Players talking during hand, what is my remedy

[MCS]

Rulings in areas where someone did something technically wrong but not super-horrible (like here) often go in favor of the offender. The floor usually doesn't wanna take a hard-line position about anything.

EDIT: Also, I think you handled it well. The two other players are less likely to do it again because they've been warned. And it sounds like you stayed reasonable about everything, both then and now. Good luck and keep reading Ed Miller. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[EJXD2]

My issue is with the OP buying in for the minimum and only playing two hands after two hours.

Not only that, but what did his opponents think OP had? He's played two hands all day, and he's raising like a fiend? I'm surprised he didn't have pocket queens.

[undathesea]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and arranging chips deceptively. That latter is not part of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are not allowed to hide high denomination chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't get me wrong, I hid absolutely nothing... all of my chips were in plain view and I was most forthcoming when asked how much I had. This was completely unintentional on my behalf, I simply sat down with 150 that was colored up since I didn't want to go to the cage and buy chips from them.

If they had gone all-in... I definitely would have called in both instances and not felt bad about their blunder... they were trying to use their stacks to push me around with bad cards... good thing they asked for a count first.

[swede123]

[ QUOTE ]
My issue is with the OP buying in for the minimum and only playing two hands after two hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is this an issue? I'd say you don't want to force it, ESPECIALLY when playing short stacked in your first B&M game.

Swede

[Willy Gee]

"My issue is with the OP buying in for the minimum and only playing two hands after two hours."

Read Getting Started in Hold 'em. Ed Miller explains why a beginner, like myself, should do this.

"Not only that, but what did his opponents think OP had? He's played two hands all day, and he's raising like a fiend? I'm surprised he didn't have pocket queens."

I really don't think they noticed what I was playing. I think they just like to gamble.

Having never played no limit, I assumed that the players would be better than limit players. But, based on what I saw this weekend, they are worse. They call huge bets with weak draws, and lose lots of money.

I was amazed.

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
My issue is with the OP buying in for the minimum and only playing two hands after two hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should not have an issue with either of those. Buying in short is a legitimate strategy, as has been discussed many times. Playing tight + bad cards = two hands in two hours.

[undathesea]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My issue is with the OP buying in for the minimum and only playing two hands after two hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should not have an issue with either of those. Buying in short is a legitimate strategy, as has been discussed many times. Playing tight + bad cards = two hands in two hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, how about you do the same thing... but with more money in front of you? Play tight, wait for good cards? If I am playing for 2 hours and playing only two hands, I don't want to double 20-40 dollars... I want to double 100-200 dollars. I understand wanting to reduce the liability, but in doing that, you lose tons of leverage that a bigger stack brings.

This strategy may work when playing with good players, as they will tend to notice that you have been playing extremely tight and will fold to you when you raise, but most of the donks at 1/2 NL will call and gambool. It may be a legitimate strategy, but I think there are too many inherant disadvantages when playing this way.

With that said... I read Ed Miller and trust his advice... otherwise I wouldn't be here.

[bernie]

If you had won this hand, would you have posted it?

Yes, the button was wrong to announce his intention.

b

[radek]

[ QUOTE ]
Kick the button in the nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thhis is the correct answer. Followed by SHIIP

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
If you would have gone all-in for 100... your villain probably would have dropped his cards right there.



[/ QUOTE ]

You wouldn't want him to call for the 100?

b