With 22 players left in $2500 o/e event mike was given a full round penalty after winning a pot. At such a critical point I the tournament, this penalty seems excessive without at least a prior incident or warning.

Several players have come out to defend mike and blast the floor person Dave lamb. The full sory is here.

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2014/0...tion-18516.htm

A brutal ruling by a TD that should be fired.

lol knee-jerk reaction much?

Dave Lamb has been involved with running MTT's for decades and is very well respected.

Penalty seems extremely unfair, if this is accurate:

Maybe it's the pounding, don't know what the rules says about this.

Matusow claims there is not a no swearing rule and the guy warned him twice about dropping f bombs in a randon convo to friend.

Then gives him a penalty for excessive celebration. Mike says Jack Effel told him that excessive celebration isn't a rule anymore.

So if this is true what Mike says , then this guy despite his decades of experience doesn't even know the rules and he is a floor guy for the biggest MTT events of the year.

Or he was targeting Mike which would make him a power abuser.

Decades of experience and is still a terrible tournament director who made a bad ruling. Why is the WSOP ran so poorly?

That's a pretty big penalty late in a stud tournament with huge antes and bring ins every hand.

I don't see why it's relevant whether or not it happened at a critical point in the tournament. It's either a fair ruling or it isn't, regardless of that.

If I was Mike I would be very upset with this ruling. This ruling feels like it is based more on his past instead of the present.

So how much of his stack did this equate to?

Mike was on our podcast yesterday talking about this. I was sitting next to him when this was recorded, and he actually ran around the room reenacting everything. He's pretty fired up about all this.

NSFW language

NOW THATS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT

First of all, cards run in streaks too, I mean, those eight hands I missed, I could’ve won four or five of them.

Sigh. Oh Mikey Mikey Mikey...

That would be rule 45:

"Rio prohibits the use of obscene or foul language in any public area of the casino at any time. Any participant who uses such language or makes a
foul, profane, obscene or vulgar statement, or speaks abusively or in an intimidating manner to another participant, a dealer or a Tournament staff
member, will be penalized. These penalties will be levied based on Rules 39,107 and 108."

Wsop rules: http://www.wsop.com/2014/2014-WSOP-Rules.pdf

When I first read them my first thought is this will kill Mike.

He penalized a player for a non-existent rule.

where there's smoke ...

Here's an idea: When you win a pot simply stack your chips and shut the **** up.

what a bs situation, I'd be pissed as well, Mike is being reasonable in this situation even though I'm not the type who would celebrate in that manner

Then there is rule 40:

"40.In addition to that authorized in Rule 39, Rio may impose penalties of any kind or nature upon any person who gives, makes, issues, authorizes or endorses any statement or action having, or designed to have, an effect prejudicial or detrimental to the best interest of the Tournament as determined by Rio, acting in its sole and absolute discretion. This may include, but shall not be limited to, expulsion from the event and property, forfeiture of a participant ’s entry fee(s) and/or loss of the right to participate in this and/or any other Tournament conducted by Rio. Additionally, Rio may in its sole and absolute discretion impose penalties of any kind or nature upon any person who, in Rio’s view engages in inappropriate conduct during Tournament play"

It's just magnified more at critical points I think is what he's saying.

Ruling is garbage, TD needs a stern talking to for terrible ruling

I just would like to point out that it is, in my opinion, very hypocritical that with 22 players left a player can get an orbit penalty for celebrating "excessively" due to the fact that it's disrespectful to the other players, but fans, or hecklers, 20' away from the final 9 players of the tournament, are free to be as annoying and loud as possible while excessively celebrating hands their friends win, and/or making detracting remarks to other opponents at the table.

Case in point, this year one of the Hinkle's was being what could be considered excessively annoying and loud while Helmuth and Forrest played heads up for hours. I believe Forrest even asked for it to stop at some point, through the floor, but to no avail. Or last year when one of the Brit's made a final table, the rail was going insane, being loud and obnoxious, chanting, celebrating excessively and making it hard for anyone at the table to concentrate.

I'm not saying the rail should be silenced, but I think it's a bit ridiculous that the rail can do whatever the hell it wants with regard to excessive celebration, while the players whose money is actually on the line, who are viscerally experiencing the emotional swings of high stakes poker, are supposed to sit motionless and silent, swallowing any emotion they are experiencing. Just doesn't seem balanced imo.

I've had a lot of experience with Lamb as a floor/TD as he is from my area and he is typically very fair and a very good TD, I think in this case the ruling was excessive but he may have been constrained by someone else's direction or there may have been more to the story with some prior history or something.

In either case I think players at the table should be given as much or more leniency than people on the rail that have just as much if not more of an effect on other players in the tournament.

I think this is a fair point. Either embrace the antics or start with those less affected.

So let me get this straight. There is a no foul language rule (#45 posted earlier) and he admits he was warned twice before the penalty.

In the Lisandro vs. Cantu thread I see comments like this:
and that's OK, but after 2 warning for breaking a published rule a penalty is unfair?

So if they don't do something they should be fired, and if they do something they should be fired?

Seems like the old saying " The floors ruling, no matter how well intentioned, is always wrong" Is being taken to heart.

Obviously the ruling is BS, but it's pretty hard for me to feel too sorry for Mike.