I’ve been following the Daniel Negreanu vs. Matt Savage debate/feud/disagreement since the two first started going back and forth on what is known as the “No Disclosure Rule” AKA “The No Talking About Your Hand Rule” AKA “The Jamie Gold Rule” at the 2011 WSOP. Since the initial Twitter flare-up the conversation has continued in the poker media and even in a lengthy segment on the QuadJacks.com podcast.
Anyone who listened to the podcast and still thinks Savage is making sense should have their head examined. When given specific examples by Negreanu and QJ hosts, Savage 50% of the time said that type of table talk was fine, and 50% of the time said that was disclosing the contents of your hand. When asked what the difference was, Savage merely said “you can’t disclose the contents of your hand”. And in each case, with varying degrees of precision, they were simply giving hand ranges!
This is the reason the rule is terrible; even the most well-known, well-respected, tournament director cannot explain the rule in a way that players understand, and can’t make a consistent ruling.
Before I get into the crux of the problem I would like to point out that this is not a Matt Savage rule or his decision alone, but like other sports that have to tinker with rules before they are “good”, this one needs some serious tinkering. Savage is one of the best TD’s in the industry, and his reputation and motives are beyond reproach –that said, he is just wrong about this rule.
Savage’s reasoning for the rule in a recent article on Pokerati.com is even more mind-boggling: to protect against verbal collusion. His main point of contention is that TD’s around the world cannot be called upon to know players’ relationships with other players. But if this were truly an issue –collusion—wouldn’t players with strong friendships be able to hash out a better arrangement than shouting “fold, I have Aces” to a friend of theirs? Even if you didn’t hash-out signals beforehand, wouldn’t a simple and subtle head shake be just as effective as blurting out fold?
Do they not realize that Scotty Nguyen would be on the receiving end of a penalty for what has become one of the most iconic stories in poker history: “You call it’s gonna be all over baby!” Under the rule this type of table talk is disallowed since Scotty disclosed the contents of his hand. Or, what about the infamous story of Jack Strauss’s bluff on a 7-3-3-2 holding 7/2 where he told his opponent he could look at either card for $25, which after parting with a $25 chip caused his opponent to suspect a full-house and fold the best hand –Sorry Jack, that’s against the rules in today’s poker world (although it should be noted that this bluff took place in a cash game, but I still think it’s pertinent).
I don’t think Savage and the TD’s understand the reason so many poker players are against this rule: This verbal jousting is a way to get a read on your opponent, if they want to play along of course; it’s not as if the other player has to answer! I have never in my 15 years of playing poker seen the situation that Savage claims to be guarding against.
Furthermore, poker is a game of deception, so who is to say when you are telling the truth about your hand or lying? If other players’ have concerns over certain antics taking place at a table they can call the floor over –who can then look at each players’ cards and determine if any funny stuff is going on.
If the TD’s are so interested in stopping collusion, why are they focusing on “Idiot Collusion” which even the greenest poker player would be able to spot on their own, when TD’s should be concerning themselves with preventing more subtle forms of cheating –since they are the experts after all—and protecting the REAL integrity of the game.
Let’s not forget that poker is a self-policing game, and if players can’t protect themselves from “verbal” forms of cheating that’s their own fault. I’m sorry, but I have no sympathy for players in a game who do not speak up when other players are declaring their hand to another player in an obvious case of collusion. There is a difference between protecting the integrity of the game and holding players’ hands.
I agree that players shouldn’t speak, or in any other way disclose the contents of their hand, in a multi-way pot, but heads-up it shouldn’t make a difference if a player says, “Can you beat top pair?” or “I can beat two pair.” If it elicits a reaction from their opponent than they have done their job as a poker player –if other players at the table suspect shenanigans there are recourses to see if their suspicions are correct. BUT, like I said earlier, chances are if there are shenanigans taking place it will be done covertly, not by blatantly disclosing your hand so your buddy folds!
What is taking place is that TD’s are protecting novice poker players from professionals, and in my mind this is akin to the old home-game rule of “No Check-Raising”. A bad sports analogy for what is being done is banning play-action passes from football because certain people are better at it than others –or maybe outlawing lining up to spike the ball only to toss a pass.
And at the same time I feel like they are trying to simplify their jobs by deterring difficult decisions –which is good for tournament directors, but that’s what they get paid for!