- Commissioner’s statement on Ventura, Marte
- Ronnie O’Sullivan: Masters champion ‘felt so vulnerable’ in final
- Arron Fletcher Wins 2017 WSOP International Circuit Marrakech Main Event ($140,224)
- Smith challenges Warner to go big in India
- Moncada No. 1 on MLB Pipeline’s Top 10 2B Prospects list
- Braves land 2 on MLB Pipeline’s Top 10 2B Prospects list
- Kingery makes MLB Pipeline’s Top 10 2B Prospects list
- New Zealand wrap up 2-0 after Bangladesh implosion
- Mathews, Pradeep, Gunathilaka to return to Sri Lanka
- Elliott hopes for rain for Poli
A PokerNews Debate: Did William Kassouf Deserve A Penalty?
- Updated: September 23, 2016
Watching Episode 3 and 4 of the World Series of Poker on ESPN this past week left many players puzzled, and in some cases, angry. Angry and also pretty darn entertained. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that the altercation between Stacy Matuson and William Kassouf and the subsequent penalty doled out by tournament director Jack Effel was what behind those feelings. To many, it felt unjust, unfair and against what so many believe is good for the game.
That being said, let’s dissect the rule before we debate this one.
First of all, if the question would’ve been, “Was Jack Effel within his rights when he gave Kassouf a penalty?” the answer is much easier. Absolutely. Officially, the tournament’s floors and director can do whatever they want. Rule 111 of the rule book makes this absolutely clear:
The sole and absolute discretion part of that rule kind of makes all the other rules on the subject irrelevant. Even so, other rules the WSOP has compiled over the years back up Effel’s decision to give Kassouf a one-round penalty:
William Kassouf was heads-up in a pot with Matuson and she still had to act, so exception 1 didn’t apply. There were still at least 200 players left in the tournament, so exception 2 didn’t apply either. Kassouf attempted to advise Matuson so he broke point b of rule 113.
While some don’t agree with Jack Effel that Kassouf was taunting his opponent by making hand gestures, one could certainly interpret him screaming “9-high like a boss!” after the hand was finished, that way.
This one is easy as well, he broke rule 116 by excessively chattering; no doubt about it.
Effel, according to William Kassouf in Daniel Negreanu’s podcast, said the following on camera:
He admitted on camera that I wasn’t actually breaking any rules. […] he said ‘Listen, you’re a smart guy, you’re a lawyer, you know what you’re doing, you’re getting under the player’s skin, and you’ve taken their chips, and you’re getting them frustrated. While you’re not actually breaking any WSOP rules, you’re bending them to the max. You’re forcing me to intervene for the integrity of the game and sportsmanship behavior at the table.”
(29:37 into the show)
“Your speech play strategy is too advanced for the WSOP rules”
(42:49 into the show)
So while Effel said this, according to Kassouf, he wasn’t right according to his own rule book. Unless they changed the rules in the official PDF document on the site since the tournament ended, the rule book clearly gives Effel every right to give Kassouf a one-round penalty.
But the question today isn’t, “Was Jack Effel right to give Kassouf a penalty?” The question is, “Did William Kassouf Deserve A Penalty?”
No, Kassouf …