A morality post inspired by a response in another thread here

[Unknown Soldier]

the post was by tomek322, he brought up a moral question that I was faced with (kind of) the other day. I think it deserves a new thread.

Here is the post:

[ QUOTE ]
I thought about this while playing this weekend. Two newbies sat down at 1-2NL. They did the typical, play every hand to the end, bad bluffs into the nuts type stuff. On a cig break one of them asks me, "hey you seem to have some experience, this is my first time at a casino, how am I doing?"

The human part of me wants to grab him and tell him to go home. It was apparent that he will leave broke, but the other part of me just looked at him like an ATM. And since I was stuck 200, I answered him like I answer all questions while playing. I shrugged and said, "I really wasn't paying attention, but aren't you up since you sat down." He nods and goes, "yeah, I guess I am." He busted half hour later, bluffing with 73off into an AAJ92 three flush board.

I think you have to remove your sympathy for incompetent opponents, as no one forces people to play, it is their conscience choice. The total newbs are the only ones I have any internal conflict playing against. The remainder of players I couldn’t care less about. I don’t hate my opponents, I have such a competitive streak in me that once the cards I dealt I don’t need anything to psyche me up to play. Most, if not all, poker players believe they have an above average skill set so I never feel bad about taking their money. I even go out of my way to try and bust the super cocky.

In today’s world, every one is told they are special, above average and great. Unfortunately poker is a game were disillusions of grandeur are costly. Poker is one of the few disciplines were self criticism is necessary. It is absolutely critical to be able to accurately rank yourself at the table and tailor your play accordingly. I have no sympathy for people who are ignorant to their own incompetence.

[/ QUOTE ]

So this question is about encouraging players to play even though you know that they will lose.

O.k. First of all I don't agree with feeling sorry for a person if they are losing at a table, that's the name of the game (I'm quite sure there was a similar thread a few months ago about this). If you don't take their money, they will take yours. Plus, it's their decision that you have in no way influenced (purposely).

However, this is quite different in my opinion. Here, the player asked for your help. That get's rid of his ignorance right? O.k. so tomek322 gave a rather ambiguous answer, but it still hid the truth. It implied that he was winning through his skill. This, after him asking directly for tomek322's help. Recognising that he was a decent player. Is this wrong? What about if tomek322 had said "no you are a very good player, carry on"


My experience (confession)

it was a home poker game and my friend had never played before and has no naturaly ability for a game of this sorts. However, in practise he'd hit alot of cards and won some chips off us all. I asked him whether he wanted to play for real money, and he (sensibly) said that he didn't. Then I said "go on, you're doing so well against us". I think that was wrong