That popular phrase in the title of this column is how I used to feel when I assisted with directing tournaments. Players asked me the same questions over and over again. I secretly hoped that someday, someone would write a standard book of tournament rules. Enter the TDA, the Tournament Directors Association. In the past few columns, we looked at some of the ways the TDA is working to make rules consistent from venue to venue. Let's take a gander at some more rules that you can expect to see when playing in a TDA event.
Rule No. 9 states: "All cards will be turned faceup once a player is all in and all action is complete." This appears to be straightforward, yet this rule, one of the original 14 TDA rules, continues to be met with some opposition. The good news is that players and tournament directors alike are beginning to get used to it, and even like it. Some players do not like to reveal their cards, especially if they have a loser. However, in my opinion, the upsides of this rule outweigh the downsides. Exposing the all-in players' holecards makes it far more fun and exciting for the spectators. Although some players dislike it on the basis that having to expose their holecards causes them to alter the way they play a hand, and it "gives away information," there have been relatively few problems since its adoption, and most players have gotten used to the rule and like it.
One of the newly adopted rules this year is No. 24, which states: "All chips must be visibly displayed at all times. Players may not have tournament chips in their pockets at any time. A player who has chips in his pocket will forfeit the chips. The forfeited chips will be taken out of play from the tournament." How does this affect you? It prevents a player from moving his chips, when going to a new table, in a manner in which they could be intermingled with other chips or "forgotten" and later introduced. If each player moves his chips in racks or with his bare hands, the chips in action are always in sight. This helps to keep things clean, so to speak. I always thought it was strange to see a player who was moved to my table dig into his pockets for his tournament chips. Tournament directors should assist in this process by always bringing racks to a table when it is time for it to break.
Another interesting rule that received a great deal of debate at the TDA meeting is rule No. 26. It states: "In limit events, there will be a limit to the number of raises allowed, even when heads up. (The limit will be the house limit.) However, once the tournament becomes head up, the rule does not apply." It used to be that when a hand got down to heads up, the players could raise themselves into a stupor. That's not the case anymore. Now, they may put in only the number of raises allowed by the house in normal play, whether that number is three, four, or five.
This end to unlimited raises deals a blow to potential "chip dumping." It is entirely likely that you will go your entire poker life without ever witnessing this occurrence, but it has happened. Chip dumping occurs when two friends (or teammates) are at a table, and in order to gain an unfair edge in the tournament, one "dumps" his chips to the other via a raising war. This occurs when one player has no hand at all but puts in several raises, only to end up mucking his hand, essentially doubling up his buddy. Of course, this is highly unethical, and, in fact, is cheating. Tournament directors and players frown very seriously upon this type of play, and now with the addition of rule No. 26, it will be much more difficult for the bad guys to ruin the game we love.
One of my favorite rules is No. 31. It states: "Floorpeople are to consider the best interest of the game and fairness as the top priorities in the decision-making process. Unusual circumstances can, on occasion, dictate that the technical interpretation of the rules be ignored in the interest of fairness. The floorperson's decision is final." Why do I like this rule so much? There are several reasons, but the main one is that situations always come up that no one ever thought of when the rule was written. I do not like absolutes, especially when they can affect the outcome of a poker tournament. For example, there are some cardrooms that employ the "card on the floor is an automatic penalty" rule. While I understand their reasons for it, I prefer that the tournament director be given the latitude to interpret what exactly happened that caused a card to go on the floor, and then make a decision accordingly. I have seen cards go off the table in all kinds of freaky ways, and I think all rules should be interpreted and enforced on an individual basis. I also fully support the belief that if you chose to play in a tournament, you should have faith in the fairness of the tournament director and be willing to support his decisions. If you don't, don't play. While that may sound harsh, I do believe it. I have chosen not to play in events in which I thought the decision-making might be subject to influence, and not executed with good intentions.
I'll cover a few more rules in my next column, and then I will move on to something else. My favorite new rule is yet to come, so stick around. Please know that it is the intention of the TDA to make tournaments more fun, fair, and enjoyable for everyone by establishing uniform rules so that you will better know what to expect when you play. If you have any ideas on the topic, please e-mail them to me. Class dismissed.
Please contact me with any ideas for column topics, with your poker-related questions and comments, or for information on Card Player Cruises, www.cardplayercruises.com.