|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 2/13/2012 2:21:04 PM PACIFIC |
 Is this a form of cheating?, ShootEmUp, 22. Oct 2003 06:54 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Recently while I was playing in a 75 - 150 short handed game where I was the favorite I realized that the other 4 players in the game were all friends. I play with these guys all the time in a full game and we are rarely short handed and I have never seen anything out of the ordinary with them cheating in a full game. Well after 10 minutes of playing short I left the game because: These players were chopping their blinds with each other when I was not in the blind and if 1 of them raised they checked it down after the flop if I was not in the hand. So either I was playing or it was check check check or chop. Well I lost my cool and told them what I thought. In a full game they also check it down to each other and don't raise each others blinds. Again if someone is in the middle of this I have not seen 1 player be out of line with his bets and raises to build a pot for 1 another. This sucks and is no way to play poker and it really bothered me. I have quit the game completely where I still believe I am a winner in the game but I hate to feel cheated and let them have the edge. Small edges can lead to big profits. If I had 4 friends that would always check it down I could raise with second pair then check all the way. I have discussed this with a friend Grant who plays in the game and he feels that it is not a huge disadvantage but I tend to disagree. Should I play in this game ? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 07:02 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 06:54 ShootEmUp wrote: > Recently while I was playing in a 75 - 150 short handed game where I was the > favorite I realized that the other 4 players in the game were all friends. > I play with these guys all the time in a full game and we are rarely short > handed and I have never seen anything out of the ordinary with them cheating in > a full game. > Well after 10 minutes of playing short I left the game because: > These players were chopping their blinds with each other when I was not in the > blind and if 1 of them raised they checked it down after the flop if I was not > in the hand. > So either I was playing or it was check check check or chop. > Well I lost my cool and told them what I thought. > In a full game they also check it down to each other and don't raise each > others blinds. > Again if someone is in the middle of this I have not seen 1 player be out of > line with his bets and raises to build a pot for 1 another. > This sucks and is no way to play poker and it really bothered me. > I have quit the game completely where I still believe I am a winner in the > game but I hate to feel cheated and let them have the edge. > Small edges can lead to big profits. > If I had 4 friends that would always check it down I could raise with second > pair then check all the way. > I have discussed this with a friend Grant who plays in the game and he feels > that it is not a huge disadvantage but I tend to disagree. > Should I play in this game ? do not play in that type of game, your friend is totally wrong. this is very common in tournys as well, "soft playing" . soft playing is unethical and can be considered cheating if its a tourny (i think) to have a whole table soft playing against you is insane. i guess they thought you wouldnt notice and were a sucker or something. ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ShootEmUp, 22. Oct 2003 07:11 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| This is the only live game bigger than 20 40 in the area so It is a tougher decision. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Angel, 22. Oct 2003 07:17 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I've read in books that chopping the blinds and checking it down can make others think they are being cheated but I found that difficult to believe. A bit less difficult now. It was over a period of 10 minutes. How many hands are we talking about? I realize I wasn't there but from the details you included I think you over-reacted. Checking a hand down is more often a sign of weak play than cheating. When people cheat they tend to use more subterfuge. As for chopping the blinds - thats pretty standard, particularly in locales that have a 'no flop no drop' rule, or with weak players who don't know how to play heads up. Again, people tend to be more deceptive when they are cheating. So, since checking a hand down is normally a sign of a weak play - and chopping blinds is usually a sign of weak players - I would likely pay good money to sit in this game. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ShootEmUp, 22. Oct 2003 07:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Angel we are talking about a 75 - 150 game that serious money is at stake. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 07:26 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 07:24 ShootEmUp wrote: > Angel we are talking about a 75 - 150 game that serious money is at stake. thats funny, i siad the same thing at the same time!!! ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Angel, 22. Oct 2003 07:29 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 07:24 ShootEmUp wrote: > Angel we are talking about a 75 - 150 game that serious money is at stake. Ok, then it would be all the more desirable to play against weak players. I play $75/$150 - or actually $80/$160, I am familiar with the structure of the game at that level. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 07:32 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 07:29 Angel wrote: > on 22. Oct 2003 07:24 ShootEmUp wrote: > > Angel we are talking about a 75 - 150 game that serious money is at stake. > > Ok, then it would be all the more desirable to play against weak players. I play $75/$150 - > or actually $80/$160, I am familiar with the structure of the game at that level. i disagree ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 07:39 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 07:29 Angel wrote: > on 22. Oct 2003 07:24 ShootEmUp wrote: > > Angel we are talking about a 75 - 150 game that serious money is at stake. > > Ok, then it would be all the more desirable to play against weak players. I play $75/$150 - > or actually $80/$160, I am familiar with the structure of the game at that level. it is not "desirable" to be at a table full of people soft playing against you, imo ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Angel, 22. Oct 2003 07:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Just let me know what casino and I'll come and admit I was wrong in person ;) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 07:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Definition of terms: softplay- to check into or not bet when checked to by another player/players in order to minimized yours or their loss for that hand. Mild form could be not betting if on the flop the only players in are known to each other. Severe form could include betting/raising agressively when unknown/unliked players are in the hand then checking down after they drop out. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 07:43 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 07:40 Angel wrote: > Just let me know what casino and I'll come and admit I was wrong in person ;) like grant said, your always right Angel. ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ReMMy, 22. Oct 2003 07:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I don't understand, you're at a huge disadvantage. You are forced to fight for your blinds every round, they simply put their best hands up against your blinds, not only do you have to go against the best hand at the table, but the other blind as well, who will simply stick around if he hits, and fold if not. The only thing that would make it worthwhile would be if they were bad players, which hasn't been discussed much, obviously we know that they play a lot, but he also said he was the "favorite", maybe a little more clarification on their skill level would help us... Again, unless I was signifigantly better than all of them, I would feel at a disadvantage. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 07:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 07:45 ReMMy wrote: > I don't understand, you're at a huge disadvantage. You are forced to fight for your blinds every round, they > simply put their best hands up against your blinds, not only do you have to go against the best hand at the > table, but the other blind as well, who will simply stick around if he hits, and fold if not. > > The only thing that would make it worthwhile would be if they were bad players, which hasn't been discussed > much, obviously we know that they play a lot, but he also said he was the "favorite", maybe a little more > clarification on their skill level would help us... > > Again, unless I was signifigantly better than all of them, I would feel at a disadvantage. yeah, if his favorite status trumps these soft players (potentially colluders) then it might be ok to stay in. if he has that much of an advantage of skill, he should stay. ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Angel, 22. Oct 2003 08:02 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| "You are forced to fight for your blinds every round" They've been playing short ten minutes. Every round is, at most, one round. I'm not trying to nit-pick but it seems that everyone has adopted the initial posters position that this is collusion. I don't think it is. His point is well taken, "we are taking about serious money" - in my experience when the game is big and cheating happens - it is significantly more deceptive than checking it down or chopping blinds. Usually, in my experience, the aforementioned actions are indicative of someone playing higher than they should who can't handle the fluctuations of short-handed play or they are simply afraid they will be outplayed. If I know that I am a favorite at this game - I stay whether they chop blinds and soft-play each other or not. I'm not saying I'm right - just that I would stay. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 08:06 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:02 Angel wrote: > "You are forced to fight for your blinds every round" > > They've been playing short ten minutes. Every round is, at most, one round. I'm not trying to nit-pick but it > seems that everyone has adopted the initial posters position that this is collusion. I don't think it is. His > point is well taken, "we are taking about serious money" - in my experience when the game is big and cheating > happens - it is significantly more deceptive than checking it down or chopping blinds. Usually, in my experience, > the aforementioned actions are indicative of someone playing higher than they should who can't handle the > fluctuations of short-handed play or they are simply afraid they will be outplayed. > > If I know that I am a favorite at this game - I stay whether they chop blinds and soft-play each other or not. > I'm not saying I'm right - just that I would stay. i agree. who wouldnt agree? but it is an annoying atmosphere to play in. : ) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 07:46 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 07:40 Angel wrote: > Just let me know what casino and I'll come and admit I was wrong in person ;) so you think its an advantage to have 5 guys at at a table soft playing? im confused as to how that is weak. they are conspiring against you, that is not weak. becuase they chop the blinds does not make them weak. becuase they check down when shootemup is not in the hand does not make them weak. if they are playing like this, then they can also collude as well as soft play and that is not a good game to be in imo ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Mark, 22. Oct 2003 08:07 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > so you think its an advantage to have 5 guys at at a table soft playing? I would rather play against passive opponents than aggressive ones. You gain may be less, but so is your risk. >im confused as to how that is weak. > they are conspiring against you, ShootEmUp never said they were conspiring agaisnt him. that is not weak. becuase they chop the blinds does not make them weak. No, it doesn't make them weak but it does increase his hands/hour. > becuase they check down when shootemup is not in the hand does not make them weak. > if they are playing like this, then they can also collude as well as soft play and that is not a good game to > be in imo > Yes, but if they are not colluding and Shoot has an edge, then his edge will be magnified due to the increase in volume. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Mark, 22. Oct 2003 08:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Modest mice Why? Where is the harm in playing agaisnt passive opponents? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 08:07 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:03 Mark wrote: > Modest mice > > Why? Where is the harm in playing agaisnt passive opponents? there is difference between passive and semi colluding known as soft playing. there is harm. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Mark, 22. Oct 2003 08:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Mice But what is the harm if they are not taking advantage of it? I think you are judging the actions and not the effects. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 08:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:20 Mark wrote: > Mice > > But what is the harm if they are not taking advantage of it? > > I think you are judging the actions and not the effects. > > Mark you are naive if you think a bunch of soft playing sharks at a shorthanded 75/150 game will not take advantage. soft playing is unethical and if they soft play, they could also collude and that is not where i would put my bankroll in play. imo ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ShootEmUp, 22. Oct 2003 07:54 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| There were 4 players in the game 1 solid player rarely out of line and very predictable 2 solid and had a hand when raising or check raising 3 very loose and passive. The problem is that they were checking unless I was in then they would play their regular way. When I folded on flop or turn they would check it down. I asked to see every hand and they were legitimate. 1 hand I raised under gun with a9 off sb and bb called. flop was 966 sb bet bb raised and I folded. sb had 86 and bb jj and they checked it down. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ShootEmUp, 22. Oct 2003 07:58 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I knew this was a bad situation and left after 10 minutes but what about this type of play in a full game | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ReMMy, 22. Oct 2003 08:02 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| It's not as bad to overcome, but w/ 5 of them its still sucks, and is lame either way. Do they even bother to try and hide it in the full games? I would think they would have someone bet and the other fold at least some of the time to avoid announcing it to the table.... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ReMMy, 22. Oct 2003 08:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Exactly the BB can make moves like this to knock him out of the hand w/o having to pay for it when SB does have a 6... Again I have to wonder why a cardroom allows this to go on, I would simply tell them to call me when they've taken care of it, until then they won't get my business or the business of any of my friends... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Eihli, 22. Oct 2003 08:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Shouldn't the small blind have 3bet with JJ in this hand? If so, then the only reason he called was so he could let the BB see the flop cheaply and wasn't worried about getting it heads up with you. That is cheating and I would not play in this game. Then again I don't quite play 75/150 yet so maybe calling with JJ here is the right play. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, gary ford, 22. Oct 2003 11:29 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 07:54 ShootEmUp wrote: > There were 4 players in the game > 1 solid player rarely out of line and very predictable > 2 solid and had a hand when raising or check raising > 3 very loose and passive. > The problem is that they were checking unless I was in then they would play their regular way. > When I folded on flop or turn they would check it down. > I asked to see every hand and they were legitimate. > 1 hand I raised under gun with a9 off sb and bb called. > flop was 966 sb bet bb raised and I folded. > sb had 86 and bb jj and they checked it down. Shoot--why were you the outcast? Often, especially in a no call no drop situation all the players will chop and check down until additional players arrive. 3 doing it and one not is rude at best and implied collusion at worst | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 11:48 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 11:29 gary ford wrote: > on 22. Oct 2003 07:54 ShootEmUp wrote: > > There were 4 players in the game > > 1 solid player rarely out of line and very predictable > > 2 solid and had a hand when raising or check raising > > 3 very loose and passive. > > The problem is that they were checking unless I was in then they would play their regular way. > > When I folded on flop or turn they would check it down. > > I asked to see every hand and they were legitimate. > > 1 hand I raised under gun with a9 off sb and bb called. > > flop was 966 sb bet bb raised and I folded. > > sb had 86 and bb jj and they checked it down. > > Shoot--why were you the outcast? Often, especially in a no call no drop situation all the players > will chop and check down until additional players arrive. 3 doing it and one not is rude at best and > implied collusion at worst so gary, would you continue playing? ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, gary ford, 22. Oct 2003 12:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 11:48 modestmice wrote: > on 22. Oct 2003 11:29 gary ford wrote: > > on 22. Oct 2003 07:54 ShootEmUp wrote: > > > There were 4 players in the game > > > 1 solid player rarely out of line and very predictable > > > 2 solid and had a hand when raising or check raising > > > 3 very loose and passive. > > > The problem is that they were checking unless I was in then they would play their regular way. > > > When I folded on flop or turn they would check it down. > > > I asked to see every hand and they were legitimate. > > > 1 hand I raised under gun with a9 off sb and bb called. > > > flop was 966 sb bet bb raised and I folded. > > > sb had 86 and bb jj and they checked it down. > > > > Shoot--why were you the outcast? Often, especially in a no call no drop situation all the players > > will chop and check down until additional players arrive. 3 doing it and one not is rude at best and > > > implied collusion at worst > > so gary, would you continue playing? asuming this is not one of those times you are jesting, since it turned out all the other players were Asian, I never would have been in the game in the first place. Question---since you mentioned that you played a lot, have you found that cardroom management rarely solves these types of problems? Question # 2--- Where do you usually play? > > ----------------------------------------------------- > "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and > last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 12:13 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 12:00 gary ford wrote: > on 22. Oct 2003 11:48 modestmice wrote: > > on 22. Oct 2003 11:29 gary ford wrote: > > > on 22. Oct 2003 07:54 ShootEmUp wrote: > > > > There were 4 players in the game > > > > 1 solid player rarely out of line and very predictable > > > > 2 solid and had a hand when raising or check raising > > > > 3 very loose and passive. > > > > The problem is that they were checking unless I was in then they would play their regular way. > > > > When I folded on flop or turn they would check it down. > > > > I asked to see every hand and they were legitimate. > > > > 1 hand I raised under gun with a9 off sb and bb called. > > > > flop was 966 sb bet bb raised and I folded. > > > > sb had 86 and bb jj and they checked it down. > > > > > > Shoot--why were you the outcast? Often, especially in a no call no drop situation all the players > > > will chop and check down until additional players arrive. 3 doing it and one not is rude at best and > > > > > implied collusion at worst > > > > so gary, would you continue playing? > > asuming this is not one of those times you are jesting, since it turned out all the other players were Asian, > I never would have been in the game in the first place. Question---since you mentioned that you played a lot, > have you found that cardroom management rarely solves these types of problems? Question # 2--- Where do you > usually play? > > our hero had no options, this was the only game in town apparently. im happy to have a lot of options here in the bay area. and youre in vegas, so u do too. anyway i play Bay101 (which is filled with asians) and artichoke Joes, less asians. im not bigot , but prefer Joes. and yes, cardroom management (if you wnat to call it that)is always terrible at solving any kind of problem that ive had or have seen happen. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, gary ford, 22. Oct 2003 12:46 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks modest--I'm attending the Wed poker discussion group today here in LV and have asked that pokerroom management be discussed. My perception is the same as yours pokerroom management is an oxymoron. Any additional info would be appreciated. Gary | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 13:23 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 12:46 gary ford wrote: > Thanks modest--I'm attending the Wed poker discussion group today here in LV and have asked that pokerroom management be > discussed. My perception is the same as yours pokerroom management is an oxymoron. Any additional info would be > appreciated. > > Gary i havnt played lucky chances (matt savage is the tourny director there, or used to be) but that casino, ive heard, has a zero tolorance policy regarding swearing/belittling behaviour. sounds impossible to me, but it would be nice if the managers were at least more proactive in handling problem players and situations. also, many of the floorman do not seem to be clear on poker rules and therefore give bad rulings in disputes. maybe in vegas its better. earlier this year i had my hand taken away by the dealer in seat 9, with the hand covered by a heavy lucky piece. of course i had the nuts and lost a 275 pot in the fiasco. mangement handled this situation so badly i couldnt believe it. in another situation with a insane swearing player (i even know the floorpeople) i tryed to explain that the player needed to be kicked out, but nothing happened. he said they kicked him out before. this person was so out of control, i just left after that. seems like the standard practice, if you dont like something, just leave or tablechange, deal with it. anyhow, on the subject of new players, i wonder why a simple how to play brochure of some kind isnt readily available to new players at the sign up counter. this would be better than nothing for new players that havnt played before, but dont want to say so and/or do not want lessons given to them prior to playing. it might solve some of the new player issues without embarrasing anyone to not play. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 07:25 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 07:17 Angel wrote: > I've read in books that chopping the blinds and checking it down can make others > think they are being cheated but I found that difficult to believe. A bit less > difficult now. > It was over a period of 10 minutes. How many hands are we talking about? I > realize I wasn't there but from the details you included I think you over-reacted. > Checking a hand down is more often a sign of weak play than cheating. When people > cheat they tend to use more subterfuge. As for chopping the blinds - thats pretty > standard, particularly in locales that have a 'no flop no drop' rule, or with weak > players who don't know how to play heads up. Again, people tend to be more deceptive > when they are cheating. So, since checking a hand down is normally a sign of a weak > play - and chopping blinds is usually a sign of weak players - I would likely pay > good money to sit in this game. angel, i understand your point, but this is not normal play for a 75/150 shorthanded game. ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ReMMy, 22. Oct 2003 07:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I agree, I would not play this game, they are obviously not looking to take each others money, only his... Shootemup, was this at a cardroom? Did you bring it to their attention? I would imagine they would have trouble getting a game together with that crap going on... Who knows, they may even have signals setup... Also, did you ask them about it? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ReMMy, 22. Oct 2003 07:31 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Doh, I see that you did tell them what you thought... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 07:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| softplay defined- to check into or not bet when checked to by another player/players in order to minimized yours or their loss for that hand. Mild form could be not betting if on the flop the only players in are known to each other. Severe form could include betting/raising agressively when unknown/unliked players are in the hand then checking down after they drop out. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Phish, 22. Oct 2003 08:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| First, this sounds very unusual for a 75/150 game. Second, even if their intention is not to cheat, it is very difficult for them to avoid doing things that becomes, in effect, cheating. For example, let's say that I'm playing with a friend and a couple of strangers and I never bet against my friend and vice versa. There are many situations where I find myself with the type of hand (a middle pair for example) which might be good but I don't want to put anymore $$ into the pot after the flop. In this situation, if my friend bet, I may be more inclined to raise to drive out the third active player so I can showdown the hand for free on the turn and river. This is especially useful if the pot pre-flop is already big. Conversely, if I flopped a strong hand and want more action on the later streets, I would be more inclined to not raise since I don't want to play heads up against my friend and not be able to bet. Regardless of the situation, this 'implicit prior agreement' between my friend and me will affect how I play my hand. There's no way to avoid it. I think it would be practically impossible for me to attempt to not take advantage of the situation. Therefore, you were, in effect, being cheated, even if their intentions were honest. You should bring your concerns to casino management who should warn them very sternly against such behavior. Unfortunately, where I play poker, I don't think the casino management is experienced enough to be aware of the implications of such 'passive collusive' behavior. Your only other option is to complain and quit. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 08:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:00 Phish wrote: > First, this sounds very unusual for a 75/150 game. > > Second, even if their intention is not to cheat, it is very difficult for them to avoid > doing things that becomes, in effect, cheating. > > For example, let's say that I'm playing with a friend and a couple of strangers and I > never bet against my friend and vice versa. There are many situations where I find myself > with the type of hand (a middle pair for example) which might be good but I don't want to > put anymore $$ into the pot after the flop. In this situation, if my friend bet, I may be > more inclined to raise to drive out the third active player so I can showdown the hand for > free on the turn and river. This is especially useful if the pot pre-flop is already big. > > > Conversely, if I flopped a strong hand and want more action on the later streets, I would > be more inclined to not raise since I don't want to play heads up against my friend and > not be able to bet. > > Regardless of the situation, this 'implicit prior agreement' between my friend and me > will affect how I play my hand. There's no way to avoid it. I think it would be > practically impossible for me to attempt to not take advantage of the situation. > > Therefore, you were, in effect, being cheated, even if their intentions were honest. You > should bring your concerns to casino management who should warn them very sternly against > such behavior. Unfortunately, where I play poker, I don't think the casino management is > experienced enough to be aware of the implications of such 'passive collusive' behavior. > Your only other option is to complain and quit. > > thanks for your post phish. ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Mark, 22. Oct 2003 08:17 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > For example, let's say that I'm playing with a friend and a couple of strangers and I > never bet against my friend and vice versa. There are many situations where I find myself > with the type of hand (a middle pair for example) which might be good but I don't want to > put anymore $$ into the pot after the flop. In this situation, if my friend bet, I may be > more inclined to raise to drive out the third active player so I can showdown the hand for > free on the turn and river. This is especially useful if the pot pre-flop is already big. This is called the free card play, and does not need collusion to work. > > Conversely, if I flopped a strong hand and want more action on the later streets, I would > be more inclined to not raise since I don't want to play heads up against my friend and > not be able to bet. This is called the slow play, and again, does not need collusion to work. > Regardless of the situation, this 'implicit prior agreement' between my friend and me > will affect how I play my hand. There's no way to avoid it. Right, but that does not mean that you are going to have an advantage over a 3rd opponent if you are only going to check down your hand heads up against your friend. I think it would be > practically impossible for me to attempt to not take advantage of the situation. This is the same as knowing anyone else's tendencies. This type of colluison can take place without any kind of verbal agreement, and even takes place between strangers. It would be cheating if you conscously decide to do it. And it is different from just knowing how you opponents play and using it against them. However, i think that the effect of the play is much more important than the act, meaning, that if some players are doing stupid things you shouldn't immediately assume that its harmful to you. Examine it and try to decide if you can benefit from it. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 08:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:17 Mark wrote: > > > For example, let's say that I'm playing with a friend and a couple of strangers and I > > never bet against my friend and vice versa. There are many situations where I find myself > > > with the type of hand (a middle pair for example) which might be good but I don't want to > > put anymore $$ into the pot after the flop. In this situation, if my friend bet, I may be > > > more inclined to raise to drive out the third active player so I can showdown the hand for > > > free on the turn and river. This is especially useful if the pot pre-flop is already big. > > > This is called the free card play, and does not need collusion to work. > > > > > Conversely, if I flopped a strong hand and want more action on the later streets, I would > > be more inclined to not raise since I don't want to play heads up against my friend and > > not be able to bet. > > This is called the slow play, and again, does not need collusion to work. > > > Regardless of the situation, this 'implicit prior agreement' between my friend and me > > will affect how I play my hand. There's no way to avoid it. > > Right, but that does not mean that you are going to have an advantage over a 3rd opponent if > you are only going to check down your hand heads up against your friend. > > I think it would be > > practically impossible for me to attempt to not take advantage of the situation. > > This is the same as knowing anyone else's tendencies. This type of colluison can take place > without any kind of verbal agreement, and even takes place between strangers. > > It would be cheating if you conscously decide to do it. And it is different from just knowing > how you opponents play and using it against them. > > However, i think that the effect of the play is much more important than the act, meaning, > that if some players are doing stupid things you shouldn't immediately assume that its harmful > to you. Examine it and try to decide if you can benefit from it. > > Mark > he did and felt it was a bad situation, and at 75/150, i would error on the side of caution and make the same decision: leave ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Mark, 22. Oct 2003 08:36 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > > he did and felt it was a bad situation, and at 75/150, i would error on the side of caution and > make the same decision: leave > I'm think he left for the wrong reason. He left because he didn't like the soft playing, not because his edge decreased. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Phish, 22. Oct 2003 08:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:17 Mark wrote: > > > For example, let's say that I'm playing with a friend and a couple of strangers and I > > never bet against my friend and vice versa. There are many situations where I find myself > > > with the type of hand (a middle pair for example) which might be good but I don't want to > > put anymore $$ into the pot after the flop. In this situation, if my friend bet, I may be > > > more inclined to raise to drive out the third active player so I can showdown the hand for > > > free on the turn and river. This is especially useful if the pot pre-flop is already big. > > > This is called the free card play, and does not need collusion to work. > > > > > Conversely, if I flopped a strong hand and want more action on the later streets, I would > > be more inclined to not raise since I don't want to play heads up against my friend and > > not be able to bet. > > This is called the slow play, and again, does not need collusion to work. > > > Regardless of the situation, this 'implicit prior agreement' between my friend and me > > will affect how I play my hand. There's no way to avoid it. > > Right, but that does not mean that you are going to have an advantage over a 3rd opponent if > you are only going to check down your hand heads up against your friend. > > I think it would be > > practically impossible for me to attempt to not take advantage of the situation. > > This is the same as knowing anyone else's tendencies. This type of colluison can take place > without any kind of verbal agreement, and even takes place between strangers. > > It would be cheating if you conscously decide to do it. And it is different from just knowing > how you opponents play and using it against them. > > However, i think that the effect of the play is much more important than the act, meaning, > that if some players are doing stupid things you shouldn't immediately assume that its harmful > to you. Examine it and try to decide if you can benefit from it. > > Mark > Mark, You're obviously not a sophisticated enough poker player to appreciate the implications. But in general, let me just say that soft-playing a friend is, in effect, having a prior collusive agreement that sets up rules that are different for you and your friend than what your other opponents must operate under. The different rules are that you have the additional option of increasing or decreasing the action in the later streets depending on whether you can get the hand heads-up with your friend. Now this special rule cannot be exploited every hand, but having this extra option gives you a tremendous advantage. It's almost, but not quite, as good as having the choice to go all-in or take money from your pocket whenever the situation suits you. No one should have to play under circumstances where two of their opponents have additional options that they don't have. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Angel, 22. Oct 2003 08:47 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:40 Phish wrote: > You're obviously not a sophisticated enough poker player to appreciate the implications. I think that is a bit over the top harsh. I also think Mark made valid points. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 08:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:47 Angel wrote: > on 22. Oct 2003 08:40 Phish wrote: > > You're obviously not a sophisticated enough poker player to appreciate the implications. > > I think that is a bit over the top harsh. I also think Mark made valid points. > i was going to say the same thing, lets not get personal. but i still disagree with marks valid points. ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Mark, 22. Oct 2003 09:55 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > Mark, > > You're obviously not a sophisticated enough poker player to appreciate the implications. LOL - grow up > > But in general, let me just say that soft-playing a friend is, in effect, having a prior collusive > agreement that sets up rules that are different for you and your friend than what your other > opponents must operate under. The different rules are that you have the additional option of > increasing or decreasing the action in the later streets depending on whether you can get the hand > heads-up with your friend. Now this special rule cannot be exploited every hand, but having this > extra option gives you a tremendous advantage. It's almost, but not quite, as good as having the > choice to go all-in or take money from your pocket whenever the situation suits you. > No one should have to play under circumstances where two of their opponents have additional options > that they don't have. What i'm saying is, that knowing opponents are colluding and having a negative expectation are two different things. If ShootEmUp is still beating his opponents it doesn't matter if they slow play each other. Also, if he knows what is going on, he may be able to use it against them. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Phish, 22. Oct 2003 13:28 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 09:55 Mark wrote: > > Mark, > What i'm saying is, that knowing opponents are colluding and having a negative expectation are two > different things. > > If ShootEmUp is still beating his opponents it doesn't matter if they slow play each other. Also, if he > knows what is going on, he may be able to use it against them. > > Mark > Regardless, this kind of behavior is very bad for the game. The last thing a poker game/room needs is any hint of cheating. Suspicions of cheating will kill a higher stakes poker game faster than anything else. Rather than tolerate it or try to take advantage of it, the best thing you can do is to nip it in the bud. Even if their intentions were honest, management should advice them that they cannot softplay each other. If they persist, management should break the game and not allow any of them to play at the same table again. Playing 75/150 and above, people are risking tens of thousands of dollars on the integrity of the game. The game must be above ALL suspicion. > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Mark, 22. Oct 2003 07:58 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| This is a tough decision as it's the only game in your range to play in. But I think a bigger factor in deciding whether or not to play should be how they play agaisnt you. Do they get into raising wars with you in the middle, check it down when you fold, then show down garbage? Do they play in any way which negatively affects you. It doesn't sound like they are conspiring AGAINST you or colluding AGAINST you. If you are winning the pots you enter and have an edge in the game, then their soft playing is actually a benefit to you. If they constantly check down thier hands and chop their blinds, then you are going to get many more hands per hour. If you already have an edge, this will increase your volume, making you more money when they soft play. Here's another example: When i 1st started playing a couple of years ago, i moved to a table where a good friend of mine was playing. After a couple of hands it became apparent that many of the players at the table had an agreement. The agreement was, that when heads up, i'll check the river if you will. At first this bothered me, but after playing for a little while anyway, i realized that it actually helped. I stated from the start that i wasn't going to check my hands on the river, and everyone said "alright". But when i was in a hand and checked the river, everyone else would check. I guess they thought was finally going to play along. This meant that all sorts of river'd str8s and flushes weren't getting bet and i was getting free showdowns when i needed them. Of course, i still bet the river when i had a hand, and got called alot. My point is, that even if players are going to bend the rules for themselves, although this may be "cheating", you should really think about how it is going to affect you and your bankroll if you play against them. I think that in your case, as in my real life example, your opponent's "cheating" will actually add to your profits. Besides increasing the hands per hour, you will have a few more benefits IF you decide to play against them in this sort of situaiton. 1. You may be able to make an agreement that you can chop the blinds when you get a total garbage hand. They may actually allow this to keep you in the game. 2. If you play passively when its advantageous to you (you have a weak hand and want a free showdown), you may get the hand checked down because they may think you're finally going to play along. However, if you every feel that they are colluding against you, leave ASAP. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 08:13 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 07:58 Mark wrote: > This is a tough decision as it's the only game in your range to play in. But I think > a bigger factor in deciding whether or not to play should be how they play agaisnt > you. > > Do they get into raising wars with you in the middle, check it down when you fold, > then show down garbage? Do they play in any way which negatively affects you. > > It doesn't sound like they are conspiring AGAINST you or colluding AGAINST you. If > you are winning the pots you enter and have an edge in the game, then their soft > playing is actually a benefit to you. > > If they constantly check down thier hands and chop their blinds, then you are going > to get many more hands per hour. If you already have an edge, this will increase > your volume, making you more money when they soft play. > > Here's another example: > > When i 1st started playing a couple of years ago, i moved to a table where a good > friend of mine was playing. After a couple of hands it became apparent that many of > the players at the table had an agreement. The agreement was, that when heads up, > i'll check the river if you will. > > At first this bothered me, but after playing for a little while anyway, i realized > that it actually helped. I stated from the start that i wasn't going to check my > hands on the river, and everyone said "alright". But when i was in a hand and > checked the river, everyone else would check. I guess they thought was finally going > to play along. This meant that all sorts of river'd str8s and flushes weren't > getting bet and i was getting free showdowns when i needed them. Of course, i still > bet the river when i had a hand, and got called alot. > > My point is, that even if players are going to bend the rules for themselves, > although this may be "cheating", you should really think about how it is going to > affect you and your bankroll if you play against them. > > I think that in your case, as in my real life example, your opponent's "cheating" > will actually add to your profits. > > Besides increasing the hands per hour, you will have a few more benefits IF you > decide to play against them in this sort of situaiton. > > 1. You may be able to make an agreement that you can chop the blinds when you get a > total garbage hand. They may actually allow this to keep you in the game. > > 2. If you play passively when its advantageous to you (you have a weak hand and want > a free showdown), you may get the hand checked down because they may think you're > finally going to play along. > > However, if you every feel that they are colluding against you, leave ASAP. > > Mark > mark, that was point, if they will soft play there is a fine line between that and colluding. as phish put it "semicolluding" or whatever. ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Mark, 22. Oct 2003 08:25 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > mark, that was point, if they will soft play there is a fine line between that and > colluding. as phish put it "semicolluding" or whatever. Mice But you can never eliminate this from poker. I was playing heads up versus two players who know each other's play inside-out, they could use their knowlege against me in the same way. These guys don't have to be colluding, they don't even need to be friends. They are just using their knowledge in a game based on information. However, if i still have an advantage in the game shouldn't i keep playing? Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 08:29 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:25 Mark wrote: > > mark, that was point, if they will soft play there is a fine line between that and > > colluding. as phish put it "semicolluding" or whatever. > > Mice > > But you can never eliminate this from poker. I was playing heads up versus two players who > know each other's play inside-out, they could use their knowlege against me in the same way. > These guys don't have to be colluding, they don't even need to be friends. They are just using > their knowledge in a game based on information. > > However, if i still have an advantage in the game shouldn't i keep playing? > > Mark > it depends on that "edge" when your in a game that you dont feel confident because they are obviously playing together (cheating or not), i wouldnt want to continue unless i felt like dealing with that problem and felt i could do well. if i felt comfortable that i could play well even if they were conspiring, i would still play. ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Phish, 22. Oct 2003 08:16 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 07:58 Mark wrote: > This is a tough decision as it's the only game in your range to play in. But I think > a bigger factor in deciding whether or not to play should be how they play agaisnt > you. > > Do they get into raising wars with you in the middle, check it down when you fold, > then show down garbage? Do they play in any way which negatively affects you. > > It doesn't sound like they are conspiring AGAINST you or colluding AGAINST you. If > you are winning the pots you enter and have an edge in the game, then their soft > playing is actually a benefit to you. > > If they constantly check down thier hands and chop their blinds, then you are going > to get many more hands per hour. If you already have an edge, this will increase > your volume, making you more money when they soft play. > > Here's another example: > > When i 1st started playing a couple of years ago, i moved to a table where a good > friend of mine was playing. After a couple of hands it became apparent that many of > the players at the table had an agreement. The agreement was, that when heads up, > i'll check the river if you will. > > At first this bothered me, but after playing for a little while anyway, i realized > that it actually helped. I stated from the start that i wasn't going to check my > hands on the river, and everyone said "alright". But when i was in a hand and > checked the river, everyone else would check. I guess they thought was finally going > to play along. This meant that all sorts of river'd str8s and flushes weren't > getting bet and i was getting free showdowns when i needed them. Of course, i still > bet the river when i had a hand, and got called alot. > > My point is, that even if players are going to bend the rules for themselves, > although this may be "cheating", you should really think about how it is going to > affect you and your bankroll if you play against them. > > I think that in your case, as in my real life example, your opponent's "cheating" > will actually add to your profits. > > Besides increasing the hands per hour, you will have a few more benefits IF you > decide to play against them in this sort of situaiton. > > 1. You may be able to make an agreement that you can chop the blinds when you get a > total garbage hand. They may actually allow this to keep you in the game. > > 2. If you play passively when its advantageous to you (you have a weak hand and want > a free showdown), you may get the hand checked down because they may think you're > finally going to play along. > > However, if you every feel that they are colluding against you, leave ASAP. > > Mark Mark, Your example sounds like a 10-handed 3/6 game where you're playing with a bunch of retirees. In that environment, I wouldn't have any problems either. But when you're playing 5-handed 75/150, you're sure to have at least one player smart enough to automatically take advantage of the situation. I know I would (see my previous post). That's why I would never softplay anybody. The situation as initially described sounds like minefield to me. > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Formless, 22. Oct 2003 08:28 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| The question isn't whether it's cheating, but if you should play, and the answer is a big no. Cheating may not be the right word, maybe it is. But they are playing as a team, and whether it is explicit or implicit, you are at a big disadvantage. Here's what's gonna happen when you play: You bring AK in for a raise and get called by at least two players. The flop comes Q92 and it's two bets to you. You fold, they laugh, and check their random hands the rest of the way. This is just one of many moves that will cost you money. I used to play at a club where there was an unwritten rule: Asians don't bet into Asians, unless you have the stone cold nuts. So Asians tended to get busy on the flop to drive out non-Asians, then they would check the turn and river. I stopped playing there. Maybe you should consider playing a higher limit online game like the 30-60 game at PokerStars or something. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ShootEmUp, 22. Oct 2003 08:35 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Its funny you say that because they were all asians | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ManicStarSeed, 22. Oct 2003 09:32 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:35 ShootEmUp wrote: > Its funny you say that because they were all asians With all due respect.... Have we stumbled on a cultural difference? [edit] Explaining some more.... For example, from what little I understand of Japanese culture.... 1) Japanese cherish group harmony. They tend not challange (openly dissagree with ) each other in public where one can be "dishonored". 2) Japanese are relatively ethnocentric. They like to consider themselves civilized and sophistiated. Gaijin such as you ( assuming non-japanese) and me are not regarded as highly. These are just two specific cultural traits of the Japanese (again all due respect) that could lead to this "implicit collusion". Mss [end edit] Mss | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, gary ford, 22. Oct 2003 12:11 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 09:32 ManicStarSeed wrote: > on 22. Oct 2003 08:35 ShootEmUp wrote: > > Its funny you say that because they were all asians > With all due respect.... > Have we stumbled on a cultural difference? > [edit] > Explaining some more.... > For example, from what little I understand of Japanese culture.... > 1) Japanese cherish group harmony. They tend not challange (openly dissagree with ) each other > in public where one can be "dishonored". > 2) Japanese are relatively ethnocentric. They like to consider themselves civilized and > sophistiated. Gaijin such as you ( assuming non-japanese) and me are not regarded as highly. > > These are just two specific cultural traits of the Japanese (again all due respect) that could > lead to this "implicit collusion". > > Mss > [end edit] > > Mss Not all Asian cultures are the same, but your portrayal of the Japanese 'group think" is accurate. However, the other players were only identified as "Asians" , not Japanese. Shoot, perhaps you can define their ethnicity and their age. Many American- born "Asians " no longer adhere to the "old" ways | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ManicStarSeed, 22. Oct 2003 16:08 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > Not all Asian cultures are the same, but your portrayal of the Japanese 'group think" is accurate. I agree that the Asian cultures are drasticly differentfrom each other > However, the other players were only identified as "Asians" , not Japanese. Shoot, perhaps you can > define their ethnicity and their age. Many American- born "Asians " no longer > adhere to the "old" ways Point taken and appreciated. Granted, I used a small slice of one culture and painted it as if it was more universal, I know it is not. To paint gross generalities, and believe in them is erroneous. It is mearly a thought exercise. As for adhering to old ways, I am a third generation American, and I can not help but argue like an Italian..I AM LOUDER SO I WIN!!! It doesn't take much to "adhear" to ingrained cultural norms for several generations. In fact, it is rather normal to "take care of your own" as the Italians say. Take it light... Mss | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 16:10 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| spoken like a true oregonian (thought excercise) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ManicStarSeed, 22. Oct 2003 16:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 16:10 modestmice wrote: > spoken like a true oregonian (thought excercise) LOL true true. The hippy culture here teaches me to cover up all that dark nastyness with fluffier thought forms. Mss | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 16:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| word, keep it up | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, modestmice, 22. Oct 2003 16:36 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| btw, mss, i dont know if you like elliot smith, but that was really sad that he died today. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, ManicStarSeed, 22. Oct 2003 16:51 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 16:36 modestmice wrote: > btw, mss, i dont know if you like elliot smith, but that was really sad that he died today. > I saw him open up for Beck back in '97 or '98 and wasn't too impressed. It is really sad about his apparent self inflicted end. It hurts to think about it, not for me, personally, but on the human level. Thinking about being depressed enough to end it all... simply hurts. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, gary ford, 22. Oct 2003 11:44 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:35 ShootEmUp wrote: > Its funny you say that because they were all asians And you are not Asian? You,ve been racially colluded. Very common in L.A.--certain Asian tournement players have been suspected of collusion and not just because their names are Ngyuen any more than if their names were Smith or Jones. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Phish, 22. Oct 2003 08:55 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 08:28 Formless wrote: > > I used to play at a club where there was an unwritten rule: Asians don't bet into > Asians, unless you have the stone cold nuts. So Asians tended to get busy on the > flop to drive out non-Asians, then they would check the turn and river. That is BLATANT cheating plain and simple. The situation as intially described was a little bit more nuanced. While it wasn't intentional cheating, it would almost inevitably lead to unavoidable cheating acts. > > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Formless, 22. Oct 2003 13:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Wow, I thought for sure someone would have called me racist by now, lol. For the record, I don't believe that Asians have weekely meetings where they discuss how to cheat whitey at poker. Most of the players at the club in question were just degenerates who played all day every day. A very social game. So the implication was "Look, I'm degenerate and you are degenerate. If we bet into each other, one of us will go home broke and there will be no game tomorrow. So let's softplay each other". The Vietnamese lady who ran the game actually took me aside one day and told me how "This is a social game. People come here to have fun and enjoy themselves". That was her subtle way of telling me if I want to bet and raise, maybe I should go play at the Italian game. And the Italian game is a subject for another post..... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, gary ford, 22. Oct 2003 17:25 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 13:20 Formless wrote: > Wow, I thought for sure someone would have called me racist by now, lol. > > For the record, I don't believe that Asians have weekely meetings where they discuss how > to cheat whitey at poker. Most of the players at the club in question were just > degenerates who played all day every day. A very social game. So the implication was > "Look, I'm degenerate and you are degenerate. If we bet into each other, one of us will > go home broke and there will be no game tomorrow. So let's softplay each other". > > The Vietnamese lady who ran the game actually took me aside one day and told me how > "This is a social game. People come here to have fun and enjoy themselves". That was her > subtle way of telling me if I want to bet and raise, maybe I should go play at the Italian > game. And the Italian game is a subject for another post..... I think you might have been better off in the Italian game.Louder, but better off> > > > > > > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, noiseboy, 22. Oct 2003 09:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think it is wrong and unethical to soft play. However, when you are in a pot with these players, do you feel as if you have a decent edge? If so, you might want to play in the game anyway. You might even consider getting in on the chopping since it might reduce the rake you are paying in the smaller pots. I'm not sure what your casinos policy is on rake when there is no flop. Basically, if it's a profitable game for you, I wouldn't quit the game, but you were right to express your feelings to them. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Mark Barnett II, 22. Oct 2003 09:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| i think by definition to some degree this is cheating simply because they are not playing the same game as you are. however its quite possible they were/are clueless about this you said they also do this in the full game you said they showed down somewhat reasonable hands when you folded if it had been me i also would have probably left simply cause i wasnt comfortable with the situation *which can totally destroy any edge you have* but before i left i would not have gone on a rant i would have simply said Gentlemen i dont feel comfortable playing at this table in this situation, having said that i would like to ask you a question, if i leave will you still be wanting to play? *insert why you feel uncomfortable if you can do it in a pleasant manner, after all if this is the only game in town i would expect they are also part of the reason you play there* | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, mkpoker, 22. Oct 2003 10:11 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| It's certainly unethical play...not even a debatable point, IMO. Certainly not as bad stacking the deck, but it's definitely cause for leaving and getting mighty peeved. That said, if despite your disadvantage, you still feel the favorite in the game, you may wish to stay. (It's my sense this was Angel's point earlier--that your opponents' unethical behavior didn't disadvantage you ENOUGH to leave the game). I think an analogy would be this: You're playing in a game with lousy players and as a "handicap," you always expose one of your hole cards. Obviously, this puts you at a big disadvantage. But if the the skill gap is so great that you feel you can beat the game despite it all, then go ahead and keep playing. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, PairTheBoard, 22. Oct 2003 12:02 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I've always wondered just what the strategies woulld be for successfull collusion play. I've never seen it explained in the literature. I assume authors do not want to provide a cookbook for cheating. About the only collusion play that makes sense to me is when one colluder has the nuts and signals to his partner to stick around with nothing just to help cap all the bets. This tactic would be a killer with a team of several colluders as at least two of them would often be in the same hand without having to loosen their play. With a pair of colluders, if they enter hands too loose in hopes of setting up these plays, I'm not sure they will be successfull. If the colluders are habitually jamming pots as bluffs then it's like being at a table with a couple of maniacs. The money they are pouring into the pots will eventually end up in my stack. If the softplay discussed in this thread does not extend to killer-nuts-collusion, then I don't think it's cheating. It certainly becomes a different game with altered dynamics that must be adjusted to. However, just because it's a different game doesn't mean it's not beatable. It may be tougher to beat in the sense that play against two maniacs is tougher than play against one. But once I toughen up and adjust, I will win even more money against two idiots than I will against one. Once I'm on to their moves I love to see their money pouring into the pots. Similarly with these soft players. If they are poor players, playing poor cards, and making bad moves then let them do so together if they want. It's just more dead money flowing into the pots as far as I'm concerned. What they do when I'm out of the hand does not effect me. This is my thinking on the subject for what it's worth. However I can't say I've actually seen much of this kind of thing and I would much rather test out my theories in a 3-6 game than 150-300 one. At the least I would like to have read a high limit pro's experience with it. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, Phish, 22. Oct 2003 13:14 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Oct 2003 12:02 PairTheBoard wrote: > I've always wondered just what the strategies woulld be for successfull collusion > play. I've never seen it explained in the literature. I assume authors do not want > to provide a cookbook for cheating. > > About the only collusion play that makes sense to me is when one colluder has the > nuts and signals to his partner to stick around with nothing just to help cap all > the bets. This tactic would be a killer with a team of several colluders as at > least two of them would often be in the same hand without having to loosen their > play. With a pair of colluders, if they enter hands too loose in hopes of setting up > these plays, I'm not sure they will be successfull. If the colluders are habitually > jamming pots as bluffs then it's like being at a table with a couple of maniacs. > The money they are pouring into the pots will eventually end up in my stack. > > If the softplay discussed in this thread does not extend to killer-nuts-collusion, > then I don't think it's cheating. It certainly becomes a different game with altered > dynamics that must be adjusted to. However, just because it's a different game > doesn't mean it's not beatable. It may be tougher to beat in the sense that play > against two maniacs is tougher than play against one. But once I toughen up and > adjust, I will win even more money against two idiots than I will against one. Once > I'm on to their moves I love to see their money pouring into the pots. Similarly with > these soft players. If they are poor players, playing poor cards, and making bad > moves then let them do so together if they want. It's just more dead money flowing > into the pots as far as I'm concerned. What they do when I'm out of the hand does > not effect me. > > This is my thinking on the subject for what it's worth. However I can't say I've > actually seen much of this kind of thing and I would much rather test out my > theories in a 3-6 game than 150-300 one. At the least I would like to have read a > high limit pro's experience with it. Collusion does not need to be as blatant as raising and reraising when they have a sucker trapped in the middle. That kind of collusion is too blatant to be undiscovered for long. Collusion can be very subtle and still be very profitable. Let's say you have a 3-handed game (with 3 good players), and two guys have agreed beforehand to play 'best hand' against you. Now they don't even need to signal to each other what they have, all they need to do is play tighter than they would've normally. Hence if partner A on the button raises, partner B in the small blind who if he were playing independently would've reraised with his J9s (a correct play), now folds because he knows that his partner is entering the hand with a better hand than usual. This action will result in most situations in their playing the better of their two hands against you. (In a 3-handed game this usually just means higher cards). Now if they were to signal each other to say I have an ace and the other guy says I have a queen high, and the queen dumps his hand, that is even more devastating. But they don't need to signal to achieve a significant edge. All that's required is a prior agreement to play 'best hand'. Of course, it's assumed that anyone smart enough to successfully pull off a subtle collusion like this would be good poker players to start off with. But in a field of 3 good players, this collusion would give them an edge they would otherwise not have. And when you're playing really big, this small edge can mean real money. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, PairTheBoard, 22. Oct 2003 18:07 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Aha. I hadn't thought of that. It's a little hard for me to see exactly how they would accomplish that without signals though. Seems like there would be a lot of room for miscommunication. If they somehow knew who had the better hand by the betting I can see how that would be hard to beat. Still, if one of them mucks a hand worth a play it seems like it's costing the team money rather than saving it. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Is this a form of cheating?, spawn of satan, 23. Oct 2003 11:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Why play at all if you're uneasy about the situation? Even in a game where you're the best player, this kind of uncertainty will inexorably find its way into your play, and that's bound to affect the quality of your decision-taking, with predictable results. Alan | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network | Find Vancouver Businesses |
|