um, in the clear.


Finally, a couple of my favorite quotes:

"Ask me what I've got...(opponent asks)...you beat." - Layne Flack

"I've got you beat. You're my friend, but I don't want you to suck out on me." - Hachem, just before John Gale calls all-in and sucks out on him


I think a lot of players fear table talk, which is why pros use it.

Edit: And I don't believe for a second that Hachem was trying to help Watkinson. Hachem's just too competetive (see above).

[ClonexxSA]

I think his comments are fine, they can be taken either way.

I don't think they are any worse then Scotty's "Call me and it's all over baby".

[Miles Ahead]

[ QUOTE ]
I think his comments are fine, they can be taken either way.

I don't think they are any worse then Scotty's "Call me and it's all over baby".

[/ QUOTE ]

The biggest difference there is Scotty was heads up. I'm not sure what I think of Hachem's table talk. If he said "I have Kings," that would at the very least be a serious breach of etiquette and I believe under tournament rules could result in a time penalty. I'm not too fond of what he was doing, simply because he was giving information to other people who hadn't acted yet, which the initial bettor didn't have, and the actions of the players yet to act in the hand were ultimately going to affect all of the remaining players in the tournament.

"Unethical", though? I don't think so.

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
For the purposes of this discussion, I ask that everyone assume that Hachem actually wanted Watkinson to fold and was telling the truth with his statements and that Lee Watkinson actually had QQ and believed Hachem. This may or may not have been the case (In some of your opinions not in my opinion) but regardless, I want to know if you think that it was unethical for Hachem to do all of the following:

1.) Tell the truth about how strong his hand was (He did in fact have what he was making it clear he had)
2.) Tell Lee Watkinson he knew what he had.
3.) Tell Lee Watkinson to fold.



[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's only unethical if you make a 4th assumption: the two were friends or they had some kind of staking going on. I REALLY think all staking must be disclosed.

But otherwise, I think it is not unethical even given your 3 assumptions above. If they are not friends or staking each other, why would Lee necessarily believe Joe?

Also, the fact that another guy might not understand English so well is not unethical at all. What would be unethical would be to say things in ANOTHER language, or to say things so quietly to the person next to you that the guy at the other end of the table can't hear.

[Scooterdoo]

It's possible in a cash game that Hachem, or any other player, would encourage a friend to fold because he thinks that he has the friend beat and he doesn't want to take money directly from a friend. However, it simply makes no sense at all for Hachem, or any other player, to discourage action from a friend if he thinks it will help him win the tournament. Think about it... he is trying to win and at some point him winning means that his friend needs to lose. In this case, the 'friend' (LW) is one of the best tournament players in the game. It defies all logic to think that he doesn't want to beat Lee. Of course he does. Also, while he might like Lee, they probably know each other less than a year and probably are not great friends anyway (although I have no idea, I'm just guessing).

Common sense makes me believe one of two things: 1) he really did want a call and was using his table talk to get one; or 2) more likely he felt that Lee had AK and did not want the overcard calling him with the chance of a bad beat killing his tournament hopes. If he really knew that Lee had QQ it defies all logic that he wouldn't want a call.

[guitarizt]

If I'm playing in the ME and I'm as good of a player as hachem I don't want a call either. I want to be hu with one player who I have dominated and that's it. Minh is a good player and can definately hold his own he doesn't need any excuses. He could of put hachem on AK because if his friend was thinking so long about calling he wouldn't have anything lower than kings. He might of thought he was getting the right price to call.

[FrankieB]

Watched this tourney recently and i know why ESPN showed 3 eps of it. It really was a great event with lots of action and 2 ME winners on the final table. I love Kido Pham. Some great quotes from him:

Doug Lee after folding AK with big chip lead: I wont fold that hand on the final table

Kido Pham: If you make it there....if you make it there


Joe Hachem: Dont look at me like that kid your scaring me

Kido Pham: You know what im thinking..that you're not a fluke winner like that Chris Moneymaker.


I also noticed that his table talk was extremely effective especially against JC Tran. Managed to make himself look weak very well.