Since the Chronicle likes to chime in on all things poker-controversy, here goes: No chops. If the game of poker is to be considered skill and talent, then just stop the chop already. Otherwise, gee, let the Patriots and name-your-opposing-team declare themselves both winners of the Super Bowl. They can play sudden death for the trophy.
While we are on the topic, we really wish there were a way to force disclosure of deal-making and the selling of pieces. If two or more players at a table have a deal in place, or pieces of each other, they are likely changing the way they play. In the interest of game integrity, their opponents should be afforded the same knowledge.
This is not a matter of calling out collusion or consortiums. After all, we are certain this would never happen in a poker game. (Snort). This is a matter of making this a real game, a real sport, something that requires skill, endurance, and focus. Some good people have spent a lot of time in front of judges, attempting to convince law makers that poker is skill. Backroom deals and piece-exchange negate (rhymes with “deflate-gate”) this argument. But we digress. There will be a more comprehensive ranting on this view in the near future. The topic is fraught with counterpoints and the word ‘unless’.
The Chronicle understands the ease, convenience, and need to allow chops in local tournaments which have no cumulative point/results impact. The home casino running tournaments which has no need to track results should be encouraged to facilitate mutually agreed chops. Any tournament where results matter, for any type of cumulative POY, freeroll, Hendon Mob results, satellite opportunity et al should have a standing ‘no chop’ policy standard.
I am sure Matt Savage will take this post under serious consideration.
P.S. The Patriots are the worst.
Fin
Flynn