The F-Bomb, and the All-In Rule

The first poker rule ever to be written up in a national newspaper was given the hip-hop name "F-Bomb." A story on the first page of USA Today discussed the success of the 2005 World Series of Poker, as well as a final-table decision in one of the preliminary events. In that event, one of the final two players was given a penalty for using the F-word. There was quite a bit of discussion about the ruling because of the timing of the incident and the effect it could have had on determining the winner.

The WSOP and many other major tournaments have a rule that assesses a player an automatic penalty if he uses the F-word. I like the rule, and hope that these tournaments continue to keep it in place. Many high-profile players have questioned the use of the rule because they believe it is selectively enforced. If all players were to help enforce it (the only way to make it really effective), there would be no debate about who should receive the penalties. As a player, you are responsible for adhering to rules and pointing out rules infractions, and this one should be no exception.

The reason I like the rule is not because my ears are pure, far from it. I think that at a time when poker is at its peak and everyone wants a piece of what is going on, it is important that poker is being portrayed in a positive light. Sure, every sport and game that has a public audience has players who get out of line, but most of them suffer penalties for doing just that. Poker should be no exception.

My hope is that the rule will become a nonissue in a few years when everyone knows that you just don't yell things that might be offensive to others. There is no need for it, and it shouldn't be tolerated. In the USA Today column, the author addressed the current state of poker and why the foul language needs to be cleaned up:

"This is 2005; poker is different and the World Series of Poker is way different than it used to be. Cameras are running. Reporters are taking notes. Blogs are awaiting updates. Web sites are refreshing. Books and DVDs, T-shirts and hats, cards and chips, and assorted accessories are waiting to be sold."

Change of subject: In a previous column, I discussed some no-limit hold'em situations in which players made all-in bets but didn't put any chips into the pot. Since then, I have seen one more similar situation and heard of countless more. Many players e-mailed me and agreed that a rule should be put in place to alleviate this problem, and also offered suggestions for ways to improve the process. Surprisingly, there were many people who had a similar suggestion: use an "all-in" button. I don't like the thought of giving every player a button and forcing them to throw it in in place of an all-in bet. However, the suggestion did get me thinking about having the all-in button available in the dealer's tray. If a player makes an all-in bet, he announces that he's all in and has to place at least some chips into the pot. At that point, the dealer tosses the button in front of the player.

I don't think there is a perfect solution to this problem, but I think the all-in button and requiring a player to put out some chips are both better ideas than allowing players to just announce, "All in," and move nothing forward. Bob Ciaffone made a very valid point as to why players should want a rule that forces all of the chips to be put into the pot; he described it this way: "I agree that a verbal statement cannot be heard, and needs visual support from the act of putting chips into the pot. Aside from possibly causing an error, not having to put chips in deprives a player from seeing how the chips were put in – fumbled, cut smoothly, and so forth. This should be a part of any live game."

Michael O'Malley is the poker room manager for www.PartyPoker.com, and he can be reached at rzitup@aol.com. His website is updated regularly at www.rzitup.com.