Vinny Vinh is a piece of sh*t

[bruce18lee]

I am a good friend of Rafi Amit and was present during the controversy. I realize there was a previous thread concerning this topic but I wanted to add a couple of thoughts as someone very familiar w/ the situation.

First of all, the F-bomb rule is ridiculous and an ineffective remedy to player/dealer abuse. The F-bomb rule itself has done very little to change player behavior. It still comes down to the discretion of dealers/floorpersons, and this incident has shown that implementation of this rule is not a solution. On day two of the tournament, Vinny Vinh told the dealer that he would "knock him out" if he exposed Vinny's hand after Vinny had shown the hand to another player. The floor was called, and Rafi was actually one who supprted letting Vinny off w/ a warning.

So whats worse, Vinny's behavior or when Rafi says "[censored] it, lets gamble"? Rafi didn't say the word in a malicious way whatsoever. Vinny, on the other hand, is constantly taunting others. I think its obvious the rule is a bad solution and ineffective. Also, the rule is inconsistently enforced. I have played at numerous tables this year where the F-word was used and ignored.

I couldn't believe that this event wasn't televised. ESPN missed out on probably the most exciting headsup match of the tournament. It would be great if the public got to see what a piece of [censored] Vinny Vinh is (something that most in the poker world already know). Vinny flat out lied in his video interview on cardplayer when he said that he didn't have anything to do w/ the penalty being issued. I also wish that people could see how the situation was handled by the floorperson Jack Effel. Jack basically allowed a player to triple his chips in a headsup match w/ half a million dollars on the line w/ a decision that was very debatable. I think Jack failed miserably in protecting the integrity of the match.

[istewart]

Maybe your friend Raffi was being too gay?

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
I am a good friend of Rafi Amit and was present during the controversy. I realize there was a previous thread concerning this topic but I wanted to add a couple of thoughts as someone very familiar w/ the situation.

First of all, the F-bomb rule is ridiculous and an ineffective remedy to player/dealer abuse. The F-bomb rule itself has done very little to change player behavior. It still comes down to the discretion of dealers/floorpersons, and this incident has shown that implementation of this rule is not a solution. On day two of the tournament, Vinny Vinh told the dealer that he would "knock him out" if he exposed Vinny's hand after Vinny had shown the hand to another player. The floor was called, and Rafi was actually one who supprted letting Vinny off w/ a warning.

So whats worse, Vinny's behavior or when Rafi says "[censored] it, lets gamble"? Rafi didn't say the word in a malicious way whatsoever. Vinny, on the other hand, is constantly taunting others. I think its obvious the rule is a bad solution and ineffective. Also, the rule is inconsistently enforced. I have played at numerous tables this year where the F-word was used and ignored.

I couldn't believe that this event wasn't televised. ESPN missed out on probably the most exciting headsup match of the tournament. It would be great if the public got to see what a piece of [censored] Vinny Vinh is (something that most in the poker world already know). Vinny flat out lied in his video interview on cardplayer when he said that he didn't have anything to do w/ the penalty being issued. I also wish that people could see how the situation was handled by the floorperson Jack Effel. Jack basically allowed a player to triple his chips in a headsup match w/ half a million dollars on the line w/ a decision that was very debatable. I think Jack failed miserably in protecting the integrity of the match.

[/ QUOTE ]

making a post calling someone a piece of shit and berating the director of a tournament which was worth .5M to your friend is certainly no way to win people to your way of thinking.

he may be a sleazeball, but all you're doing here is joining him.

fim

[sekrah]

I know Vinnie Vinh.. He really is a dirtbag.

[Mikey]

My mother's old boyfriend Donald and Vinny Vinh used to walk home togehter from school as children.

[otnemem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am a good friend of Rafi Amit and was present during the controversy. I realize there was a previous thread concerning this topic but I wanted to add a couple of thoughts as someone very familiar w/ the situation.

First of all, the F-bomb rule is ridiculous and an ineffective remedy to player/dealer abuse. The F-bomb rule itself has done very little to change player behavior. It still comes down to the discretion of dealers/floorpersons, and this incident has shown that implementation of this rule is not a solution. On day two of the tournament, Vinny Vinh told the dealer that he would "knock him out" if he exposed Vinny's hand after Vinny had shown the hand to another player. The floor was called, and Rafi was actually one who supprted letting Vinny off w/ a warning.

So whats worse, Vinny's behavior or when Rafi says "[censored] it, lets gamble"? Rafi didn't say the word in a malicious way whatsoever. Vinny, on the other hand, is constantly taunting others. I think its obvious the rule is a bad solution and ineffective. Also, the rule is inconsistently enforced. I have played at numerous tables this year where the F-word was used and ignored.

I couldn't believe that this event wasn't televised. ESPN missed out on probably the most exciting headsup match of the tournament. It would be great if the public got to see what a piece of [censored] Vinny Vinh is (something that most in the poker world already know). Vinny flat out lied in his video interview on cardplayer when he said that he didn't have anything to do w/ the penalty being issued. I also wish that people could see how the situation was handled by the floorperson Jack Effel. Jack basically allowed a player to triple his chips in a headsup match w/ half a million dollars on the line w/ a decision that was very debatable. I think Jack failed miserably in protecting the integrity of the match.

[/ QUOTE ]

making a post calling someone a piece of shit and berating the director of a tournament which was worth .5M to your friend is certainly no way to win people to your way of thinking.

he may be a sleazeball, but all you're doing here is joining him.

fim

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this joining him? I don't think there's anything wrong with posting to clarify what a jizz bucket someone is.

[The_Tracker]

This thread is stupid not unlike the "F-word" rule.

[TStoneMBD]

i dont think its fair to berate vinny for his decision here, despite it clearly being questionable in a moral sense. if you were in his shoes would you take the 3x chip lead at the chance for the massive prize purse at the expense of abusing the rules and tainting your name? i know that i probably would.

however, i think there is alot of valuable discussion in your post. clearly the f-bomb rule is being enforced in poor manner and the situation needs to be fixed. i dont fault you for insulting the tournament director for making his decision, but i do not know if he is forced to enforce the rule if someone asks for it to be.

[MicroBob]

i don't know vinny and don't care whether he's a dirt-bag or not.
If I have to deal with him personally in the future then I'll change my opinion on that perhaps.


But, in this situation, I think it was Jack who was especially idiotic.
It wasn't vinny's decision to make. He can encourage the director to make a ruling that favors him and, in this situation, I don't think that encouraging such an advantage is terribly appropriate. But he wasn't the one who made the ruling.


The WSOP made a bad rule and a stupidly unfair decision.
Vinny isn't the WSOP though....he's not the one who made him sit out.


In this situation...I would VERY seriously consider slow-playing for the 10-minute time-out in order to be fair (yes...even with that much money on the line).
Of course, this would change if I was playing against Vinny, considered him a dirt-bag (as many seem to believe) and had been especically jerk-ish to me throughout.

[autobet]

If "[censored] it, let's gamble" gets a player sent to time out, then shouldn't 100 other behaviors have the same consequence?

Isn't "[censored] it, let's gamble" half of what's poker's all about?

The use of the f-word in a harmless way should not be punished.

I do think they need to draw the line somewhere, but maybe the context should be considered...