That makes a lot of sense. If you were the tournament director, would you want more publicity? It sounds like Pesh wanted to complain about the ruling and Effel didn't know what to do or just wanted to go with the rules. And of course he didn't want a blow up.

LOL. You originally brought up the ADA but now it's not even relevant??? OK!

Barring a Covid positive player from a live poker tourney is perfectly reasonable and legal. de Silva is NOT being penalized - he is having the rules (which were well known to him and to others) applied to him, that's it! And seriously mate, firing someone for having cancer and barring a Covid positive player from a live final table is not even remotely the same situation - seriously, give your head a shake!

Reasonable accommodations do not need to be made for everyone for whatever reasons - reasonable accommodations are required in very specific circumstances. A Covid positive player and live poker tourney is not one of those specific circumstances.

Tennis player only get paid if they win. Golfers, ping pong, pool, darts, sailing, surfing, ice dancing etc. They are only getting paid when they win. In the meantime they pay out of their own pockets. We pay the host and staff a fee to accomodate. Even stock brokers pay a fee.

I wonder if anyone of the FT contemplated finding ways to infect other FTers with COVID .

I understand the wish of playing the FT live and I understand the rule. I think the smart thing to do was to also change the date of the event if infections were at a certain level. In that case, it certainly would have been postponed. It's not a smart idea or a good look to be playing this FT right now. There's not a lot of pain to delay it and they are making a bunch of people travel to get to the event.

There is no analogy where players put up a portion of the prize pool. They are significantly different. No broker would be allowed to take your positions and pay you your initial principal.

Adding nothing to the thread other than this is false. Even the crappy 250 events the players get appearance fees.

These are examples to give frame of reference to where contracts like this that cause damage to one party based on health issues the party has have been stricken down. There's really no point arguing this anymore with you because you offer no points other than its written in the contract therefore its gospel. I will bet a large amount of money that any contract that negatively effects a party's existing investment/work/property etc if they get coronavirus is stricken down in court. If you don't think that is the case than you can believe whatever you want.

You have not provided any relevant examples. Firing someone for having cancer because an employer wanted to avoid higher insurance premiums is in no way comparable to the WSOP enforcing it's own rules on a player. Yes, de Silva has been denied the opportunity to make additional money over and above his 9th place money - but that doesn't automatically mean (as a matter of law) that there was a wrong doing or any form of discrimination that requires a legal remedy. Put another way, not all forms of discrimination are in fact illegal! As examples, "no shirt no service" rules, a nightclub that has a 25 and older rule, etc. Life is full of perfectly legal forms of discrimination. Barring a Covid positive player from a live final table would be perfectly acceptable and reasonable as a matter of law.

I don't know if you are a lawyer or just want to be one, but you're clearly trying to establish a wrong doing that prevents de Silva from making additional money. Now, from a legal perspective, is the WSOP denying de Silva the opportunity to make additional money over and above his 9th place winnings? Yes. But that in and of itself does not constitute a tort (i.e. wrong doing) on the part of the WSOP.

the difference with all your guys examples siding with this rule is that no money or investment or work was done prior to the exclusion of the individual. Find one example where there was some value put in before an event occurred and an exclusion like this occurred AFTER and they were not compensated the current value and I will respond.

I agree with you perfectly if the event was day 1 and he tried to enter covid positive and he was barred that is not protected and he has not claim. Hell even if he knew he was going to be covid positive for the event or was documented being reckless he can be ruled at fault, but generally without those things its considered an act of god.There is a difference between being in the middle of a contract and choosing whether or not to start a contract. Once a contract begins there are laws in place to protect both parties. What if the rule stated he received $0? They have to give him current value of his position which is most arguably ICM so I doubt any professional poker would state there is a better measure of his current value.

I'm not a lawyer. I have dealt with a lot of corporate legal disputes. Almost all get settled to be honest. I imagine if this gets to that point it will be settled anyways. Who knows I thought the Vao dispute would be settled but he had pretty damning evidence against him.

But the rule doesn't state he gets ZERO. Give it a rest mate, there is no legal wrong doing here. The only legal wrong doing that is even remotely conceivable in this situation is if someone knowingly/purposefully gave Covid to de Silva - that most definitely could be a lawsuit.

Thanks doctor glad ur experience with covid is the end all be all for people in 20/30s.

Never mind NFL players still complaining about it weeks after. My neighbor is 30 and has brain fog 3-4 weeks after testing negative and still randomly feels out of it. He was perfectly healthy before.

guy thinks his opinions are worth weight in gold when no one really knows if there will be long term problems for people who recovered healthy or not.

I wrote this on 11/13. Let me have my, “I told you so” moment.

The player (and friends) can cry a river all they want but he entered knowing the risks. Everyone did. At least he got 9th place.

It’s a bad beat for sure.

Not penalising Hellmuth for his rant that knocked jcamby out of the main event, overruling the initial Hellmuth penalty for yelling at Dragomir, probably other stuff involving Hellmuth etc.

How did Hellmuth knock out jcamby with a rant?

hard to overlook the rules at this point but when you consider all that goes into putting on a production with the covid **** storm, there're some pretty easy ways to deal with positive tests. how hard would it be to have a table cam, a hole cam and a guy sitting in the chair placing/mucking them? you could charge the guy from his prize pool for the cost of accommodation.

but even if you weren't willing to take on any inconvenience at all and want to harp about how the cams could undermine the integrity of the game, just letting him blind out is way more appropriate. it's so bizarre to penalize people to an even greater extent than for not showing up.

wrt jack effel - will always chime in when the issue comes up, ive had very limited experience with him personally but all instances were pretty bad. very dismissive attitude.

Pot was 3 ways to the 1034ddx flop, Camby had A9dd and checked, next guy had K2dd and bet 3k, Hellmuth minraised to 6k, Camby shoved allin for 25k or so, and Hellmuth immediately started to rant and ***** and complain before the initial bettor had acted. This made it pretty clear that Hellmuth wasn’t going to be calling, which in turn allowed the guy with K2dd to safely call, which he did.

Hellmuth folded and the guy with K2 spiked a 2 on the turn and won the pot, knocking Camby out.

It was egregious, and it almost certainly cost Camby his tournament life. A tournament director was standing right there and he did nothing in terms of penalizing Hellmuth, which shows the favoritism that exists for well-known players in general and for Hellmuth specifically.

To Phil’s credit, he paid Camby’s entry fee into the main event the following year.

You have to be really stupid to not quarantine yourself leading up to an opportunity like this

Can you cite this?

The rules I see say the following (emphasis mine):

"Any player who tests positive for Covid-19 prior to the start of the final table play will be disqualified and receive the minimum final table payout." [Source: https://www.wsop.com/2020/main-event/faqs/]

Unless there's another rule that supersedes this, it could be interpreted as paying out higher than ninth. e.g. Player A gets DQ'd due to COVID, receives 9th-place money. The next day, Player B gets DQ'd due to COVID. The new minimum payout is that of eighth place. And so on and so on.

I'm not saying that's the rule, either, but it certainly could get interpreted in that fashion.

So when it turns out you have long term effects from having had COVID and will require health care related to the effects that will cost money that you don't have, you will understandably refuse treatment for your overblown circus of a disease, right? RIGHT???

-BD

From the actual text of the regulation, not the FAQ:

Players must undergo a COVID-19 screening prior to participating in the live event. Players who refuse the screening or any player who tests positive for COVID-19 will be excluded from the live event and awarded the minimum 9th place prize money.

https://www.wsop.com/2020/main-event...nv%20terms.pdf

I’ll be fine. Thanks.

Considering hes like 80% vs that particular hand he should be thanking hellmuth lol.

Also everyone suggesting "why dont you just infect your opponents to gain equity" ok then why dont you just ddos your opponents at an online poker final table? cuz both are illegal and cheating, most people dont want to win that way, they want to win legit

Is this rule going to only be for the rona, or is any other infectious disease included? What if I get something else, is that okay?

I agree with the poster who gave the playbook on how to almost fully eliminate the chance of testing positive.

I would have made the trip to Vegas the next day and rented a house. Then for the next few weeks I'd order zero contact take out, play on WSOP.com and walk around by myself in the desert for exercise.

Someone with kids may not be in a position to do that though.

Still the rule is 100% fair, can't have someone with Covid play and ICM should not be paid out. An amateur big stack could possibly just say I have Covid and I'm not showing up, please wire me 600K or whatever the number may be.

How many times did they repeat the test? many false positives....


There are some horse races where owners pay entry fee and becomes prize pool.