Poker Articles

F-Bomb Rule: Part II (Fat Man)
By Tim Lavalli

In F-Bomb Rule: Part I (Little Boy) I discussed the F-Bomb rule and the multiple F-Bomb penalties received by Mike Matusow during the main event of the 2005 WSOP. The second infamous F-Bomb incident at the 2005 WSOP is not so well publicized, ESPN had already called it a day and thus, there is no videotape. And unlike the first incident, which had little impact on the player and the outcome, this penalty made for high drama and a reassessment of the implementation of the F-Bomb penalty.

So, let’s get the set-up correct; I have heard far too many stories that don’t even have the players or event correct. It happened at the final table of the Pot Limit Omaha Event #35. The final table was down to heads up between Vinnie Vinh and Rafi Amit. First place paid $511,835; second paid $282,280, so we are talking about a heads up match for a difference of $229,555 and a World Series of Poker bracelet. According to observers the boyz were talking to each other but nothing particularly nasty or out of line at all. Rafi had been the chipleader for most of the day before they got down to two players. The heads up had been going awhile and the chip lead had changed hands several times.

After one hand, won by Vinnie, the chip lead once again shifts to Vinnie but it is very, very close. Rafi leans back in his chair, puts his hands behind his head and looks up at the ceiling. Meanwhile, the dealer scrambles, riffles, shuffles and deals the next hand. As Vinnie picks up his hole cards, Rafi let out a long sigh and says quite loudly to the ceiling: “F***!” Rafi then looks down, checks his hole cards and begins to play the hand. Jack Effel, assistant tournament director, is announcing this final table and he sees “dozens of heads snap around” at Rafi’s use of the F-Bomb. The violation is clear, there will be a penalty but a hand is in play and must be completed. Jack waits for the hand to play out and then informs Rafi that he now has a 10-minute ‘away from the table’ penalty to serve.

Several things must be taken into consideration here. First, this is a heads up final table for a WSOP bracelet. Second, there is not a doubt in anyone’s mind, except perhaps Rafi’s, that a penalty is going to be assessed. Third (and this is a biggie!) on the hand that had begun before or as the F-Bomb was delivered---both players get all their chips in the middle. Finally, it is not a written rule (yet) what to do when there is a violation during the play of a hand; it is clear that enforcement has gone the way of completing the hand, which is as it should be, before any penalties are assessed. There is a clear tendency of tournament staff not to kill a hand in play whenever possible. So let’s take a look at what happened.

First, Rafi cannot believe that a penalty is being called on him when it’s heads-up for a WSOP bracelet. He actually does not believe it is happening. Second, when it becomes clear that there really is going to be a penalty; Mr. Amit’s friends and followers enter the tournament area to “discuss” the point. This discussion leads to security being called to restore order. Leave it to ‘enough said’ that violence was avoided but that if the F-Bomb rule applied to the crowd at the rail, the event would have been finished without an audience.

Speaking of applying the rule…. Just how do you “deal” with dealing heads up for ten minutes when the only action is going to be raise by Vinnie and the dealer folds Rafi’s hand and rakes the blinds and antes to Vinnie? No one had ever considered this, so TD Jack Effel had to on-the-spot realize that he was going to need to stand there and be sure that the hands were delivered and executed by the dealer in a “normal” time. Not too fast, which would benefit Vinnie, nor too slow to lessen the effects of the penalty to Rafi. Each hand is dealt out, Rafi’s hand is killed, the cut card is removed from the bottom of the deck, the deck is dropped in the muck, the chips are shoved to Vinnie, the muck is scrambled, the blinds and antes are put out and the deal process begins again: not too fast, not too slow.

Lost among all of this furor is Vinnie Vinh and his place in this entire incident. I had a private interview with Vinnie at the Caesars Indiana WSOP Circuit event a few weeks ago. By Vinnie’s own words, confirmed by TD Jack Effel, he did nothing. Jack was standing at the table, he assessed the penalty. Vinnie did not call for a penalty. In fact, the only comment Vinnie made during the “discussion” about the penalty, was when Rafi asked him about the it, Vinnie said: “If it were my choice we would just play and be done with the game; but its not my tournament, I don’t run it, I just play.” So all the noize on the Internet over the next several days about Vinnie’s involvement in the penalty was just Internet gossip, actually more like cyber crap. About the only thing you can say about Vinnie’s actions was that he had the good sense to stand up and leave the immediate tournament area during the ‘discussion’ that led to security being called. I will get back to Vinnie Vinh in a moment; if you are a real poker strategy fan don’t miss his final comments on this hand. But first, the F-Bomb implications.

I have previously reported (http://www.pokerpages.com/articles/archives/lavalli01.htm ) that this incident caused the assembled TDs at the WSOP to modify the F-Bomb rule. At least for now if there are less then five players at the table and a time penalty is going to be assessed it will not be ten minutes. The new rule, which the Tournament Director’s Association will consider and probably approve in the near future, is: the penalty will be two rounds of blinds. So, if five players are left you miss 10 hands, 4 players 8, etc. The heads up the penalty would be 4 hands. Of course, if you get more than one penalty, you could sit out longer. Clearly the TDs recognize that the rules need to be both flexible and changeable as new situations arise.

Did this whole messy incident affect the outcome of the WSOP bracelet? Well, no. When the penalty was assessed Rafi had 1.5 million in chips and Vinnie had about 75K; it was by any measure a huge lead. During the ten minutes, Rafi was blinded off 192,000 in antes and blinds. So after the penalty, Vinnie Vinh had around 250K and was still down over 5 to 1. Over the next 45 minutes (what TD Jack Effel called: “a very tense 45 minutes”) Vinnie got up to about 400K once but never higher and Rafi Amit did eventually take down the title and the bracelet. So in the end, the penalty did not make a significant difference in the final result of the match. And the TDs recognized that the F-Bomb rule needed some ‘final table’ adjustment but did they go far enough? One wonders whether fixing the F-Bomb rule will ever go far enough towards making or remaking the distinction between playing poker in a casino and playing bingo in the church basement. Just how good or bad, silly or stupid is the F-Bomb rule? You decide and when you do, be sure to let the floor staff at your local cardroom know how you feel.

I promised some poker tactics from Vinnie Vinh, so put on your thinking caps. You know sometimes you see a hand played out, usually by the professional player, and you think: “Man, he is thinking way ahead of my game.” or “Wow, I never even considered those other chipstacks when she made that reraise.” So, let’s go back to the hand being played out just before the penalty was given to Rafi Amit. The facts are all included above; did you get them? Did you catch ‘the move never made’? I didn’t and I was shocked when Vinnie pointed it out to me. I said that both players got all of their chips in the pot on that hand. I also mentioned that on the previous hand Vinnie had taken the chip lead and that after the hand, just as the penalty began, Vinnie had a super short stack of about 75K to Rafi’s 1.5M. Got it yet?

Prior to that last hand, Vinnie had more than half of the chips in play. He, in fact, had Rafi covered by “about 75K,” which means that if Vinnie, knowing a 10 minute penalty was coming, had simply folded that big all-in hand, he would have had 10 minutes (192,000) of blinds and antes given to him when he was already the slight chipleader. If Vinnie had folded that hand before the penalty then after the ten-minute penalty it would not have been Rafi 1.35M and Vinnie 250K. No, it would have been Vinnie 1.0M and Rafi 600K, a very, very different situation. So why didn’t Vinnie just fold? And, oh by the way, would you have folded knowing your opponent was about to get a penalty?

Well, Vinnie Vinh told me that he was sure Jack was going to give the penalty, he could see Jack when the big, loud F-Bomb came out of Rafi’s mouth and he could see Jack was going to give the penalty. Too many people heard the F-Bomb and enforcement was inevitable. Two things prevented Vinnie from laying that hand down based on the impending penalty. First, Vinnie admits that he had a playable hand and “under normal circumstances” it was a hand he would play and under those tournament circumstances a hand he would play all-in. Second, Vinnie felt that taking advantage of the impending penalty was clearing shooting an angle. It wasn’t illegal, angle shooting is by definition not illegal, but it clearly was not in the spirit of fair play in the game. Vinnie was quite adamant about this: “I was not the bad guy here and I am not that type of player.” Vinnie strongly felt that taking advantage of the coming penalty was not something he would do; it is not part of his game or his character. I am sure others would feel differently. The more interesting questions are: Did you pick up on the opportunity when the facts of the hand were laid out? Vinnie saw it immediately and made his decision; I and a lot of other folks missed it completely, until Vinnie pointed it out. How about you?

Oh, one final comment on the F-Bomb rule. If and when the television networks starting ponying up some money for the prize pool, like they do for every other televised competitive sporting event, then I change my vote. If TV and the sponsors want to quit ripping off the poker players (read: free talent) and do the right thing and pay for the right to show these players (pay the prize pool not the casino); if and when that happens then I support the F-Bomb rule and other restrictions on abusive behavior. You want to ‘clean it up’ for television, fine but pay the players you are using as your talent.

(Just to avoid any unimplied insult to players or tournament staff. The use of "Little Boy" and “Fat Man” in the article titles are references to the nicknames given to the nuclear “bombs” dropped by the United State Air Force over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.)

Comments? Please send them to Editor@PokerPages.com.