Give my friend back his money?

[Arito]

I have struggled a bit with the thread title but I think the 'dilemma' is pretty much what most readers would expect after reading it.

Disclaimer: The following 'dilemma' is by no means a big deal. The reason I'm posting this is because I generally enjoy the ethics-related discussions on here ("who is the bigger douchebag?" type thing). Also, dollars are really euros but it doesn't matter much (EUR1 = $1,3).

So, it's Sunday night and my best friend (since age 9) and I go to the local poker room because we were too late to catch the latest movie. The game is $5-$5 NL with a $250 minimum and $1000 max buy-in. Perhaps important to note that this is well above our comfort level (I play 200NL online for a 'living', he plays 50NL online for fun sporadically) but not so much that we are playing on scared money. This is the lowest no limit game they offer in our neighborhood, not counting homegames and such.

The session goes fine for me. I bought in for $500 and double up the first hand when I catch a gutshot on the turn which I bet on the flop. Unlucky villain with a similar stack makes his (lower) open ender on the same card and all the money goes in. For my friend it doesn't go so well, but he loans another $500 for his second buy-in from me and tilts it up to about $1100. I realize that losing a buy-in isn't really bad but remember we're playing high for us here.

Then the following hand comes up, which is the final of the night (the casino is closing). Moron A openraises to $50 with approx $150 behind. This is not standard for the game (raises are usually $20-$30) but he's stuck 2k and he's obviously steaming, wanting to double up his last hand. Like the retard that I am, I announce $200 when I look at my beautiful pocket jacks, not realising my friend to the right of me and directly between me and villain hasn't acted yet. As I say the words I see he already has $200 in his hand. I puke. He must have a better hand than I have. I ask the dealer what the rule is and he informs me my $200 is dead whatever my friend does. Damn. My friend raises to $200, I call, the rest fold and villain obviously calls. My friend and I check the hand down on a Ace high flop and his QQ is good (villain had KT). As he stacks his chips I realise he is very likely to offer me my $200 back when we leave the table, and contemplate my reaction to it.

1. He doesn't have a lot of money, although he recently got a decent paying job (he is a student).
2. He owes me $4,5k, but is paying that back during the rest of 2007, now that he has a job.
3. $200 isn't a lot of money to either of us, but not insignificant at all either. A $200 win in a poker game is usually considered a good session (our homegames are usually $0,50/$0,50 though).
4. I have given him $50 back after a night in this homegame because he made a retarded call on the river with a hand that had no chance at all at being best.
5. If he had raised to $200 I would have instafolded my JJ.
6. I was up $300 before this hand and he was still up $100.

As expected, he offered me the $200. I said I thought he might but don't know if I should take it as it is my own fault I acted out of turn. He insists, I take it and thank him, we cash out and go home. Normally, we wouldn't really give it a second thought, but like I said, I like to think about this kind of situation, which prompted me to these questions to you all:

Would you have played it differently (not accept it or accept half?) and is my friend's play standard?

[GooseHinson]

Don't take it, and don't refund him when he loses to you in homegames.

[captZEEbo]

story was hard to follow. I don't think I'd offer the money back if i was your friend.

[Howard Beale]

If you can't play poker 'for keeps' against your best friend you should not be playing in the same game. It's his money now. Don't take it back.

[[Phill]]

Im confused.

So you lent him his second buy in, which he gets to 1100, then he wins that pot of 400 profit for 1500 total.

He owes you 4.5k.

So why arent you taking the entire 1.5k and wiping off a third of his debt to you?

[Arito]

[ QUOTE ]
If you can't play poker 'for keeps' against your best friend you should not be playing in the same game. It's his money now. Don't take it back.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify, this does not happen often. I gave it that one time because it was an irrational call, which he wouldn't make had he thought it through. He wasn't very good then, but has improved a lot. In general we try to avoid each other in any poker game we play, which simply means narrowing our calling ranges to each other's raises and bluffing less. Perhaps some people might consider this unethical in itself?

The point is, we play for keeps. These are exceptional situations.

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you can't play poker 'for keeps' against your best friend you should not be playing in the same game. It's his money now. Don't take it back.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify, this does not happen often. I gave it that one time because it was an irrational call, which he wouldn't make had he thought it through. He wasn't very good then, but has improved a lot. In general we try to avoid each other in any poker game we play, which simply means narrowing our calling ranges to each other's raises and bluffing less. Perhaps some people might consider this unethical in itself?

The point is, we play for keeps. These are exceptional situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no such thing as an exceptional situation when it comes to this. I dont understand why he even offered.

[Arito]

[ QUOTE ]
Im confused.

So you lent him his second buy in, which he gets to 1100, then he wins that pot of 400 profit for 1500 total.

He owes you 4.5k.

So why arent you taking the entire 1.5k and wiping off a third of his debt to you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry it was so difficult to read. My loan to him has nothing to do with poker. Also, $1000 of that $1100 already was mine, I loaned him his initial buy-in aswell. He pays off any poker loans immediately when he can, which is usually a week or less.

[Matt R.]

Keep it. You (rightly) told him it was your own fault, and that you didn't know if you should take it. If he insists, and you still don't take it, it could in some ways be considered insulting and at least mildly annoying. He clearly actually wanted to give you the money back.

Maybe the only thing I would do differently is say, "Hey, it's my own fault, you should keep the money" rather than being kind of wishy-washy about it and saying "hrmm I'm not so sure I should take it." At least then you can be sure that if he insists you didn't influence his decision in any way.

But yeah, keep the money.

[Howard Beale]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you can't play poker 'for keeps' against your best friend you should not be playing in the same game. It's his money now. Don't take it back.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify, this does not happen often. I gave it that one time because it was an irrational call, which he wouldn't make had he thought it through. He wasn't very good then, but has improved a lot. In general we try to avoid each other in any poker game we play, which simply means narrowing our calling ranges to each other's raises and bluffing less. Perhaps some people might consider this unethical in itself?

The point is, we play for keeps. These are exceptional situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a matter of principle I wouldn't accept the money from a friend of mine. That is understood when I play against them. We all play each other hard. That said, if he 'insists' then take it and, if you feel bad about it, deduct it from what he owes you and don't tell him until the last payment is due. Then you can dig up this thread in a year and ask what to do all over again. Good luck w/ the search function. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]