Influencing Action: Poker’s Chronically Under-Policed Problem

Published on December 8th, 2025

Something Irrational?

A few weeks ago, Patrick Leonard put a question to the Twitterati. He asked:

“What’s something irrational that really tilts you in poker? I hate [when] on the river the dealers count down the remaining deck whilst people are thinking. I know they have to do it / [it’s] their job, but [it] always drives me irrationally tilted.”

The responses were, for the most part, much like Leonard’s example, a collection of examples that I personally found very rational. Breaking a player’s concentration while he is in the tank could have a massive effect on his final decision and the outcome. The vast majority of players instinctively recognise this as a hush comes over even the rowdiest table once a pot begins to bloat.

Now I do realize that the live poker environment is not like the conditions created for over the board chess. It’s a messier beast with a multitude of potential distractions. Nonetheless, interference ought to be minimized, especially in key moments. I think the crux of Leonard’s issue, and why I agree with him, is that action shouldn’t be but sometimes is influenced by external forces, even something as benign as a dealer counting down the deck.

I offered my own particular bugbear to the thread. I tweeted: “… I literally want to drop kick across the table when a player is tanking say on the button after I shove in early and he’s commenting on my range with two [players] left to act. [The] Floor will always say ‘cmon now don’t do that’ whereas they should be snap giving penalties.” This issue was fresh in my mind as I had just had an altercation with a player and member of the floor staff at the Malta Poker Festival. It also reminded me of another incident, during a UKIPT side event in London in 2012.

Influencing Action at the Malta Poker Festival

A few weeks ago, I was at the final table of the Scandinavian Open Poker Championship at the Malta Poker Festival. There were 8 players left, the average stack was 9 big blinds and I bet 5 of my 6 big blinds from under the gun. The action folded around to the button who started to break down the range of hands he believed that I would have in that spot.

“What are you doing?”, I said to him, after which I threw a glance to the tournament director who was standing behind the dealer. Throwing his cards away, he continued to wax lyrical about my possible holdings. After the blinds folded, I asked the TD if he was going to at least have a word with the player on the button. The TD instead had a word with me, telling me that I was out of line to make an issue out of what had happened.

In my opinion, and I don’t think this is controversial, influencing action is a big deal in poker. It is the reason there is a rule against speaking during multi-way pots. Now, of course, if a player is seeking some basic information pertinent to the hand, say enquiring about a players stack size or asking the dealer to spread the pot, that is fine. However, talking about the contents of their hand or the ranges of their opponents is beyond the Pale.

To say that I was angry at both the player and TD would be an understatement. I looked up the player on the Hendon Mob database and he has been playing live poker for at least 7 years. He should certainly know better. The TD is also experienced and while it is the job of the players to protect one another, it is the job of the TD to enforce the rules.

Influencing Action at UKIPT London

The other incident that sprung to the forefront of my mind was from a side event at the UKIPT London in 2012 when a member of Team Pokerstars got a tongue-lashing from me after the following hand.

With seven left on the bubble of another shallow-stacked final table, I shoved from the Hijack for 4.2 big blinds. The action folded to the big blind who asked for a count. As the dealer reached across to grab my chips, the patched up pro in the small blind (who had an even shorter stack than me) casually elbow-nudged and then shrugged to the player in the big blind, saying “it’s only about three big blinds”.

“Oh, okay then”, said the player in the big blind who immediately flicked in a chip, after which, the count was completed by the dealer who gave the player the correct information. The following exchange ensued:

Big Blind: “Oh, that’s more than I thought.”
Dealer: “You made the call!”
Small Blind: “It’s pretty much the same amount.”
Me: “It most certainly is not and you shouldn’t have stuck your nose in.”

My King-Queen offsuit went to showdown versus the big blind’s Eight-Six offsuit. Fortunately I held but it left a bad taste in my mouth so I called the floor to adjudicate on what had just happened. The player in the small blind was given a warning not to do it again.

Should it be a Penalty?

I reached out to a couple of tournament directors about these two incidents, curious about what actions if any they might take differently. Both agreed that they were bad situations but both also acknowledged that it is the type of thing that is rarely, if ever, escalated by a dealer to the floor.

So my question to you the reader is twofold: Why is that and is it rational or irrational that I am tilted so much by it?

David is a professional poker player, writer and commentator. He has written over 800 blogs and articles on poker; including news, opinion and strategy. He is the producer and host of the 3-time GPI Global Poker Award winning podcast ‘The Chip Race.’ In 2025, he was nominated for the GPI Global Poker Award for journalism. David was a brand ambassador for Unibet Poker from 2017 until 2025. He is currently a Team Pro ambassador for PokerStars.