David Pham Chops

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]
I was trying to illustrate was there are VERY few circumstances in which I would sit out with them. A strong friendship on the line seems like a good reason.

[/ QUOTE ]
Before I played poker I played Magic: The Gathering and there were certain "careless mistakes" you could make in Magic that by virtue of the rules, would cost you the game (for example, failing to shuffle when you are supposed to or accidentally drawing an extra card). Some of my good friends played in tournaments with me, and when we played tournament matches against each other we always knew the rules were in full effect. I have made careless mistakes against them that have cost me matches and they have done the same against me.

I believe if your friendship with this guy is really worth having, he would understand the nature of the situation. Him expecting you to sit out with him would be pretty much the same thing as saying "Hey, Skeme, can I have 50K? I am not gonna pay you back but I would really like the money--if you don't give me the money, I don't think I'll continue to be your friend."

Who is the scumbag, the person who says that or the person who refuses to give the 50k?

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]
You lose all sight of the spirit of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]
Spirit of the game:

Well I'm not certain which, but the spirit of the game is either perfection or money or both. Either way, allowing Pham to take back a $50,000 mistake falls outside of my bounds of "moral quandaries" into the realm of "pretty stupid things to do".

[ QUOTE ]
That is your perogative, but get used to people considering you a prick.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm already used to people that want me to give them $50,000 considering me a prick when I refuse.

[Angrymoog]

Youre operating under a logical fallacy. You assume that you already have all the money. When in truth you have a choice as to whether youll allow, in the spirit of the GAME of poker for someone to have a fair chance at winning the money.

Your choice to actually (heaven forbid) play poker, does not give them 50,000.

Noone likes rules lawyers and angleshots.

I'm sure Tiffany Williamson thought the same about stalling every hand, I wonder how well she was liked?

We live in a social world. If you lack social graces thats your choice, but dont expect to be well liked.

[AliasMrJones]

[ QUOTE ]
Noone likes rules lawyers and angleshots.

I'm sure Tiffany Williamson thought the same about stalling every hand, I wonder how well she was liked?

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you possibly make this comparison?

Angleshooters are actively trying to bend the rules or take advantage of loopholes to give them an advantage. This is the exact opposite! The people who let the f-bomb fly knew the rule and broke it anyway. The benefit is going to the bystander -- the person who had nothing whatsoever to do with letting the f-bomb fly. There is no angle being shot here. The bystander is just sitting there playing poker. The f-bomb dropper is the one doing something.

The F-BOMB DROPPING PERSON breaks the rules. THE CASINO enforces a penalty on that person and you're saying the only person in this thing who has had absolutely nothing to do with it should stop playing poker according to the rules established prior to the tournament?

That is ludicrous. If the f-bomb rule is in effect and you can't control your own mouth you have noone but yourself to blame. Stop trying to divert the blame on the bystander to the incident who actually is playing by the rules.

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]

Your choice to actually (heaven forbid) play poker, does not give them 50,000.

[/ QUOTE ]
Do you understand the concept of expected value? If I win on average $50,000 more when I let them get blinded down than if I play against them, then by sitting out with them I am (on average) handing them $50,000 of my own money. That's money that belongs to me, not both of us or the pot or the prize pool--it is my expected value and I have to make a choice as to whether to hang onto it or give it up.

[ QUOTE ]
Noone likes rules lawyers and angleshots.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We live in a social world. If you lack social graces thats your choice, but dont expect to be well liked.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well if I am disliked by society that puts me in pretty good company historically.

So I guess what I'm saying is, f*ck society. I don't care whether you like me, and I don't care whether I'm liked by society as a whole. I don't care if I'm liked by "respected poker players" as a whole or if I'm liked by George W. Bush or anybody else if they are choosing to dislike me because I thought for myself.

As far as my priorities in life go, thinking for myself is way way way above being liked by society.

[WDC]

Try telling them its "F**cked up" and then ask them what you were supposed to say after the stupidist f**cker on the planet rivers a two outer. Saw that happen once. Don't know how long the penalty was because the guy just never came back.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
As far as my priorities in life go, thinking for myself is way way way above being liked by society.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kind of ironic that thinking for yourself, in this context, entails agreeing with the spirit of an idiotic rule.

Hell, I like it. I have more discpline than most with verbal outburts. I'll consider it a potential edge... Needle my opponent, see if I can get him to give up, oh, say $300,000 because he can't handle himself.

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
You've been around longer than I have, David, but in all the major tournaments I've played, I don't think I've seen this type of behavior (enforcing rules as a method of shooting an angle) even once.


[/ QUOTE ]

You do not understand an angleshot. The oponnent enforced nothing at all. The TD enforced the rule, his oponnent gave him a more than fair alternative which was accepted in a gentlemanly manner. If it had been you and me playing I'd have slipped the dealer and extra $5K to deal like lightning. Then you could call that an angleshot!

[Howard Treesong]

I would regard taking advantage of an F-bomb penalty as a scumbag maneuver. I would take the penalty right along with any player I respected -- including David. If someone had taken an angle shot at me along the way, or otherwise pissed me off (a la Randy Jensen-type antics, for example), however, it's a totally different ball game.

I ran across a similar situation at an '02 Commerce tournament. We were at two tables when Bill Gazes inadvertently put a card on the floor. I watched him do it. There was zero intent on his part to throw the card or express frustration: it was a freak event. Cherie docked him twenty minutes. We were six or seven-handed, so I couldn't take a penalty along with, but I took max time on every hand because the penalty IMO was wrongly applied.

That situation is a little different, because the equity is getting divided five or six ways, but the point is the same.