Bigger Deal

We all know what attributes a person needs to become a good player. But what does it take to become a tournament director?

Obviously he or she requires a thorough understanding of poker, but does not necessarily have to be a good player. He needs to be totally unbiased when asked to give a ruling, and be thick-skinned when settling a dispute - knowing that, whatever the ruling, he will upset one or more players.

In my 40 years in the poker world, I have been witness to literally hundreds of incidents where a ruling has to be made. Some occur often, others once in a blue moon.

The TDA (Tournament Directors Association, set up by Matt Savage and others in 2001) has gone a long way to standardising rules. But these rules are a long way from being universally accepted. So I urge players, in their own interests, to check out the local rules when playing a tourney in a strange card room.

The rule I wish to mention here is the ‘moody’ rule. What does it actually mean? In the USA it would appear that anything goes, excluding physical violence to players or the dealer. In Europe, however, many card rooms have strict rules on ‘moody’ - that is, you cannot mention your hand possibilities, or make misleading gestures etc.

Would you, as a player, prefer a rule whereby all verbal and physical gestures go? Or would you prefer that card rooms have a strict policy concerning ‘moody’?

Personally, I have found that players sometimes use a remark by another player to get an edge whereby a ruling has to be given, excluding the guilty player from betting. I myself, frankly, would prefer the American method where all ‘moody’ is allowed, and is part of the excitement of poker.

Some years ago, when I was playing poker at Binion’s Horsehoe in Las Vegas, a very aggressive, drunk person joined the game, and turned what was up to then a friendly, enjoyable game into a very unpleasant one. He constantly insulted the dealer, and made loud comments concerning other players’ actions. As a tourist I made no comment, but the following scenario finally elicited a response from me.

The flop came out showing two hearts. There was some betting by other players, and now it was the drunk’s turn to act. As he called the bet he said in a menacing tone to the dealer: ‘If you turn another heart, I’m going to kill you’. As always happens in such circumstances, the turn card brought another heart. More betting round to the drunk, who promptly raised - and got two callers. (I, incidentally, was not involved in the hand). The river brought a rag card; other players checked to the drunk, who duly bet - and got a caller. He (the drunk) then turned over the nut flush.

‘You would never get away with that in England. What you did was outrageous’. Who said that? To my amazement I found it was me, the biggest coward on earth. ‘Well, bud, this ain’t England - so shut up’ was the response from the drunk. This remark prompted the other players to call a floor-person, with the dealer backing up their complaints. Two huge security men were called to escort the drunk off the premises. I do not know to this day whether the other players were truly upset with the drunk’s actions, or complained in order to keep the ‘fish’ (yes, me) on the table. I have a feeling it was the latter.

Disregarding the fact that the player was drunk, do you want to allow this sort of behaviour in a hand? Is it all to be deemed a part of the game? As I said above, from a Director’s point of view it is much easier for the ‘anything goes’ rule to apply. There are no rulings that have to be made concerning comments or gestures, unless grossly offensive. The screening of poker on TV has made us relax this rule in England, as the likes of Tony G, Phil Hellmuth and the ‘Devilfish’ are seen constantly trying to get a reaction from their opponents by talking about their hand while it is in progress.

Maybe we should allow anything except deliberately misleading remarks or gestures. But, if we adopt this rule, there will be instances whereby the Tournament Director has the the right to see a player’s hand, even if no other player has called his bet - certainly a rule the looser players would not like.

And finally, another factor is beginning to take a hold in poker (particularly from the young new internet-bred players) - namely, telling other players what to do while they are playing a hand. Remarks such as : ‘You have to call this bet for value’, or ‘With what you have left in chips, you have to go all-in’, etc etc.

Personally, I do not like this trend, and do my utmost to stamp it out. One player for one hand is my rule. Do you find these sort of comments are creeping in? The older players have learnt poker etiquette from years of playing live poker. Players who learn by playing three or more screens at once on the internet often do not realise that some etiquette must prevail when finally playing the felt.

What is your view on all this ? Let me know, and I’ll respond as a TDA veteran.