Situation in the jackpot last night!

MegaSin · 25-12-2009 5:27pm

mdwexford wrote: »

He was drunk and obviously not remembering what he was told or unable to comprehend what he was being told.

If he was that drunk maybe he shouldn't be playing poker?

mdwexford · 25-12-2009 5:28pm

MegaSin wrote: »

If he was that drunk maybe he shouldn't be playing poker?

Dont get me wrong ill gladly play drunks and have no sympathy if they call my all in on the river with Ace high and i have the nuts because they misread their hand or something but i wouldnt do what the OP did here, i think its way out of order.

MegaSin · 25-12-2009 5:30pm

mdwexford wrote: »

Dont get me wrong ill gladly play drunks and have no sympathy if they call my all in on the river with Ace high and i have the nuts because they misread their hand or something but i wouldnt do what the OP did here, i think its way out of order.

Maybe but the drunk was worse imo. I'd say he was acting a p***k the whole night. And the OP gave back the money so the drunk wasnt that bad off and learned a lesson maybe.

j10spades · 25-12-2009 5:54pm

put them both on a boat and sink it

digiman · 25-12-2009 5:58pm

If this was some new guy to the club who was not aware of the rules then its angle-shooting. But the guy has been repeatedly told the rules and is breaking the rules continually by announcing his hand when he plays a pot so he should have no complaints.

We are playing a game of poker here at the end of the day and not here to play a babysitting game with drunk people. Why should we leave free money on the table? I don't think I would have given the money back, I would feel a bit sorry for the guy that lost his money but at the end he has been told the rules and kept breaking them so its his own fault. If he was sober and acting like this would you let him away with it? He's playing poker drunk, its his own fault.

AdMMM · 25-12-2009 6:00pm

This rule, if I recall, is to prevent collusion between players (Sorry dear friend, I have the nuts, you should just check it into me). Only the most gruesome of characters cling onto it as a means of angleshooting though.

Rekop dog · 25-12-2009 6:10pm

AKQJ10 wrote: »

fck that OP resorting to angleshooting to beat a drunk out of his money is pretty lame.

Ok this is incredibly harsh. Pre flop there was 2 others involved, I'd opened and had no idea I'd end up in the situation I did. Post flop I was wrong. Lots of people make wrong decisions in the heat of the moment. It was not a premeditated act in any way, I didn't go into the pot thinking I'm going to effectively screw him out of his chips. As I said in my OP, I though about it, knew I made a very unethical play and returned his chips! I could have given some bias bs of how the events unfolded but I wanted to give an honest account, knowing I wasn't fully covering myself in glory in order to show how easily this stupid rule can be manipulated, and if this brings change I'll be happy!

Secondly for all people calling me a 'douche', I did not go into detail of the villians reation to this but if I did, I don't know what you would be calling him! Some of the threats towards the manager (who remained diplomatic throughout) where disgusting. He had a right to be angry but this was out of
other. Again I won't go into detail as it serves absolutely no purpose to the thread.

The reason I started it was to expose a ruling, that is very open to angleshooting, serves very little purpose and causes more problems than it's worth. The moral dillema has clearly split opinions, but the majority bar kayroo it seems think the rule is ridiculous.

Again I ask for club managers and the likes of JP to draw up a list of clear rules, which leave no room for ambiguity and have them clear available at all events. I'd appreciate any responce from these people. My intensions are purely to try improve the game we all love and minimise possiblities of these types of situations occuring and ultimately turning this negative situation into a positive one.

TommyGunne · 25-12-2009 6:30pm

keane2097 wrote: »

Are you not reading peoples' posts or just deliberately ignoring them?

Reading people's posts has absolutely nothing got to do with my post. Reading something doesn't mean that I will agree with it, and it certainly doesn't mean that its right. In other words, yes I did read the posts, as I always do, and also I disagreed with them. As I was posting about the morality of the point rather than on facts, I am certainly entitled to that opinion, and I would be very surprised if someone could sway me from it. So really, whether I read other people's posts or not is absolutely and entirely irrelevant.

keane2097 wrote: »

The villain had the rules explained to him repeatedly.

Again, absolutely and entirely irrelvant to the content of my post, or were you deliberately ignoring the content?

keane2097 wrote: »

"Scamming a drunk person" my hole :rolleyes:

Yup. Its my opinion that this is the height of angleshooting, and much worse than slowrolling and the likes, in that you are actually taking money from someone rather than just annoying them.

I think that I would have played the hand the exact same as the OP, but with the intention of giving the chips after I get them to give him a warning of what can happen if he keeps doing that. But again, thats a matter of opinion and is what I would do. I just think that that is the most horrible form of angleshooting.

I really don't get how its different from a guy angleshooting someone off aces in that tourney either

EDIT: Not at all trying to be harsh on the OP, just on the people that want to keep the money. Anyways, its not being harsh cos its just my opinion. I have no problem taking money from drunks or idiots, as long as they know how things work.

kakak1 · 25-12-2009 6:55pm

IMO the point is being missed here.

Management of any & every club have a moral responsibility to every customer who walks in their door. A drunk SHOULD NEVER be allowed play at a poker table & this has to be a management decision. However greed, (which if you think about it is the cause of most of our countrys financial problems) takes over & this applies to management & to players. Everyone wants the easy buck.

Saying the player was warned several times is a load of bullsh1t because a drunk very often cannot comprehend what is being said to them.

In fairness to the OP he did offer money back which he didn't have to do. But the situation would never have happened if management were doing their job right.

scange01 · 25-12-2009 6:56pm

TommyGunne wrote: »

I really don't get how its different from a guy angleshooting someone off aces in that tourney either

I would say there different, as the villain in this situation was a drunk, shooting his mouth STILL after being told the rules more than once, as pointed out numerous times on this thread. The rule was brought up, he knew about it. He was being a douche. Deserved.

If you keep warning someone and take no action, why have the rule and why warn him- It was going to be enforced eventually(but should've been earlier, I know). He was given the benfit of the doubt up until then and he took if for granted. He took for granted getting his money back too.

In the other situation, your man was tricked into it by being asked what he had. The OP, in this situation, did NOT ask what he had. The mouthpiece was shouting it out by himself.

Defo feel criticism of the OP here is mostly undeserved.

Just my opinion.

Rekop dog · 25-12-2009 6:58pm

TommyGunne wrote: »

I really don't get how its different from a guy angleshooting someone off aces in that tourney either

Never said you where being harsh just to the comments like Fck the op and douche.

Anyway I pretty much agree with most of what you said apart from the bit I quoted. I tried to talk the guy out of the pot and he was clearly warned.

The guy in the aces hand was completely manipulated, it was clearly pre-meditatedand instead of talking him out of it he dropped him right in it.

Stratispheres apart in terms of angleshooting and I don't even think that's debatable!

digiman · 25-12-2009 7:00pm

TommyGunne wrote: »

EDIT: Not at all trying to be harsh on the OP, just on the people that want to keep the money. Anyways, its not being harsh cos its just my opinion. I have no problem taking money from drunks or idiots, as long as they know how things work.

This guy has been repeatedly told how things work yet continues to do it?

kakak1 · 25-12-2009 7:03pm

scange01 wrote: »

I would say there different, as the villain in this situation was a drunk, shooting his mouth STILL after being told the rules more than once, as pointed out numerous times on this thread. The rule was brought up, he knew about it. He was being a douche. Deserved.

If you keep warning someone and take no action, why have the rule and why warn him- It was going to be enforced eventually(but should've been earlier, I know). He was given the benfit of the doubt up until then and he took if for granted. He took for granted getting his money back too.

In the other situation, your man was tricked into it by being asked what he had. The OP, in this situation, did NOT ask what he had. The mouthpiece was shouting it out by himself.

Defo feel criticism of the OP here is mostly undeserved.

Just my opinion.

why, when he was previoiusly warned, was he not removed from the table, surely this is the correct thing to do......................oh forgot, loss of potential revenue to club & other players.......silly me

scange01 · 25-12-2009 7:21pm

kakak1 wrote: »

why, when he was previoiusly warned, was he not removed from the table, surely this is the correct thing to do......................oh forgot, loss of potential revenue to club & other players.......silly me

Yeah, I agree with you on that, shouldn't have been at the table. But it's not the OP's fault then, is it? Ya can only play against what's put in front of you. If it was attempted to kick him out, can you imagine the kick-off!?

Shouldn't have even got his moneys back.

TommyGunne · 25-12-2009 7:31pm

digiman wrote: »

This guy has been repeatedly told how things work yet continues to do it?

But he clearly has no idea of the implications....

AKQJ10 · 25-12-2009 7:34pm

Rekop dog wrote: »

Ok this is incredibly harsh.

I wasn't saying fck the OP, i was saying fck calling hoping that the drunk has the hand he's announced so it can be ruled dead. I get that drunks can be annoying at the table but there most likely gonna lose their money anyway so no need to win by technicality. Jackpot should prob have just not let the guy play if he was too drunk to remember a rule being said to him repeatedly but i doubt at any point if he was explained the rule properly or given a proper warning. Telling him in the middle of a hand where he has announced his hand is doing him no favours. He should have been allowed play this pot as normal then been told properly if it happens again his hand is dead by someone from the jackpot.

keane2097 · 25-12-2009 7:37pm

What if it was a sober player who just didn't give a fcuk about the rules and was acting the maggot repeatedly?

TommyGunne · 25-12-2009 7:41pm

keane2097 wrote: »

What if it was a sober player who just didn't give a fcuk about the rules and was acting the maggot repeatedly?

Thats a lot different

pooman · 25-12-2009 7:43pm

mdwexford wrote: »

The OP purposely called with a worse hand in order to use a technicality to win the pot, this is at worst a form of cheating and at best shocking etiquette.

Last time I checked K10 was a better hand than K8 :pac::pac::pac:
Good call pre imo, just a bad flop :pac::rolleyes::pac::P

Rekop dog · 25-12-2009 7:47pm

AKQJ10 wrote: »

Telling him in the middle of a hand where he has announced his hand is doing him no favours.

When did you expect me to tell him? He put his 5 euro extra in on the big blind, then he said what he said and I warned him then. Should I say when raising ' if you intend on calling this you should not declare your hand first'. It's hardly the middle of the hand either, he's invested 7 euro with 250 behind!

mdwexford · 25-12-2009 7:54pm

pooman wrote: »

Last time I checked K10 was a better hand than K8 :pac::pac::pac:
Good call pre imo, just a bad flop :pac::rolleyes::pac::P

Not on a K84f its not which is where he made the call.
OP raised preflop didnt call so, in your face!!!

If a drunk kept announcing his hand pre and i copped they were the cards he actually had every time id use it to my advantage but wouldnt call with a worse hand and demand for his hand to be killed.

Meh all depends how high on the moral highground you are i guess.

keane2097 · 25-12-2009 7:57pm

TommyGunne wrote: »

Thats a lot different

Would you still be as critical of the OP's behaviour?

25-12-2009 8:12pm

RoadSweeper wrote: »

He shouldn't be allowed play if he can't comprehend what is being said. If he was sober and declared his hand after repeated warnings do you think he would then argue his case?

I think the OP did what most people would do bar giving the loot back.

MegaSin wrote: »

If he was that drunk maybe he shouldn't be playing poker?

I have brought a player who was too drunk to play to the attention of the staff in the Jackpot before and was totally ignored.

kakak1 wrote: »

A drunk SHOULD NEVER be allowed play at a poker table & this has to be a management decision. However greed, (which if you think about it is the cause of most of our countrys financial problems) takes over & this applies to management & to players. Everyone wants the easy buck.

Saying the player was warned several times is a load of bullsh1t because a drunk very often cannot comprehend what is being said to them.

In fairness to the OP he did offer money back which he didn't have to do. But the situation would never have happened if management were doing their job right.

Way to tie in the economy to a drunk poker player on a Saturday night. If drunks couldn't play poker then poker would be unsustainable in most clubs. This is just a business fact. Nothing to be done about it really.

pooman wrote: »

Last time I checked K10 was a better hand than K8 :pac::pac::pac:
Good call pre imo, just a bad flop :pac::rolleyes::pac::P

LOL. One of the following is true:

1. You don't understand poker.
2. You can't read.
3. Both

pooman · 25-12-2009 9:48pm

mdwexford wrote: »

Not on a K84f its not which is where he made the call.
OP raised preflop didnt call so, in your face!!!

Well I obv didnt bother reading that part.. I took your post out of context, try to be clearer in future thanks. :pac:

The ruling is stupid and the drunk with K8 should have won the pot..the K10 is just a degen for using the ruling but fair play to him for handing back the cash.

mdwexford · 25-12-2009 10:37pm

pooman wrote: »

Well I obv didnt bother reading that part.. I took your post out of context, try to be clearer in future thanks. :pac:

The ruling is stupid and the drunk with K8 should have won the pot..the K10 is just a degen for using the ruling but fair play to him for handing back the cash.

I was very clear, maybe you should improve your thread reading skills.

Hank Scorpio · 25-12-2009 10:42pm

a poll would be interesting!

a) OP is a douche
b) OP is not a douche

pooman · 25-12-2009 11:31pm

mdwexford wrote: »

I was very clear, maybe you should improve your thread reading skills.

Why? Im barely on here. I'm not like you and come on here acting all high and mighty to massage my ego...:pac::pac::rolleyes:

mdwexford · 26-12-2009 1:41am

pooman wrote: »

Why? Im barely on here. I'm not like you and come on here acting all high and mighty to massage my ego...:pac::pac::rolleyes:

Thank god for us judging by your posts.

Yes im so high and mighty and my ego is so big because you cant read my posts and use smileys to disguise the fact you cant read posts properly, yits!!!

gorrrr72 · 26-12-2009 1:58am

nuxxx wrote: »

a poll would be interesting!

a) OP is a douche
b) OP is not a douche

b)

Jam-Fly · 26-12-2009 2:06am

thread seems to be getting a bit off topic and pointless.

The OP's aim was to highlight a needless/wrong rule and I think he has done so. I cannot see the point in having a rule where it is illegal to declare your hand.

Situation in the jackpot last night!

Comments