The Waiting Game

Was watching PokerStars’ Spring Championship of Online Poker last night, one of those H.O.R.S.E. events (the $1,000+$50 buy-in one) in which TeamPokerStars pro Daniel “KidPoker” Negreanu had made it down to the cash bubble with a relatively short stack. They weren’t quite at hand-for-hand play yet when a player at Negreanu’s table with an even shorter stack began stalling every hand. And with the extra-long time banks given to players for the SCOOP events, some of the others at the table were beginning to get antsy.

A couple of comments were made, then, after a while, Negreanu couldn’t resist chiming in as well. “i wish we could bar guys that do that for life,” he said, referring to what the staller was doing explicitly as “cheating.” He suggested a possible penalty: “put something in the security software for repeat offenders. they keep stalling, they get dealt out for a level.”

The staller defended his actions, pointing out that it was within the rules for him to take as long as he was allowed. Negreanu wasn’t hearing it. “guys like this in the old days would totally get a beat down, for real,” he continued. “and if I have anything to do [with] it i’d like to give penalties to guys who shoot that angle.”

Since there was a lot of time with nothing else to do, the conversation continued with several players joining in, as did a couple of railbirds. Negreanu noted how “only low lifes” stalled and that “today so many younger kids dont get that its wrong so its a real problem.” Eventually the bubble finally did burst, and afterwards the player who had been stalling said he was sorry, though continued to maintain it was within his rights to stall.

“ya why say sorry?” typed Negreanu. “you are NOT sorry. You do it, and will do it again.”

The debate went on a little while longer before Negreanu decided he’d had enough, saying “this will tilt me for real” if he were to continue the discussion. A few more points were thrown around, then a railbird suggested the player in question “is going to be part of a Daniel blog.” Will have to keep an eye out for that.

After several minutes, the bubble finally burst, with both the staller and Negreanu having made the money. In fact -- speaking of cheating -- Justin “ZeeJustin” Bonomo, Negreanu’s All Strategy co-host who has recently been allowed back on the site after being banned for over three years for multi-accounting, was the bubble boy, going out in 65th.

As it happened, Negreanu would end up busting the player who had been stalling, but it was basically just happenstance that caused it. Both still had similarly small stacks, and they got heads up in a stud hand in which the staller was all in on third street with a pair of split kings to Negreanu’s three-flush. Negreanu drew out his flush, and the other fellow was out in 49th. Negreanu would last a little while longer before finally going out in 37th.

I found the whole exchange interesting to follow for a few reasons. One was just the spectacle of seeing Negreanu become so animated. Was perhaps a little untoward of him as a PokerStars representative to be getting into it with another player like that, but with Phil Hellmuth setting the standard for conduct with his poorly-typed screeds over on UltimateBet I think it is probably acceptable to allow KidPoker to blow off a little steam like this once in a while.

His comments suggesting possible changes in the rules (and implying his own potential influence for helping such changes to occur) were intriguing, too. My instinctive response was to side with the staller, frankly, and not to pay much heed to Negreanu’s claim that stalling was “cheating.” Nor was I all that moved by the talk of the “old days” and so forth, although I do appreciate how the generations tend to differ over what is acceptable and what is not.

What do you think? That such a tactic is squarely within the current rules seems to make the debate mostly moot, unless someone wants to make it a matter of “etiquette” or “courtesy” or whatever.

But what about Negreanu’s suggestion about changing the rules? Should they? Could they?