[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]


I think I'm misunderstood. They aren't doing the button raise/SB 3-bet thing every time it's folded to the button. They are at the very least selective about their cards, not playing "any two". In actuality, it has folded to button on several occasions, and button had elected to fold and then SB and myself agreed to chop. Remember, this is short-handed and it often gets chopped, so there are far more orbits than your standard full ring game. So when I say "4 times in 45 minutes", it means there are probably just as many times it didn't happen. Now when it does get bet/3-bet to me in the BB there's a more than decent chance of at least a hand out there.

Garland

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, sorry, I understand now. This situation sucks. Gotta tell the floor I guess. I would leave, too, (potentially breaking the game, it sounds like), and tell the floor why you are leaving.

Honestly with cheating as a giant unknown, I sometimes wonder how it's possible to make money playing cards. The only evidence is the empirical evidence of actual winrate, nothing else makes sense. I think the biggest things in our favor are:

(1) That if someone is smart and disciplined enough to cheat and not get caught, they are good enough to beat the games without cheating.

(2) Cheaters will be bad players who overestimate their own ability, and they will think that are winning players without their partners. In those games they will be big fish and give their money back. Even if they are with their partners, they will move up and move up and get Peter Principled.

(3) If you're going to cheat, why pick Limit Hold'em as your game?