The Swap That Stirred Up The Poker World
8 years ago22 Jan
The poker world is enraged. A few days back, an interesting bit of news broke out telling the story of an unusual substitution during the opening event of the 2016 Aussie Millions Poker Championship. It seems a pregnant woman, who was playing Event #1, went into labour and the tournament director allowed her husband to swap places and play in her place. The husband, Peter Sheary, ended up finishing in 25th place and won a prize of AU$6,495.
Unfortunately, some poker media sites didn’t present the facts as they actually happened and preferred to hyperbolize in order to make the headlines. We at PokerTube aren’t fond of this particular strategy so how about getting things straight first?
What Really Happened?
In spite of some reports saying that Katrina Sheary went into labour while actually playing the open, or that she was ‘deep’ into the money at the time of the unusual (from a poker standpoint) event, the real facts are actually less dramatic.
Indeed, Katrina did play in the tournament but only in the third Day 1. According to PokerNews Live Reporting, she got through the day with a stack of 38,500 chips. It was after Day 1c - probably in the comfort of her home - that she gave birth to a healthy baby boy which means she didn’t go into labour at the poker table. The tournament director was informed during Day 1d and allowed her husband, Peter, to play in her place on Day 2 which means she never reached the money zone, her husband did.
The substitute, Peter, played the whole Day 2, built a healthy stack, and survived the bubble. He got fairly deep into the money finishing 25th and cashing in AU$6,495.
But how can this be? How could they allow a swap? Apparently there is a special rule.
What Do The Rules Say?
If we look into the Aussie Millions General Poker Tournaments Terms & Conditions, we will find this particular rule:
At the discretion of the Tournament Director, an entrant in a particular Tournament (or Satellite) may nominate a substitute, provided the person nominated as the substitute has not already entered the Tournament (or Satellite)."
And there’s more:
Where a substitute is nominated, entry into a Tournament (or Satellite) will be transferred to the substitute and the substitute will act on behalf of the entrant, commencing or continuing play in the entrant’s stead and using any applicable bank of Tournament Chips allocated to or accumulated by an entrant."
In other words, at Aussie Millions Poker Championship at least, swapping places is allowed as long as the tournament director sees nothing wrong with it. And since a woman had just given birth, it was more than reasonable to accept this unusual substitution, GIVEN the terms and conditions presented above. Yet many members of the poker community saw this swap as a clear foul.
Is The Poker Community Overreacting?
On the 2+2 forums, there is already a trending thread about this matter. Some of the users even went as far as calling the move cheating, angle shooting, or even part of a predefined plan to make the money.
Others thought about repercussions and setting dangerous precedents. Like this (posted by Kebabkungen):
Scenario: You are playing with a pregnant woman who is obviously a recreational and pretty bad. She luckboxes her way all the way to Heads-Up against you. Once Heads-Up, she goes into labour. Once she’s been rushed to the hospital, Scott Seiver sits down at the table. It was his wife, and therefore, he’s allowed to take over.Yes, it’s a contrived scenario, but would anyone seriously be OK with this?"
Or this (posted by illdonk):
What if during the pre-final-table break the woman gets married to Phil Ivey at one of those drive-through chapels then comes back to the table and takes labor-inducing medication?I think they really should have considered every possible related hypothetical situation before making a decision on a possibly one-time event."
Of course (luckily for all of us) illdonk was very much ironical when he posted the above situation. However many weren’t and took the matter very seriously. For example, Team PokerStars Pro Liv Boeree posted on her Facebook page this opinion:
The comments that followed were very much in line with the 2+2 users indicating that Katrina should have blinded out of the tournament and warning the poker community about the possible precedents.
Editor’s Take: Poker Mom Of The Year?
But enough about precedents and hypothetical situations! How about taking the matter lightly? While some claims stating that Katrina Sheary shouldn’t have been allowed to play the tournament in the first place are very reasonable, there is no need to overreact. Yes, the poker swap was within the Aussie Millions rules, it’s not like the organizers broke their own rules. No, this isn’t a universal rule, the World Series of Poker for example doesn’t allow swapping places.
So let’s not make a big fuss out of it. How about maybe congratulating the couple and applauding the courageous woman who wanted to have some fun and play poker while waiting to give birth? Maybe give her a title like the Poker Mom of the Year or at least giving the couple a well-deserving break.
Poker is still a game and let’s not forget we’re in this game not only because of the money or the competition, but also because we’re empathic human beings.
Where do you sit in this debate? Do you take this matter seriously or lightly? Please share your opinion with the rest of us.
Comments
You need to be logged in to post a new comment