WPT to Test Shot Clock, Issue Splits Players

While the majority of players voted in favour of introducing the Shot Clock, others fear it would slow down live tournament play even more.

[3]

After conducting a voting among the players of the WPT LAPC festival, WPT has announced that the Shot Clock would be tested at the stops of the series. The concept is as follows:

1. Players would have a 30-second clock to act on their hands. If they didn't act in that time span, their hand would be declared dead and automatically folded.
2. Each player would receive two "Time Buttons" to use each day of a tournament for especially tough decisions. The "Time Button" would have to be introduced before the 30-second clock expired and would give the player an additional 60 seconds to act. Players could use one or both on a particular hand, but after using them, the player would not be able to receive any additional time.

At the LAPC, 80% of players voted in favour of the introduction of the Shot Clock; however, a number of community members, including renowned pros like Marvin Rettenmaier do oppose it: they say that players would always use up the maximum amount of time allowed, effectively slowing down tournaments even more, achieving quite the contrary result as opposed to its intentional goal.

Still, apparently even the WSOP management is considering the introduction of the clock. Executive Director Ty Stewart commented as follows:

“We are watching it closely. We agree with trying to encourage 'fast play' and may experiment with a clock on the Circuit this year where there are smaller fields. I have observed mixed results to date on both the operation of it and the field sizes for such events. Generally, we want the WSOP to be a fun, welcoming environment. We have very high percentages of recreational players, speaking dozens of languages, who have never played under a shot clock. We're under the mentality that more penalties and more dead hands are bad. We are not going to rush to change anything until we see how people react to it.”

Meanwhile, some alternative ideas have surfaced, most notable that of Andy Frankenberger. He argues that the speed of live tournaments indeed needs to be increased but it is neither the Shot Clock, which puts too much pressure on recreational players, nor the current practice, which is slow and may be used in an unfair way, that is most effective. Instead, Frankenberger proposes the following:

“My idea involves two minor but critical changes:

1. Empower the dealer to call the clock without involving the floor
2. Require that a second person "confirm" the clock being called in order to initiate the process.
   

Let's look at how these changes can address the three flaws I identified with the current process.

• Players will be far less intimidated to call the clock because they know that for clock to actually be called, another player at the table will have to second the motion and they will not be the "one" who called clock. They will be part of a consensus, and it's tough for players to argue with a consensus. Over time, it will be viewed less as unsportsmanlike and more as what it should be — a necessary part of the game.
• The process will be much faster if the floor doesn't have to come over to initiate the clock process. If we are willing to discuss the implementation of a shot clock, which would empower the dealer at each table to regularly declare a hand dead if the clock expires, why not discuss allowing the dealer to count down the clock and declare a hand dead in the (much more rare) instance where multiple players have called clock.
• Requiring a minimum of two people to call the clock prevents a single player from initiating the clock countdown inappropriately.”

It remains to be seen which of these concepts will eventually be implemented.