4) fairness of playing to the money in each day of multi day events rather than to a set level.

agree if its within ~3.5 hours

6) the proliferation of dont ask dont tell tournament advertising which just lists buyin amount but no fees.

this is fine, wives can argue this point. leave the rake out of it

Removal of the "no talking during hands" rule.

More leniency for people who accidently flip cards with action pending.

There NEEDS to be a hard rule for any casino that declares it uses the TDA handles late registration/seating in a manner that doesn't allow rampant angle shooting.

Yes i saw someone blinded out for showing 8-2 in sb didnt realize there was a raise.


Doesn't seem fair if someone enters at 300-600 and sits with a full stack behind the button.

On the subject of leniency for prematurely exposed hands, the rule is: The rule is fine, but the application is not. Many directors treat "may" as "shall" and that isn't fair when single, accidental, and mostly inconsequential violations of the rule result in penalties.

------------------

Reentries
TDA's should put an immediate stop to:

1. Players entering after the reentry period has expired. For example, if the reentry period ends after level 6 plus the break, a player who busts first hand in level 7 cannot reenter. Also, a player who shows up at the window after level seven starts should not be permitted to reenter. I've seen both happen.

2. Players asking for and being given requested seat assignments when reentering. "I want to go back to my original table," should not be permitted unless it is permitted for everyone. I have seen too much accommodation of regulars being given their preference on reentry seating.

7) having a more defined guideline for tda approved payout structures. (Example 9th should pay about 10% of 1st)

And payout structures should ALWAYS be posted upfront, long before 1st card dealt IMHO, along with the rest of tourney details.

Lets help spread the money around the Live Poker Scene, shall we.

I don't have strong feelings about most of what was introduced in the OP.
However I feel like this:

is definitely something the TD should NOT do.

First, I don't think any "guidelines" the TD would adopt would sufficiently deal with all contingencies. Just in the above example, I think it is perfectly reasonable for the ratio between 9th and 1st place pay-outs to be very different in a 100-person tournament than it is in a 1000-person tournament.

Second, I think codifying any particular pay-out structure would impede future innovation. The payout structures at most WSOP events are now mostly much better than they were 10 years ago. If some organization had set rules 10 years ago based on payout standards then, these probably never would have changed, and therefore still be much worse than they are.

I personally would like to see much different structures than we have today. (E.g. I would like to see more places paid, but pay the bubble less than the buy-in.) I know that a lot of people don't agree with that, and I wouldn't insist on anyone implementing a structure that most people dislike. But I do like that tournaments are open to experimentation, and hope that one day some tournaments try out along those lines.

TDA Rule # 52 says:

Once a player is all in, he/she no longer has a stack. If another player would like to know the amount of a bet (all-in or otherwise), the dealer would be responsible for providing the amount of the bet.

Suggestion: Casinos using TDA rules for tournaments should make it explicitly clear that they are doing so. As it stands now, if I play a tournament in a new room I never know if they use TDA rules.

Here's another one. Venues that keep available seat cards face up and physically choose which one to give a new player.

Also venues who exclude certain seat cards from the mix when breaking tables.

Good to see the change

everyone has to show cards at showdown with penalty for mucking

TDA Rule # 52 says:

Once a player is all in, he/she no longer has a stack. If another player would like to know the amount of a bet (all-in or otherwise), the dealer would be responsible for providing the amount of the bet.

No

Constant tankers ???
Try asking them to speed up...

Then people yell at you for getting involved in hands you aren't in.

I think that someone betting an oversized chip while announcing a bet should be held to the LARGEST possible interpretation of the announcement, instead of the smallest, as is currently the rule.

Example, blinds are 100/200. On the river, Player A tosses a 5k chip into the 4500 chip pot and announces "3". Under the current rule, he has bet 300. I hate this rule because the player literally NEVER means 300 unless he is shooting an angle where he is weak and hopes the opponent will fold assuming it is 3k but if called will say 'whaaattt no i bet 300'. If a player legitimately means to bet 300 they will say "three hundred" in that spot, not "three".

Changing the rule would minimize angles and also minimize times where players are held to actions counter to their intention.

I think I like it

The biggest thing that slows down tourneys unnecessarily is the showdown situation and who shows 1st.

The back and forth on who goes 1st and the other guy mucking is stupid. If I'm not mistaken any player at the table can ask to see both hands at showdown and certainly the 2 people involved in the hand can so why not make it an automatic that when you get to showdown both players instantly flip up their hands and stop making this aspect of poker some ego/angling slowdown of the tourney.

Re: Showdown

Maybe this situation could benefit from stronger dealer instruction along with a small rules tweak like a timer to show/muck?

Dealers, when the action has concluded on the end, immediately prompt the [last aggressor, first to act, whatever is appropriate] to show. This can be a non-verbal prompt, but if the player does not immediately comply, next prompt verbally with 'Show or muck please'. If the player does not show within X seconds of the verbal count, his cards are mucked.

I'm not saying that dealers are doing anything wrong now, or that they never make the prompts on the end. However, from my experience, the prompt to show or muck on the end is handled much less forcefully than other prompts, and could use a bit more emphasis.

That rule hasn't been around for awhile. You can only ask to see both hands if you suspect collusion.

But the other guy involved in the hand can... therefore to avoid confusion about who shows first and the fact that either player at showdown can ask to see each others hand it would make sense that both people just flip them up and get the game moving. No one gains/loses an edge.

There is already a TDA rule for this

With no bet on the river left of the button shows first

Last aggressor is a thing of the past

Have dealers start the shuffle with 2 minutes left on break clock. I am sick of getting your first hand with 1 or 2 minutes off the clock for no good reason.

I realize there's a rule but the majority of players don't know it so inevitably the 2 players look at each either for a while and then one asks the dealer who has to show. It takes time that's not needed.

Players need to know the rules then. That's not a TDA issue,

But if the rule is every hand at showdown is going face-up, that eliminates 98% of the Mexican standoffs (of course it makes the remaining 2% that much more annoying, JFC is there anything more annoying than allin and call and then both guys look at each other like now what? THEY ARE BOTH GOING ON THEIR BACKS GET ON WITH IT)