You are such a condescending piece of red neck shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by jsearles22
Mea culpa. I'm not a limit or any type of pro obviously. Just an observation. You likely played it completely optimal and just ran bad. Todd is God after allQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
You're the best. We all love you. Keep your chin up. You can do it. We are all behind you and whatnot......
Take it down Druff!
Bubbling means "nothing" in the grand scheme of things. Your way ahead in limit hold em tournaments lifetime and that's all that matters at the end of the dayQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
you really showed him, Druff.
As for those claiming that Druff angled Hellmuth here. Let me point out the official TDA rules that would cover this exact situation.
37: Methods of Betting: Verbal and Chips
A: Bets are by verbal declaration and/or pushing out chips. If a player does both, whichever is first defines the bet. If simultaneous, a clear and reasonable verbal declaration takes precedence, otherwise the chips play.
B: Verbal declarations may be general (“call”, “raise”), a specific amount only (“one thousand”) or both (“raise, one thousand”).
C: For all betting rules, declaring a specific amount only is the same as silently pushing out an equal amount. Ex: Declaring “two hundred” is the same as silently pushing out 200 in chips.
No where does it state here that betting is done by hand gestures
49: Accepted Action
Poker is a game of alert, continuous observation. It is the caller’s responsibility to determine the correct amount of an opponent’s bet before calling, regardless of what is stated by others. If a caller requests a count but receives incorrect information from a dealer or player, then pushes out that amount, the caller has accepted the full correct action & is subject to the correct wager or all-in amount. As with all situations, Rule 1 may apply at TD’s discretion.
In this case, Druff was alert and as the callers responsibility....he asked for clarification. The dealer gave Druff wrong information (that it was a raise) and the floor overturned it
Last but not least...
52: Non-Standard & Unclear Betting
Players use unofficial betting terms and gestures at their own risk. These may be interpreted to mean other than what the player intended. Also, if a declared bet can reasonably have multiple meanings, it will be ruled the lesser value. Ex: NLHE 200-400 blinds, player declares “I bet five.” If it is unclear whether “five” means 500 or 5,000, the bet is 500. See Rules 2, 3 & 42. See Illustration Addendum.
If reggiman takes this down can Druff get him on radio for a winners interview?
LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING THIS FUED ESCALATE PLZ. tbh todd, fueding with phil hellmuth is kind of a no brainer way to get famous in poker these days. THE FORUM COULD SEE ALOT OF ACTION. the ppl need a new story after #hashtagking and mcdonalds fail.
reggiman is the chip leader with 19 left.
I went down earlier to the scene of my bubbling and said hello to him.
He does listen to PFA Radio occasionally.
GL to him
:knifeQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
:shock
:crowd
i hope pokernews is wrong but since meeting druff, reggiman now is the short stack with 33k??
That's really odd.Quote:
Originally Posted by WillieMcFML:knifeQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
:shock
:crowd
i hope pokernews is wrong but since meeting druff, reggiman now is the short stack with 33k??
It claims he lost 437k since the last update, which is very hard to believe given that it's a limit tournament.
I would have to go with "mistake", but maybe he just ran super awful.
I did lose 160k in a matter of 75 minutes at an earlier stage of the tournament last year, dropping from chipleader to out 40th place.
He's back to 346k.
I imagine that the "33k" was probably something like "335k" and they mistyped it.
Gotta give Druff credit, that was a bold move. I'd say over 95% of the other players would never think to call him on that. I couldn't imagine calling him out on something that trivial esp on someone as experienced as Hellmuth. Then with all the extra attn because it's Hellmuth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FPS_Russia
failing to see the bold move here.
he called the guy out for an obvious rule infraction...
if the dealer wasn't a fucking dipshit, letting his poker fanboy-gayness get in the way, he'd have done his job correctly and said "Sir, are you trying to raise?"
but no. he didn't do his fucking job correctly. good thing the floor came by and did his job correctly. And people wonder why dealers are continually getting less and less tip money. here's your answer.
try again FPS.
Are some of the details wrong in the OP or am i missing something?
As it reads now the blinds were 250-500. A player threw in a 1k chip without saying anything. How is it not a raise?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmick
JFC are you kidding? Good thing you weren't the floor either.
the player was Phil Helmuth. someone who is no stranger to the rules of the game poker. Someone who should've just shut the fuck up after the floor ruled the way it was supposed to be. But no, Phil didn't, he continued to whine and moan about it. Sorry, but i'm sure this wasn't Phil's first limit hold 'em tournament. He knew that action could be construed different ways and the dealer should've caught it.
beating a dead horse i guess. Dealer was a jackass. Floor wasn't.
There's only one way 2xbb bet is ever understood in limit when there is no verbal declaration. Doesn't matter who it is. Chips speak.Quote:
Originally Posted by Al from CheersQuote:
Originally Posted by gimmick
JFC are you kidding? Good thing you weren't the floor either.
the player was Phil Helmuth. someone who is no stranger to the rules of the game poker. Someone who should've just shut the fuck up after the floor ruled the way it was supposed to be. But no, Phil didn't, he continued to whine and moan about it. Sorry, but i'm sure this wasn't Phil's first limit hold 'em tournament. He knew that action could be construed different ways and the dealer should've caught it.
beating a dead horse i guess. Dealer was a jackass. Floor wasn't.
edit: NVM didn't know one chip rule applied to limit even when it's the exact only allowable raise amount... literally haven't played live in 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShizzmoneyQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
“Hoss_TBF”:
With the money you’ve given us we can get plastic surgery and become stallions
TEARS ON CHEEKS
“Count Counter”:
Donk down
Hellmuth:
Donk down, that’s what you say to someone after they have lost 28K straight?
In fl at least, you throw one oversized chip in without saying anything, it's just a call.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmick
One chip is always a call unless you declare it otherwise. The question is whether or not "thumbs up" is a valid raise declaration.
I would think not. When Umberto used to do it back in the day wouldn't he like cut out his chips after and physically put in the raised amount? Surely it wasn't a thumbsup and then an oversized chip?Quote:
Originally Posted by BlunderMaker
I've seen the thumbs thing live before, but again, they usually put out more chips after the gesture
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlunderMaker
according to the rules posted it was not.
The WSOP has its own rules. Not sure if thumbs up is a raise by WSOP rules. The floorman said it wasn't a raise.
The TDA rules seem to clearly back my point, stating that "gestures" are ambiguous and do not count as a raise.
I am assuming that the rare mute poker player (scottyno?) would have to get permission from the floor beforehand to gesture for raises, much like Hal Lubarsky (who is blind) gets permission to have a guy sitting behind him, looking at his cards and whispering them to him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
coge. also up my reps limit because i should be repping you with coge, not commenting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Hordell
nice try Russ.
Here's an example of Humberto using the "thumbs up" gesture to raise during the 2006 ME (starting at 1:06).Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelI would think not. When Umberto used to do it back in the day wouldn't he like cut out his chips after and physically put in the raised amount? Surely it wasn't a thumbsup and then an oversized chip?Quote:
Originally Posted by BlunderMaker
I've seen the thumbs thing live before, but again, they usually put out more chips after the gesture
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z-wHeM99Ic
He does eventually say a number after his "thumbs up" motion, which Norman Chad said is the "universal sign for a raise". He also puts in more than one oversized chip in this example.
Either way, Humberto has an exemption to do this probably because English is (barely) his second language. Phil Hellmuth's English is crass and callous, but at least he can speak it and shouldn't get such consideration unless a TD gave the OK otherwise for various reasons (i.e. he went to the dentist the night before or some other bullshit).
It looks like Humberto just shoves the entire amount out at once, meaning that he doesn't need to say anything, and it's still a raise. So the thumbs up is meaningless. (Also, as you noted, he said the amount, as well.)Quote:
Originally Posted by ShizzmoneyHere's an example of Humberto using the "thumbs up" gesture to raise during the 2006 ME (starting at 1:06).Quote:
Originally Posted by michael
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z-wHeM99Ic
He does eventually say a number after his "thumbs up" motion, which Norman Chad said is the "universal sign for a raise". He also puts in more than one oversized chip in this example.
Either way, Humberto has an exemption to do this probably because English is (barely) his second language. Phil Hellmuth's English is crass and callous, but at least he can speak it and shouldn't get such consideration unless a TD gave the OK otherwise for various reasons (i.e. he went to the dentist the night before or some other bullshit).
Also, in a Live at the Bike episode, Limon said "Send it up!" when attempting to raise with QQ. Some Asian chick in the hand called the floor and claimed that "Send it up" doesn't mean raise. The floor ruled in her favor.
Well, at that point the issue wasn't whether he had made a legal raise or not. The issue is that the dealer announced raise and 6 people acted on this announcement, so no semi-competent floorman should ever change it to a call in this spot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Question:Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaardWell, at that point the issue wasn't whether he had made a legal raise or not. The issue is that the dealer announced raise and 6 people acted on this announcement, so no semi-competent floorman should ever change it to a call in this spot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
If he just threw in a 1k chip without ANY gesture, the dealer announced raise, and 6 people folded, would you say it should be ruled a raise?
I would think it could be argued that those 6 people screwed themselves by not knowing the rules.
I think the "there's already action, hand stands" precedent only deals with dealer error, such as if the button is incorrect, and it's only noticed after a raise and re-raise preflop. But this is different.
The WSOP has a "significant action" rule, meaning that the floor man can back out a hand if there aren't at least 2 players whom have voluntarily put chips in the pot.
I think the same might apply here. Phil's action followed by 6 folds pre-flop doesn't constitute significant action.
How would you have handled this if the dealer declared raise and 3 players flatted the raise before it got to you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffQuestion:Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaard
If he just threw in a 1k chip without ANY gesture, the dealer announced raise, and 6 people folded, would you say it should be ruled a raise?
I would think it could be argued that those 6 people screwed themselves by not knowing the rules.
I think the "there's already action, hand stands" precedent only deals with dealer error, such as if the button is incorrect, and it's only noticed after a raise and re-raise preflop. But this is different.
The WSOP has a "significant action" rule, meaning that the floor man can back out a hand if there aren't at least 2 players whom have voluntarily put chips in the pot.
I think the same might apply here. Phil's action followed by 6 folds pre-flop doesn't constitute significant action.
We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one I think. 6 players folding after an announced raise is significant IMO. But it isn't a big deal one way or another to me. I have no skin in the game. Just my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffQuestion:Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaard
If he just threw in a 1k chip without ANY gesture, the dealer announced raise, and 6 people folded, would you say it should be ruled a raise?
I would think it could be argued that those 6 people screwed themselves by not knowing the rules.
I think the "there's already action, hand stands" precedent only deals with dealer error, such as if the button is incorrect, and it's only noticed after a raise and re-raise preflop. But this is different.
The WSOP has a "significant action" rule, meaning that the floor man can back out a hand if there aren't at least 2 players whom have voluntarily put chips in the pot.
I think the same might apply here. Phil's action followed by 6 folds pre-flop doesn't constitute significant action.
I don't even have any problem with you for calling Hellmuth out. People intentionally making an action in a strange way to be cute is one of my pet peeves when playing at the table. BEcause a) It isn't cute, and b) it just creates confusion from players not paying attention.
In limit holdem an obvious example of this you see all the time is when someone puts in a 3 bet, but they do it in 2 stacks, so if you aren't paying attention it looks like they are just calling, or when someone does what Hellmuth did (throws out a big chip and makes a raising motion with their hand where if you weren't paying attention to their hand motion you wouldn't know what they were even trying to do).
End of the day Phil is retard for not using his voice and he deserves whatever ruling comes his way. He's a pro and should act like one. But I'd still really really love to know if the entire hand was explained to the floor or if you asked the floor if thumbs up means raise as soon as he walked up and the floor just said no and walked away.
Also if you want to really overthink this Phil can fuck himself if he comes at you over ethics. One could actually make a point that Phil not going nuts at the floor until he got his ruling could be construed as him angling to for sure be able to play heads up with KK.
That hand is hereQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rauoz_eO4VA
Then I would have accepted it as a raise. That's "significant action", and in that case would have been my fault for not speaking up before such action occurred.Quote:
Originally Posted by jsearles22How would you have handled this if the dealer declared raise and 3 players flatted the raise before it got to you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I wasn't trying to angle the other players.
When it got to me, I thought about it, and said to myself, "Wait a minute, maybe that's not a raise!"
I'm with Verminard; agree to disagree. I don't see how 6 players folding to an ANNOUNCED raise is any less significant than if 3 players had called the exact same announced raise?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffThen I would have accepted it as a raise. That's "significant action", and in that case would have been my fault for not speaking up before such action occurred.Quote:
Originally Posted by jsearles22
I wasn't trying to angle the other players.
When it got to me, I thought about it, and said to myself, "Wait a minute, maybe that's not a raise!"
If the floorman ruled against me, I wouldn't have argued.Quote:
Originally Posted by jsearles22I'm with Verminard; agree to disagree. I don't see how 6 players folding to an ANNOUNCED raise is any less significant than if 3 players had called the exact same announced raise?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
However, in my experience, folds preflop are not considered significant action -- only money voluntarily put into the pot. This is because people cannot check pre-flop (aside from the BB), and more often than not will fold with no action in front of them.
For example, I have seen it where multiple folds occur and then it's pointed out that the button was wrong. The hand is almost always backed out at that point. The question the floorman always asks is, "What action was there?", and he's looking to hear whether or not there were two people who put money in the pot already.
The question we need answered is if Druff is still buying the Hellmuth book for the UB chapter or did this wsop incident cause him to tighten up his jew wallet even more?