David Pham Chops
 

From pokerpages.com

"Pham Forced to Accept Win

Chop or get chopped, that was the dilemma facing David "The Dragon" Pham when the points playoff championship got heads-up. It was one of the most bizarre conclusions to any poker tournament in history, and here's what happened. With three players left, Waleed Belleh moved in for $31,600, and Minh "Poker Host" Nguyen called for $10,700. "Hold on, I have a hand," Pham said. After some deliberation he folded and showed A-6. His opponents both had A-3, and Pham, in frustration, let slip the f-word. It turned out to be a good laydown, because Belleh had A-3 of clubs, and two running clubs gave him a flush.

Now it was heads-up, and Pham still had the lead, $68,100-$45,600. But there was still the matter of the f-word, heard by a floorman, Belleh reminded him. Belleh, an auto mechanic who generally plays only on weekends, offered an immediate chop, with Pham getting a few thousand extra. The Dragon had never agreed to a chop in his life But now he was between a chop and a hard place, the alternative being having a big chunk of his chips blinded and anted off in 10 minutes as Belleh played with himself. So he reluctantly agreed, took the win and split up the $50,000 first-place prize. "

Nice sentence. So hard place = playing with himself?

Re: David Pham Chops
 

yet another example of the extreme idiocy of the "f-bomb" rule.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
yet another example of the extreme idiocy of the "f-bomb" rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

And another example of a headsup opponent who didn't have the decency to let the f-word slide.

99% sure that if I'm David's opponent there, I take the penalty with him.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
yet another example of the extreme idiocy of the "f-bomb" rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

And another example of a headsup opponent who didn't have the decency to let the f-word slide.

99% sure that if I'm David's opponent there, I take the penalty with him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Such a perfect spot to shout at full volume "F-U-C-K this ridiculous rule."

Re: David Pham Chops
 

I'd tell the F bomb rule to choke on a bucket of cocks.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
Such a perfect spot to shout at full volume "F-U-C-K this ridiculous rule."

[/ QUOTE ]

I look forward to the opportunity to exercise such a noble gesture. Of course, the opponent could have waited until after Pham's stack was blinded down before determining what kind of deal he could make, so it's more like he used the penalty as a bargaining chip. Still pretty lame, but shrewd.

As an aside Paul, what do u think of the Dragon's game?

Re: David Pham Chops
 

I play in casino's in Canada and I have never heard of this rule. Does someone mind telling me how severe the penalty is. Is this a common rule all over the USA?

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
I play in casino's in Canada and I have never heard of this rule. Does someone mind telling me how severe the penalty is. Is this a common rule all over the USA?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's usually a 10-minute penalty, but if you tell the floorman that "the rule is bulllshit" you can easily turn it into 20.

And it's becoming more common. I think it started in LA cardrooms, where player and dealer abuse was a big problem and people apparently need rules to inform them that using the "f-word" is often impolite. It was a constant source of nagging at the WSOP 2005.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
99% sure that if I'm David's opponent there, I take the penalty with him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I like money too much for this.

I hate the f-bomb rule as much as the next person, but like any other rule in any other game, once it becomes a rule it is simply another aspect of the game structure. My opponent failing to adapt to the new game structure is something that I will always use to my advantage, to whatever extent that means (I'm not talking about cheating, I'm talking about playing within the rules of the game).

But if we are HU shaniac, then I will be very grateful that you chose to take the penalty with me =D.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I like money too much for this.

I hate the f-bomb rule as much as the next person, but like any other rule in any other game, once it becomes a rule it is simply another aspect of the game structure. My opponent failing to adapt to the new game structure is something that I will always use to my advantage, to whatever extent that means (I'm not talking about cheating, I'm talking about playing within the rules of the game).

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not surprising that a 2+2er would take this attitude, but it's still pretty lame. Poker is in fact a game that consists of more than squeezing out small edges at every opportunity. And yes, the F-word rule becomes just another rule (like the exposed cards rule) once it's in play, but that doesn't mean you can't use your best judgement to determine that it's a pathetic rule that has nothing to do with the game. If you're willing to take advantage of a rule as contrary to poker as the "f-bomb" in order to win, you're essentially being greedy and tacitly admitting you don't have the edge to beat your opponent organically. Most resepctable poker players would consider it a scumbag tactic.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you're willing to take advantage of a rule as contrary to poker as the "f-bomb" in order to win, you're essentially being greedy

[/ QUOTE ]
I won't argue with that. But greed is one of the reasons that I entered the poker tournament in the first place, or play poker at all.

[ QUOTE ]
and tacitly admitting you don't have the edge to beat your opponent organically.

[/ QUOTE ]
Come on, this doesn't make sense.

Let's say that I am a somewhat better player than David Pham, and for the sake of argument we are even in chips when this comes up. So maybe I am a 55-45 favorite to win the tournament if I take the penalty with him. However, if I don't take the penalty with him, maybe because of the chips I gain I jump to a 60-40, or 70-30, or whatever favorite. It would still be +moneyEV for me to make this play, although the gain in spiritual growth that I might experience might very well more than make up for that money I am missing out on. But I doubt it.

Anyway, my point is that it is silly to say that I am "admitting that I don't have an edge in the first place."

[ QUOTE ]
Most resepctable poker players would consider it a scumbag tactic.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well right now we have something of a sample size issue, but I would be interested to hear from some other respected poker players on this issue.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well right now we have something of a sample size issue, but I would be interested to hear from some other respected poker players on this issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can assure you that among sane members of the poker-touring population, taking advantage of the f-bomb rule in a headsup situation is still considered an extension of angle-shooting.

Poker is supposed to be a gentleman's game, and, yes, ruthless behavior has its place in the game, it simply shouldn't have anything to do with the "f-word."

Re: David Pham Chops
 

In Pham's spot, I think after deciding to chop I'd get up and leave, thus leaving the casino in a somewhat embarassing situation, and perhaps forcing them to come one step closer to reevaluating the rule.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
In Pham's spot, I think after deciding to chop I'd get up and leave, thus leaving the casino in a somewhat embarassing situation, and perhaps forcing them to come one step closer to reevaluating the rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what you mean about the "embarassing situation." Please elaborate.

As for reevaulating the rule, I doubt it will happen. California card players don't know how to behave and floormen presumably need rules like this to maintain a sense of leverage.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In Pham's spot, I think after deciding to chop I'd get up and leave, thus leaving the casino in a somewhat embarassing situation, and perhaps forcing them to come one step closer to reevaluating the rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what you mean about the "embarassing situation." Please elaborate.

As for reevaulating the rule, I doubt it will happen. California card players don't know how to behave and floormen presumably need rules like this to maintain a sense of leverage.

[/ QUOTE ]

It'd apply more to a big tournament with onlookers. The casino would certainly be embarassed if one player essentially left in boycott, ruining the heads up portion of the tournament.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

Here's an idea.

Don't use the f-word or any swear words at the table. It's rude.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
Here's an idea.

Don't use the f-word or any swear words at the table. It's rude.

[/ QUOTE ]

FU.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think it started in LA cardrooms, where player and dealer abuse was a big problem and people apparently need rules to inform them that using the "f-word" is often impolite. It was a constant source of nagging at the WSOP 2005.


[/ QUOTE ]

I thought it started when all the TV exposure started in an attempt to "clean up" the image of poker. I haven't played in Cali that often, but I first heard of the rule 3 or 4 years ago at the WSOP.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
Here's an idea.

Don't use the f-word or any swear words at the table. It's rude.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm an adult playing a game that requires you to be over 21 to participate, and playing it in a casino. I shouldn't have to watch my language like I was playing in an elementry school.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's an idea.

Don't use the f-word or any swear words at the table. It's rude.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm an adult playing a game that requires you to be over 21 to participate, and playing it in a casino. I shouldn't have to watch my language like I was playing in an elementry school.

[/ QUOTE ]

If there is a chance that cursing makes fish uncomfortable, why not restrain yourself from doing it? I understand the occasional slip, but grow up.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
Don't use the f-word or any swear words at the table. It's rude.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing is, the vast majority of the time the F-word is used, it's not meant in any rude way. It's either a gesture of frustartion or a benign colloquialism. Neither use should be grounds for a penalty.

When I was at a Bike final table recently, one of the players said, in a complimentary manner to another player, "See? She don't fck around." We all said "Let it slide" but the floor heard it and he was on the rail for 10 minutes.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
Here's an idea.

Don't use the f-word or any swear words at the table. It's rude.

[/ QUOTE ]

[censored] you. [censored] everyone that thinks this rule is a good one. You have no right to censor anyone, you [censored] nazi.

[censored] is one of the greatest words ever because it can be used in so many ways and still not be offensive.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

I have no evidence one way or the other... but I find it hard to believe that this was "one of the most bizarre conclusions to any poker tournament in history."

The story that followed that lead-in was extremely disappoining compared to what I had cooked up in my mind with both players flopping quads with a fouled deck and the tournament being cancelled in favor of them playing a marathon heads-up chinese poker session for T5 per point (with no bonuses).

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's an idea.

Don't use the f-word or any swear words at the table. It's rude.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm an adult playing a game that requires you to be over 21 to participate, and playing it in a casino. I shouldn't have to watch my language like I was playing in an elementry school.

[/ QUOTE ]

If there is a chance that cursing makes fish uncomfortable, why not restrain yourself from doing it? I understand the occasional slip, but grow up.

[/ QUOTE ]

But that's the hting, I'm not saying I want to walk around @#$@# you, @#$@E$ this and YOUR!#%@# mom. But, sometimes, in normal conversation, or in a moment of frustration, I curse. I can watch my language when the situation dictates it, I'm saying that a Casino isn't a place I should have to watch my language.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

It seems to me that even though they want to keep subjectivity to a minimum, it is very easy to determine the intent of the word in context. Makes me think it has more to do with general image than dealer/player abuse.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
The story that followed that lead-in was extremely disappoining compared to what I had cooked up in my mind

[/ QUOTE ]

When a silly and widely disliked rule forces a player to change his entire strategy and revoke a "no chop" policy, costing him who-knows-how-much EV, it's noteworthy.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
...I will always use to my advantage, to whatever extent that means (I'm not talking about cheating, I'm talking about playing within the rules of the game).

[/ QUOTE ]

In one of my favorite gambling-related movies, Bite The Bullet, Dabney Coleman is the owner of the horse who is favored to win the race (the race itself plays out a lot like a poker tournament). When his top competition (Gene Hackman and James Coburn) get their horses stolen, Coleman gives them till the end of the day to recover the horses because the other way isn't a respectable way of winning the race.

Great movie.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's an idea.

Don't use the f-word or any swear words at the table. It's rude.

[/ QUOTE ]

[censored] you. [censored] everyone that thinks this rule is a good one. You have no right to censor anyone, you [censored] nazi.

[censored] is one of the greatest words ever because it can be used in so many ways and still not be offensive.

[/ QUOTE ]


Gee, didn't see that coming. You this predictable at the tables as well?

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's an idea.

Don't use the f-word or any swear words at the table. It's rude.

[/ QUOTE ]

FU.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gee, didn't see that coming. You this predictable at the tables as well?

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's an idea.

Don't use the f-word or any swear words at the table. It's rude.

[/ QUOTE ]

[censored] you. [censored] everyone that thinks this rule is a good one. You have no right to censor anyone, you [censored] nazi.

[censored] is one of the greatest words ever because it can be used in so many ways and still not be offensive.

[/ QUOTE ]


Gee, didn't see that coming. You this predictable at the tables as well?

[/ QUOTE ]


Actually I am. But that really doesn't matter since I have retards like you paying me off.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]

If there is a chance that cursing makes fish uncomfortable, why not restrain yourself from doing it? I understand the occasional slip, but grow up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because there is no chance of that.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

The F-Bomb rule was a good idea gone bad. The good idea was to try and curtail abuse of dealers and other players at the table. What we got instead was the F-bomb rule which doesn't help the probelm at all. You still have people acting completely out of line towards dealers and other players, but so long as they restrain from the dreaded F-word then they can get away with much more than is appropriate. Floor staff, dealers and players need to step up in situations where someone is out of line. The F-bomb rule does nothing to help anyone.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
yet another example of the extreme idiocy of the "f-bomb" rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

And another example of a headsup opponent who didn't have the decency to let the f-word slide.

99% sure that if I'm David's opponent there, I take the penalty with him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Such a perfect spot to shout at full volume "F-U-C-K this ridiculous rule."

[/ QUOTE ]

My question from this is what would be the ruling?

1. Both players sit for 10 minutes while the dealer deals and passes blinds back and forth
2. Both players immediately resume play with no time lost
3. Both players immediately resume play with penalty time ran off the clock.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]

Such a perfect spot to shout at full volume "F-U-C-K this ridiculous rule."

[/ QUOTE ]

hell yea

Re: David Pham Chops
 

I woulda said David how about a chop and if your not up for that I will utter the F word also and take a 10 minute penalty .

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
I can assure you that among sane members of the poker-touring population, taking advantage of the f-bomb rule in a headsup situation is still considered an extension of angle-shooting.


[/ QUOTE ]

You will be surprised Shane how "respected" poker players angle-shoot at every f**g opportunity.

If I were playing HU with you, of course I take the penalty with you. But to be honest, 99% is just too much, there are some as*** in the circuit I happily enforce the rule with.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
Poker is supposed to be a gentleman's game, and, yes, ruthless behavior has its place in the game, it simply shouldn't have anything to do with the "f-word."

[/ QUOTE ]

As frivolous as the rule is, it is indeed a rule. If someone breaks it, that's their own doing, not mine. At a full table during the first level of the WSOP, do you encourage the other 7 to sit out while you wait for Matusow to come back from his 2 hour penalty?


[ QUOTE ]
When a silly and widely disliked rule

[/ QUOTE ]

So what? It's a rule, either abide by it or expect your chips to be blinded off. If David didn't know about the rule I might consider sitting out with him, but there's a VERY slim chance of that being the case.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
You will be surprised Shane how "respected" poker players angle-shoot at every f**g opportunity.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd love some examples. Most of the pros I've played with seem to play it straight. Pham, certainly, is a stand-up guy as far as my experiences with him go.

[ QUOTE ]
But to be honest, 99% is just too much, there are some as*** in the circuit I happily enforce the rule with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if there was a player whom I wanted to spite, I wouldn't do it in this scenario. It would be a passive form of agreeing with the rule. The rule is stupid and missaplied, and I would feel disingenuous if I used it to create an advantage in a tight situation.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

[ QUOTE ]
At a full table during the first level of the WSOP, do you encourage the other 7 to sit out while you wait for Matusow to come back from his 2 hour penalty?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, and that hypothetical has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

[ QUOTE ]
So what? It's a rule, either abide by it or expect your chips to be blinded off. If David didn't know about the rule I might consider sitting out with him, but there's a VERY slim chance of that being the case.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must place a low premium on personal freedom while placing a lot of trust in authority figures to create sensible rules. This is not a sensible rule and by agreeing with it, you just affirm the right of floormen to make up more stupid and constrictive rules that will ultimately inhibit your ability to play poker. It's not like David said "F*ck you I'm going to kill you and you're whole f*ing family." This was a victimless crime.

Re: David Pham Chops
 

How about Vinnie Vinh at this year's 10k PLO event?

The one thing I don't get about the rule is that only the F-word is a penalty, you can use any other profanity you want and get away with it.