Simon Trumper's reply on ESPN

[gumpzilla]

The examples you cite are clear-cut examples of stalling gone horribly wrong. Where am I advocating that people should do these things? What I am saying is that I'm near certain that you, nor most right-thinking poker players, do not always move instantaneously as soon as you make a decision. I'm not saying you take 2 minutes either, but I bet you take at least a little time pretty frequently. What is a reasonable amount of time to take? Nobody here has given a good answer to that, in my opinion.

[Quad_Damage]

This wasn't a matter of Barry getting outplayed, this was a matter of Barry getting his ass handed to him on a silver platter. I wonder if this behavior is in his book - "if you think someone is slow rolling you with the nuts, make sure to not say anything as you leave, but come back the next day and throw a tantrum."

[WWJFergusonD?]

[ QUOTE ]
The unwritten code is that you only take a long time deciding when you have an actual decision and Barry didn't call out of traditional courtesy, a mistake I doubt anyone who's read about this event will ever extend to Trumper again.

[/ QUOTE ]

It will be *very* interesting to hear (since I doubt we'll actually see) about the next incident like this involving Simon Trumper, and how quickly his opponent calls the clock on him.... 15 seconds? 20? My guess is 25 max.

[parappa]

[ QUOTE ]
The examples you cite are clear-cut examples of stalling gone horribly wrong. Where am I advocating that people should do these things? What I am saying is that I'm near certain that you, nor most right-thinking poker players, do not always move instantaneously as soon as you make a decision. I'm not saying you take 2 minutes either, but I bet you take at least a little time pretty frequently. What is a reasonable amount of time to take? Nobody here has given a good answer to that, in my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even though I disagree with you pretty strongly, I share your frustration in being unable to get a coherent response from your opponents in this discussion.

So, I think that 1 minute is long enough over the table to consider any poker decision, even though I have had many decisions that I've gladly taken longer on.

My frustration is that this million-dollar game can't put together coherent rules and has to rely so heavily on etiquette and tradition for guidance with so much money at stake. It's ludicrous. What the actual rules are is much less important than the fact that there actually are some.

[carpe2k]

Anyone have access to written rules concerning time, from Roberts Rules or WPT or WSOP?

[pokergripes]

[ QUOTE ]
Dipshit, the only reason they aren't doing is common courtesy, the thing that Trumper chucks over the side with this play. There isn't a single rule beyond the option of calling a clock preventing a chip leader from stalling on every action he has to shorten the # of hands per level. Someone who does it excessively with even farily regular decision is costing money as is some prima donna like Helmuth playing for TV time, it's accepted that once in a while someone will face a truly difficult decision and are allowed time as a courtesy among players, most online poker sites work just fine with a fixed time allotment.

By your genius assertion of whatever makes me $ is good regardless of negative impact on other players, collusion is just fine too.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is definitely something funny-but-sad about people who start out with "dipshit" in a post where they're pitching for "common courtesy". That's almost (but not quite) as entertaining as people who threaten to "kick a person's teeth in" because they think he was rude to...someone else!

What's wrong with you guys?

There is a point here that can actually be discussed regarding whether an individual player "owes something" to the other players in terms of courtesy, when he stands to pick up more chips with the "rude" play. I think that's a bunch of nonesense, but other good players appear to think that people (or other people, at any rate) should solve that common pool problem through charity, rather than the way the rest of civilization solves it (i.e., with a law). Whatever, mildly interesting point, but not something that calls for heated rhetoric.

[pokergripes]

[ QUOTE ]
You're not answering the more substantive questions I posed, just ranting, at this point. I'll pose the two that I'm particularly interested in one last time.

1) When you try to steal preflop with garbage and get raised, are you throwing your cards away instantly, or do you take a moment so that it looks like you're thinking?

2) How is somebody doing this costing you in a way that them actually making a difficult decision isn't?

Here's another one for you.

3) People who plays lots of hands are going to, on average, slow down the game substantially. Thus they are costing everybody money. Should we not allow people to play many hands?

Also:

[ QUOTE ]

By your genius assertion of whatever makes me $ is good regardless of negative impact on other players, collusion is just fine too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not asserting anything like that. Why are your panties in such a bunch? Are you having a hard time making a case like a reasonable person?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, he is having a hard time. Subtle illustrations of the point won't work with angry clowns (the worse kind of clowns). People who go on angry tirades about common courtesy are not to be reasoned with, they're to be avoided [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[pokergripes]

[ QUOTE ]
You are the one who isn't addressing issues. You haven't addressed the chip leader stalling issue at all which is highly, highly relevant. You haven't addressed people playing for media time, which is becoming more common. You haven't addressed the negative impact to the other players at the table. You haven't addressed what the game is like if everyone plays time games like this or the consquences of people calling clock regularly to prevent it. If it's ok for people to try to manipulate the time rules for their own advantage all of the above strategies are just as strategically viable as what Trumper did. The only generally accepted exception to deciding your action in a timely fashion was facing a difficult decision but once you open the door to what Trumper did, you can't say the other ways of getting trying to gain advantage are not any different.

The time of all the other players being wasted is why the cell phone rule was implemented, codification of time management of the table was necessary because some players were wasting other players time, this is more of the same crap.

Anyone who regularly takes up more than is necessary is negatively impacting the other players at the table, not just your opponent. Pretending to have a difficult decision when you don't is doing exactly that. A highly aggressive blind stealer who excessively drags out the drama when he's caught raising with 9-6 offsuit when a Dan Harrington type comes over the top is doing exactly the same thing, 5-15 seconds, the regularly accepted time to make a decision isn't the same as taking 2 minutes but you're trying to compare them when there is nothing in common.

People playing lots of hands has no relevance whatsoever, it's only relevant if they waste time during the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you only do it when you have a tough decision, that is a huge leak. In other words, that's the equivalent of saying "I have a tough decision" whenever you do it. To put it in even smaller words for you, "that's why simon did it--he was pretending to have a tough decision".

It got him the chips, it's completely allowed (not to mention necessary for every single person who doesn't want to be easily read for a tough decision when he stops to truly think hard), and this thread is pretty silly.

Oh, hang on a minute--following my own analysis, I should just be happy that PP and Barry can convince you clowns to only pause when you're really thinking, since it will help all of us non-charitable types... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[pokergripes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The examples you cite are clear-cut examples of stalling gone horribly wrong. Where am I advocating that people should do these things? What I am saying is that I'm near certain that you, nor most right-thinking poker players, do not always move instantaneously as soon as you make a decision. I'm not saying you take 2 minutes either, but I bet you take at least a little time pretty frequently. What is a reasonable amount of time to take? Nobody here has given a good answer to that, in my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even though I disagree with you pretty strongly, I share your frustration in being unable to get a coherent response from your opponents in this discussion.

So, I think that 1 minute is long enough over the table to consider any poker decision, even though I have had many decisions that I've gladly taken longer on.

My frustration is that this million-dollar game can't put together coherent rules and has to rely so heavily on etiquette and tradition for guidance with so much money at stake. It's ludicrous. What the actual rules are is much less important than the fact that there actually are some.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you jopking? All you have to do is say "clock" and there's a rule in play. The fact that some people are trying to argue that, to prevent them from having to invoke the actual existing rule about this common pool problem, then should get all their opps to just self-impose some random "shouldn't take a long time" worry on themselves (which will presumably be a much tougher row to hoe for the newbies than the pros) would be kind of funny, except that some of you guys seem to be on board for it, which is scary.

More power to you, but I am going to start taking three minutes on every decision in each major event I play, just to balance it out...I'll make up for it though by not over-fishing the pond near my house even though there are no license requirements or catch limitations, and by not tossing trash out the window of my car even when I think I can get away with it [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[pokergripes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The unwritten code is that you only take a long time deciding when you have an actual decision and Barry didn't call out of traditional courtesy, a mistake I doubt anyone who's read about this event will ever extend to Trumper again.

[/ QUOTE ]

It will be *very* interesting to hear (since I doubt we'll actually see) about the next incident like this involving Simon Trumper, and how quickly his opponent calls the clock on him.... 15 seconds? 20? My guess is 25 max.

[/ QUOTE ]

I started out feeling a bit sorry for Simon in this dispute with Barry, and then I read his posts and realized he's clearly a bad ass in Europe, and hardly going to be thrown off pace by this kind of nonsense. In fact, although Barry might be "our" local hero, sounds like Simon has him well beat on the actual tourney accomplishments front. Which is actually kind of refreshing in this kind of argument [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

In fact, this whole thing probably just makes we Americans look silly to him, and he would be correct in that conclusion. People don't smoke at the Grovsnor because it's against the rules, not because they're all being nice to the non smokers in the (common) pool. Americans are viewed as cowboys throughout the world, so let's act like it and stop whining about courtesy, ok?