Are you saying that the ADA gives you the right to spread an infectious disease?

I thought it was well established that businesses have the right to refuse to provide services to those who pose a direct threat to the health and safety of others.

FWIW, at least for now a coronavirus diagnosis doesn't qualify as a disability under the law.

So he discouraged Pesh from going public? Why would he do that? Did Effel want to let him play?

I may have misread what Pesh tweeted. He certainly came away from a conversation with Effel feeling that it would be a bad idea to go public.

My guess is that going public would only hurt Pesh because pressure would only make the WSOP have stricter criteria for COVID protocols, not lesser. I can imagine Effel wanting to avoid a public debate about how reckless the WSOP was being in having a live final table because he was concerned that it might lead to cancellation.

The issue is sports disciplines are PAID to perform their event so are treated as employees and poker players PAY a fee so are customers. If there was no rake I would agree with you.

Sorry mate, the point is, having a virus does NOT mean someone has a disability - which is the point of the ADA. Would it be "illegal" (based on the ADA) for a school to send a child home if said child came to school with the measles? Simply being "sick" (whether it be the sniffles, a flu, Covid, etc.) does not mean one is disabled. Try obtaining a disability parking decal/pass for your vehicle when you have a fever - see how well that goes for you

My understanding is air transportation is not covered under the ADA in the same ways as other industries because they are considered essential so you picked a very poor example. Yes a business could refuse service to someone who showed signs of covid but they wouldn't be able to take their money and not provide accommodations or a refund. Even an airlines refunds the value of a ticket for covid (ICM payout).

Actually you can get temporary handicap passes fairly easily.

I know that's what the TDA rules say.

But that's not what the rules to this specific tournament are.

They say that all players testing positive get 9th place money. Not the next remaining prize, or some split of remaining prizes. They specify exactly 9th place.

That's fair. Paying his ICM value instead of DQing him is an accommodation that is possible.

Yes, but not for having a virus like Covid or the flu or a cold. You don't get it do you - one can be temporarily disabled, i.e. broken hip and need a walker or wheelchair. A virus like Covid does not fall into the category of being "disabled." Just because one can get a temporary pass does NOT mean all ailments then qualify as a disability.

exclude was a bad word choice because if he had covid prior to entering the event he would be allowed to be excluded but punishing someone for getting covid mid event is not protected in my opinion. It would be the same basis for ADA although not directly covered under it which protects individuals with health issues from being discriminated against.

I imagine there is going to be a lot of cases like this. This is the only industry I can imagine that would have the audacity to not give an ICM payout which would be similar to a refund. A hotel for instance wouldn't kick someone out and not credit the days of the stay after. Most lawsuits are going to be going after the business covering added accommodations like paying their new accommodations/travel required from being kicked out. (that would be like his view of his +EV in the field if he was able to play)

I mean why would you need to park closer because you have a fever? If you did I am sure you could get one if you wanted to and a doctor agreed. You probably shouldn't be going out with covid anyways so I doubt a doctor will give you a handicap accessible pass for it. This is a pretty bad example tbh.

Disability rights are meant to protect those with health issues. Passes like those are meant to make life easier on people with health issues. The whole point of laws like this is to help accommodate people who are having difficulties related to health issues.

Under the ADA , you have a disability if you have a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity.

Having a passing illness is not a "disability" that impairs a major life activity.

Conditions that are minor and temporary (such as a cold or flu) don't count as disabilities under the ADA.

I never said ADA would cover this I said the spirit of the law protects individuals in cases like this similar to how ADA protects people with health issues.

If I had covid and I blew into your ac intake I dont like your chances of not getting covid. Or worse many hotels have shared ac systems where air is recirculated throughout the hotel which could cause spread.

There is a reasonable expectation of safety and not a reasonable expectation of safety. I doubt any court would decide not getting covid is a reasonable expectation of safety.

Disability rights (and laws like the ADA) are to protect those that are disabled. Having a health issue does not automatically mean one is disabled. Therefore, the whole point of the ADA is to help accommodate those with disabilities and NOT necessarily those with health issues. There is a HUGE difference between a "health issue" and a disability - both in law and medically speaking. In other words, a disability is a "health issue" but not all "health issues" are considered a disability.

Your correct. A disability is a health issue which prevents you from doing something. Not all health issues do this but this is obviously a case of a health issue preventing someone from doing something. It’s too new for it to be classified under ADA. In this case it would be ruled on in the spirit of the law. There are obviously added complexities of it being public safety as well. However, reasonable accommodations are usually required and DQing someone whether stated in the rules or not would not be looked on as reasonable accommodations.

Eff the ADA.

Covid may be new, viruses are NOT. Spirit of the law is NEVER considered if the law in question is written precisely enough (i.e. does the law define what constitutes a "disabled person"?) - have you read the ADA and how it defines a "disability"? I would wager you have NOT. I believe someone previously in this thread actually typed out the ADA definition. There is nothing in said definition that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that Covid constitutes a "disability".

My understanding is the only federal law about Covid is that healthcare and Ppe providers are immune from liability which don’t apply here. Please provide laws that will clearly define a ruling on this case. I can make personal attacks too but without specific laws/rulings related to this case you need to similar laws/court cases to show what is proper in this situation. I have never experienced a situation where a judge wouldn’t say in a situation reasonable accommodations should be made. If they can’t be made by the organizer reasonable compensation should be paid. Whatever is written in the contract doesn’t really matter if it is seen as illegal/unreasonable.

In this case, reasonable accommodations are NOT relevant because de Silva would not be deemed to be disabled. The ADA prescribes what it is to be "disabled" - if that bar has not even been met (and being "sick" with a virus does not meet that bar), reasonable accommodation is not required because de Silva is not (as far as the ADA is concerned) considered "disabled". Accommodations are required for persons with disability - being sick does not constitute a disability. You keep going to "reasonable accommodations" but you have yet to establish or make any reasonable argument as to why the ADA's definition of "disability" would apply to a person with Covid.

Have a read, you might learn something

https://www.ada.gov/pubs/adastatute08.htm

Are all of your posts this stupid? Congrats on getting covid and thinking your experience extrapolates to everyone or that you are now some scientific expert.

You're really caught up in the ADA aspect of this. It’s really not relevant even. The issue is the clause that is the contract that says “if you get Covid during the event you will be dqed” is not legal/an unreasonable expectation of safety. You can’t penalize people for health conditions. It would be like an employer putting in their contract that if you get cancer you will get fired. You can’t do that believe me people tried to lower their health insurance premiums. You can’t penalize people for health conditions and say it’s their fault. No judge ever would side with the wsop completely and just say “public health concerns”. They would have to show they tried to make reasonable accommodations which they couldn’t and then they made reasonable compensation (icm payout). Simply penalizing customers and dqing them is not an adequate response.

So when you got h1n1 during the last pandemic (roughly 10 years ago) it was awful but this pandemic wasn't quite as bad, therefore... we should not worry about any pandemic virus thats killing people? or what is your point here

The onus is on the other players to do the right thing and delay the event or agree to play it online.

I would liken this whole fiasco to having someone accidentally muck the winner by only showing 1 card. Ya it’s well within the rules to keep the pot, but the “right” thing to do is to do the honorable thing and not win on a technicality.

Or it’s like in soccer where there’s an injury and the other team kicks the ball out of bounds to make a sub or they give back the possession.

It’s sportsmanship imo, ya the rules were clear so what. Do the right thing.