Here is why imo he should get an attorney:

1. He paid for and won an event.
2. The winner of the event is entitled to $x.
3. He is being denied $x because he allegedly cheated.
4. Cheating is defined as breaking a rule to gain an advantage.
5. Even if everything they allege is true he DID NOT gain an advantage by removing a chip and therefore did not cheat.
6. He is entitled to $x.

No, this is correct information. The players are not allowed to chop and they chopped at this event. Ask any circuit TDs. They will tell you the same.
Both players clearly agreed to a chop and chips were dumped which is also against their rules.

FACTS:

1) There is nothing in the rules about not chopping
2) There surely is nothing in the rules (or any sense of fairness whatsoever) advocating DQ'ing players for chopping
3) Pelton would have won casino champ with a 2nd place finish in the event
4) "Chip dumping" headsup can not affect anyone else's equity in the given tournament, and thus should not result in a DQ from the given tournament
5) In events with point systems, headsup chops or "chip dumps" could have impact on the points race, and an appropriate remedy is DQ from the points race

I mean WSOPC has a rule that I must be one table length away to take a phone call. I'm headsup for WSOPC Main Event. I fold a hand, stand up, place a phone call. OK to disqualify me for this? No, because I didn't get a competitive advantage.

at the time when they were HU it was not guranteed that he would have been casino champ as there were 3 more ring events to be played still.

^^^^ all the more reason why a DQ for this is ridiculous. The points could have made neither player a contender for the NC and be worthless to both players.


Ba, Solid response to another ridiculous post.

Stupid, incompetent cheating is still cheating.

Or its stupid and incompetent but not cheating.

Every time that someone asks for a link, I plug a few words into Google, and I get the result.

Is this really difficult for some people to understand?

Hold on a minute there cowboy.

We may be a bunch of thieves, liars, lowlifes and scumbag degenerates but you're crossing the line thinking we're rats.

Agree. The post I quoted implied that Pelton won casino champ BC of the chip dump which is blatantly false. I do agree that at the time it is POSSIBLE that the points he earned for 1st would have put him over the top. Which, again, should DQ him from the points race, not the actual tournament.

What if this was done in the very last ring event between two players with 0 WSOPC points on the year? We still gonna DQ em both for violating an unwritten rule that had literally 0 effect on any other person in the universe?

Amazing how B&M is full of OMG LOOK AT THIS BAD UNFAIR THING THAT HAPPENED TO ME, but anytime something like this happens people just want to torch and pitchfork up. I despise cheaters and thieves, and if this had happened 3 handed, I would absolutely support every inch of the penalty. But the punishment should fit the crime.

ty ty

Can you loan me the money to get my pitchfork and torch out of the pawn shop?

hang on let me get someone to chip dump to me first

This article says he intended taking the chip as theft, reversing the "souvenir" story.
http://www.highstakesdb.com/4547--se...-of-title.aspx

He took the chip without permission as a souvenir, as opposed to taking it to cheat in another tournament. Its still theft. 4,000 people have filed suit in the Borgata incident.... Ha ha ha.
What a numb nut reporter, no wonder he does not post his last name.

the reading comprehension of some people....

taking it as a souvenir IS technically theft. What does "intended as theft" mean as opposed to "as a souvenir", please explain for us all the difference.

I think anyone stealing chip(s) off the table under any circumstances deserves harsh punishment. The integrity of the game needs to be preserved but ask yourself this:

What if Phil Hellmuth was playing the event, won and took the 25k chip off the table??? Someone sees him do it and brings it to the attention of the PBKC Tournament director. Phil claims he wanted it as a souvenir because it's his 1st circuit ring and wants to frame the chip. Do you guys REALLY THINK GOOD OL' CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT WOULD PERMANENTLY BAN HIM FROM ALL THEIR PROPERTIES??? HOW ABOUT DQING HIM??? HOW ABOUT BANNING HIM FROM PBKC AND KEEPING HIS WINNINGS????

I'll answer that myself - HELL NO!!! There is blatant favoritism that these "top pros" get all over the place and that's the 1 problem with all these "daily", "weekly", "monthly" rulings that occur whenever something controversial happens. If Chan Pelton would be treated the same way as Daniel Negreanu and Phil Hellmuth would be for taking a 25k chip off the table for a "souvenir" then by all means - PERM BAN AWAY.

Unfortunately, there are 2 sets of rules, 1 for the general poker population and another set for poker "celebrities". If Phil Hellmuth did the same thing I highly doubt ANY of those same punishments would be levied. Instead, PBKC and Caesars would probably come out with a great spin statement supporting Phil's "unawareness" of the circuit rules and since the tournament had ended, no harm was done.

So you are saying celebrities are treated differently from everyone else?

Um... welcome to the world, I guess.

LOL at this part. Good luck with this line of argument down at the local police station if you ever get caught with a deck of marked cards that you hadn't manage to introduce yet, or caught breaking the law in general, for that matter.

Blah blah blah blah blah "Oh he dumped chips but nobody was hurt".

For everyone saying this, how the hell do YOU know? Do you know all the side bets, staking arrangements, POY effects, etc. etc. etc.?

It's like point-shaving in basketball. "Oh, we were gonna win anyway, I was just making sure we didn't win by too much, officer. What do you mean, I'm going to jail?"

If poker's ever gonna get cleaned up, the community needs to stop this endless digging for justification for every angle shoot and start FOLLOWING THE ****ING RULES.

Marked cards are specifically designed to gain an advantage.

And hilarious that you think a headsup "chip dump" should be grounds for DQ because someone might have a side bet or staking arrangement. As far as the points race, everyone agrees it is reasonable to DQ them from points race.

agree with every letter, word, sentence and punctuation mark of this post

I think your post is completely off base; every word, sentence and punctuation. If you want to stop people for playing poker, keep DQing them for conduct not improper by the written rules but penalize them anyways for a hypothetical harm to other players.

Heres why:
Kesseler is calling for the 2nd place finisher to be DQ'd because he agreed to chop, claiming the poy points and NC made it impossible to chop without effecting other players.
Despite Kessler's assertions, we know the written rules of the event do not explicitly state a chop is improper. We also know that in this specific case, first place is leading the points race even if he takes second. Therefore, the points race is not effected by the chop, except in the hypothetical sense. We have also pointed out it is possible that a scenerio exists where neither player would be in the running for the poy leader whichever way they finished. In other words, contrary to Kessler, the poy points do not have any material effect on the decision of the players to chop, nor effect any other player.
In such circumstances, the mere possibility of a negative effect should not be a basis to DQ anyone or take his prize money.

In an alternative scenario where the points do matter or are material, DQing is still not appropriate as you can simply take away the points.

Wat?

AK if the rule is not in the rule book it is not binding. Only thing it says WSOP will not facilitate the chop.

And as long is the point system is not affected then I don't see anything wrong in it.

There is no rule against chip dumping?

I doubt anyone cares about the distribution of the payouts