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

[tomek322]

I think I need to give some more background info. The player that asked my opinion(not help), talked about playing "a bunch" of cash games back home. But none the less, I don't really think that the poker table is the place for these qustions.

While my response was misleading per se, telling him that he is a terrible poker player would probably make him confrontation and defensive. More importantly might make an uncomfortable situation for me. And since I am a big selfish bugger, I wanted to avoid that.

I didn't grab some random kid at the slots and tell him "go on, you're doing so well against us." He chose to sit. I was sucker at one point too, most likely still am the sucker.

If any one read the Stu Ungar biography, there is a story in there about Jack Strauss. A rich business man, bought in to the NL game with Doyle and gang, predictably went busto. He goes to the window to get 20K more, and Strauss gets up from the table, goes to the window and says something to the effect. "Partner you don't want to sit back down, this is NL and those are the five best players in the world. You have no chance to win."

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
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?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you might be giving him too much credit for asking for 'actual' help on top of his ability of assessing players.

I'm sure the guy wasn't asking so he could change his ways right then and there depending on how it was answered. Some might, but it's rare. And most that might do that would give up, or forget, and revert back to their donating ways since playing 'right' can be too boring or whatever.

He also isn't likely to really recognize a 'decent' player from any other player. Think about what he'd be basing that on? Especially if this was his first time playing with tomek, not to mention him being a newbie. Most think that the guys with the most chips in front of them are the better players. Not how they got those chips. Or a guy who doesn't play many hands. Which is usually a sign, but even some donators get bad runs of cards or some tight guys don't play that well postflop. This isn't to say anything about tomek, just in general terms.

Most of the time, this is more casual of a question than it seems. I'd give them some vague answer to placate them and encourage them to stay or whatever. I don't like to teach at a table. After all, if you answer that question, others might be listening in at that point.

It is amusing, though, listening to a guy who isn't that good give an assessment of a player like this as if he really does know what he's talking about when most of what he's saying is wrong. Usually it involves the guy answering bragging about himself to some degree and stating wrong strategy. Question: In that case, would you jump in and correct the guy giving a wrong assessment/strategy of a newbie player?

If a guy came up to me away from the table, I'd have no problem giving him an assessment. Though in doing so, you have to watch as you answer to see how he's reacting. Ego can still rear it's head in that situation. Sometimes they just want a pat on the back and don't like criticism. In that case, you just cut it short, change the subject and save any other analysis. They're not ready to learn at that moment.

For instance, a bud of mine is tough to really talk to when we get into some poker discussions as he really doesn't do much to improve his game. Even after I've pointed him in the right direction from different angles on different topics. For some reason he'd just rather be superstitious about seats and play on a short BR.

b

[Ben K]

I think tomek322 did the right thing by giving a nice non-committal answer. The guy went away with no persuasion to keep playing, only that tomek322 didn't have an opinion he wanted to voice. After all, the tea breaks during a game are still part of the game. It's only over once you've all cashed in your remaining chips.

If your case, I don't think you did anything bad either. The guy is your friend and surely he's going to know more about your skills than some random so he'll at least be wary and thinking which will help him. Besides afterward I'm sure you can stretch to buying him a couple of beers as consolation for playing above his head and getting busted. You weren't playing outside of his reasonable price range, were you? If you were it might be different.

One of my friends who plays in both my home games is rubbish and has earned the nickname 'cashpoint'. He knows it but views a night playing poker in the same way as a night on the beers. £40 is okay (about 4 buyins for our game). Away from the games I give him as much coaching as he can listen to but once at the table his actions are his choices.

Imo the moral here is directly comparable to persuading someone to go out for a few beers. In both circumstances, they'll probably enjoy themselves and it won't cost the earth to do so. If your friends aren't enjoying playing with you, you need to learn to be nice!

[PantsOnFire]

Here is my sad story.

I was just busting out of noob status while back and starting to get a grip on Limit holdem. So I'm playing a little over my head at a 3/6 table. During a break, a guy at the table has a smoke with me outside. I wasn't really into reading players quite then but I did notice he seemed to have a little bad luck and also bad cards because he wasn't playing many hands. Anyways I did feel sorry for him and went on for not one but two cigarettes worth of advice. I kinda felt good about myself. Well back at the table over the next few hours my luck got a little worse and he seemed to do better and better. Well, I left down quite a bit and chatted up later with a good friend of mine who had been tutoring me in holdem. I described that afternoon to him and he stunned me with his reaction. He said most likely that the guy in question was a very good local player and simply stood there for two cigarettes while I explained to him exactly how I play. Can you imagine that?

While I do realize that that sort of thing is rare, I have completely stopped giving any advice to anyone at my table or any other stranger in a casino. And as a matter of fact, I do the opposite and try and find out how the other guy is playing. If a guy asks me for advice, I do the psychiatrist thing and ask him back how he thinks he's doing and where he think's he is going wrong.

How's that for unethical? Frankly, I don't care. I will play fair but if you plunk money on a poker table I am sitting at, I have every right to win all of it. It's legal thievery and I love it.

[toots]

Seems to me that telling any guy that he's a bad poker player is a great way to lose some teeth.

Just tell 'em what they want to hear. If they were into reality, they'd be home reading 2+2 books instead of donking away hundreds of dollars.

[PantsOnFire]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyways I did feel sorry for him and went on for not one but two cigarettes worth of advice. I kinda felt good about myself.

[/ QUOTE ]
He begged for advice and I gave up everything I could think of. I had suspected he was perhaps the worst player at the table behind me and two or three others so I thought I was helping him (and boy, was I).

[Unknown Soldier]

I don't think what tomek322 did was bad, I didn't when I made the post (although I know it sounds like I did!), but I was curious of other peoples opinions, it also reminded me of what I did about a week ago to my friend. Also, I don't think [ QUOTE ]
What about if tomek322 had said "no you are a very good player, carry on"


[/ QUOTE ] has been addressed


would any of you ever hustle someone? Say in a game of pool (if you are any good! If not, choose another sport) Do the ol' pretend to be playing bad, pressure them to play for realy money. Even though they are reluctant to. Then when the money is wagered beat them. That's just one example. Emotions about this player aside.

[PantsOnFire]

[ QUOTE ]
would any of you ever hustle someone? Say in a game of pool (if you are any good!

[/ QUOTE ]
I am actually quite good at pool although I have never hustled anyone. As a matter of fact, I don't even like playing for money, especially in bars. It just leads to trouble.

No, I don't feel the need to hustle anyone and I think it is somewhat dishonest and unethical. And as far as poker, I think there can be hustling here too. For example, you join a table of newbies and say this is your first time and lose a few dollars by mucking some winning hands etc. Well, that would be unethical in my books. Also a form of poker hustling would be to give a noobie the absolute wrong advice on how to play.

[Unknown Soldier]

[ QUOTE ]
For example, you join a table of newbies and say this is your first time and lose a few dollars by mucking some winning hands etc

[/ QUOTE ]

I read a funny story about this once. Mike caro sat down at a 5 card draw table. 1st hand he called a raise, swapped one card. There was just him and one more opponent in the hand. After the sawp the opponent bet again. Caro announced that if he hadn't got that particular card from the swap he would have called(I forget the details), he then turned over something like 4sJc8h2dKc. Of course the players at the table were shocked (and probably licking their lips). Caro then played very good 5cd keeping his crazy image and made alot of money. I don't think that's unethical. That's just creating an image and making opponents play badly from it. I do it myself (not quite as extreme as that though!) Phil Helmuth once called bets down with A high playing limit hold em online, then typed "you cannot bluff me!". That being his screen name aswell, and he claimed that for the rest of the session none of the players did. That's all part of poker imo.



[ QUOTE ]
Also a form of poker hustling would be to give a noobie the absolute wrong advice on how to play.


[/ QUOTE ]
if he asks for it, then yeah I'd agree with that in general.



I'd say that me trying to convince my friend to play for money is hustling