"If you're calling 17, you're calling 22" -- did Jack Effel screw Dario Sammartino?

The scene:

Down to almost the final 9 in the Main Event, Dario Sammartino had TT preflop and was facing an all-in from another player. He asked for a count, and the idiot dealer counted it as 17 million chips. Dario said "call".

However, it turned out that it was actually 22 million, so Dario was very unhappy, and said that he should only be forced to call 17 million. Jack Effel (WSOP tournament director) was then called over, and (correctly) ruled that regardless of the dealer mistake, his calling the bet is binding.

(It should also be noted that Dario only protested once the hands were turned over, and he saw he was drawing to 2 outs.)

However, when Dario protested, Jack Effel made an obnoxious comment, "If you're calling 17, you're calling 22", which wasn't necessarily true, nor was it his place to say.

Embedded Tweet

What do you guys think of this?

Some have complained over the years that Jack is arrogant and dismissive when dealing with complaints from poker players, and that this was a perfect example.

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...43&oe=5DBE575B

rule is what it is, but his comment is fucking moronic unless blinds are something like 2M/4M+ and it's the difference between calling 4 and 5 blinds...

To me it looks like Jack has had a long day, is tired and a bit cranky. He’s like every floor man at the Commerce. If you catch them at the beginning of their shift, they’re pretty cool, but after about 6 hours on the floor, you don’t want to go near them. They aren’t assholes, they’re just reacting to the stress of their job.

His ruling was correct and he knew it. He was just a little curt in the delivery. His statement that “if you’re calling 17, you’re calling 22” is ridiculous strategically, especially in that situation. I think he’d even admit that now.

I agree with the seated player that it was a needle & it was unnecessary.

& good on Dario for not letting it affect his play going forward & making the final table in decent chip position. Not great but at least he's there with enough to do some damage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hockey Guy

I agree with the seated player that it was a needle & it was unnecessary.

& good on Dario for not letting it affect his play going forward & making the final table in decent chip position. Not great but at least he's there with enough to do some damage.

---

Correct ruling but fuck Effel ...

The way the rule is currently written, it’s the correct ruling.

I hate this rule though. If you ask for a count, and the dealer gives you an incorrect amount, and you act with that amount, that should play into the ruling. I mean, I can’t get up and go over and count the chips myself. Not all dealers break the chips down in an easy way to count. Should we start asking every dealer, every time we get a count, “are you sure? recount it!”

As far as Jack’s comment. He’s a POS who obviously doesn’t know shit about poker.

Calling off 20bb vs calling off 30bb is a HUGE difference. Especially in the worlds biggest stage.

The ruling is clearly correct but that needle is way out of line

It's a BULLSHIT rule.

Both the dealer and Jack Effel are wrong and deserve to be punished.

When they fuck up like this, they should take away their tip money and give it back to the players.


:fail2

The ruling was correct given the way it's written whether we like it or don't it's there to protect human error (mostly by a dealer) but what a bad timing for this to happen.

Another thing is when the dealer says 17 million Nick Marchington who was the one that shoved knows what he has in front of him. This is the main event and he is aware of his stack size prior to jamming so when Dario Sammartino puts his chips in really quick thinking it's 17 million Marchington should have tried to stop the situation before the cards were flipped.

I understand the rule but you are opening the door for future angle shooting if this ever comes up again which you need a dealer error to happen but still.

Jack Effel is an insensitive asshole for his comment and really should have apologized at the start of the final table before saying lets shuffle up and deal on live TV to make himself look better because his little "If he's calling 17 million he's calling 22" comment was way out of line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeerAndPoker

The ruling was correct given the way it's written whether we like it or don't it's there to protect human error (mostly by a dealer) but what a bad timing for this to happen.

Another thing is when the dealer says 17 million Nick Marchington who was the one that shoved knows what he has in front of him. This is the main event and he is aware of his stack size prior to jamming so when Dario Sammartino puts his chips in really quick thinking it's 17 million Marchington should have tried to stop the situation before the cards were flipped.

I understand the rule but you are opening the door for future angle shooting if this ever comes up again which you need a dealer error to happen but still.

Jack Effel is an insensitive asshole for his comment and really should have apologized at the start of the final table before saying lets shuffle up and deal on live TV to make himself look better because his little "If he's calling 17 million he's calling 22" comment was way out of line.

---

Somebody does say right after the 17.2M announcement "I think it's more than that" so he very well could have tried. Somebody did at least.

This has not been Jack's best WSOP.

the line actually sums it up. Dario's face was definitely a "I guess ill call 22" until he seen the QQ and tilted. he had a chance to make a fuss before cards were turned

In the end didn't seem to matter he made it finishing as runner up for $6M.. Just wish could explain that donkey tilt shove that ended the tournament.. Just bizarre to me to say the least.. There is a rumor they agreed to just go for it flipping for the bracelet essentially and had agreed to chop the remaining 16M (1st and 2nd) in half for $8M each but its a rumor at this point with no solid evidence of it being true..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ftpjesus

In the end didn't seem to matter he made it finishing as runner up for $6M.. Just wish could explain that donkey tilt shove that ended the tournament.. Just bizarre to me to say the least.. There is a rumor they agreed to just go for it flipping for the bracelet essentially and had agreed to chop the remaining 16M (1st and 2nd) in half for $8M each but its a rumor at this point with no solid evidence of it being true..

---

It makes perfect sense to chop up the money, but flipping for the bracelet would be insane. That’s poker immortality. Nobody remembers who finishes second.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayjami

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ftpjesus

In the end didn't seem to matter he made it finishing as runner up for $6M.. Just wish could explain that donkey tilt shove that ended the tournament.. Just bizarre to me to say the least.. There is a rumor they agreed to just go for it flipping for the bracelet essentially and had agreed to chop the remaining 16M (1st and 2nd) in half for $8M each but its a rumor at this point with no solid evidence of it being true..

---

It makes perfect sense to chop up the money, but flipping for the bracelet would be insane. That’s poker immortality. Nobody remembers who finishes second.

---

no argument with the 'nobody remembers who finished second' thing...but wonder how much a ME bracelet (not the actual bracelet) is actually worth nowadays...

Sponsorship-wise, a Main Event bracelet probably isn't worth a huge amount, but you can probably score at least a minor sponsorship out of it.

I'm not sure how much sponsorship Hossein Ensan is going to get, since he's 55 years old and wasn't very well known prior to this victory (despite an EPT title).

However, you do go down in poker history, and that's worth something to you if you really enjoy poker.