At Planet Hollywood tonight I took advantage of another player's mistake, to my profit. Of course, most of the money one makes at poker can be classified that way, but this was different enough that I'm feeling a bit squeamish about it in retrospect, and not sure whether I should be ashamed of myself.
Situation in brief: Heads-up in a small pot. Because my opponent bets small, I check-call both the flop and turn, hoping to make my straight. Sure enough, the river brings me the stone-cold nuts. I'm out of position. Do I bet or try for a check-raise? The question just boils down to whether I think he will fire again if I check to him.
I'm thinking about this, and have just decided that he's most likely to check behind, so I need to value bet. But just as I'm about to reach for some chips, he tosses $10 forward, out of turn. I had not checked, had not made any movement that was either calculated to look like a check or might reasonably be interpreted as such. It's just that I took a lot longer than he had gotten used to from my checks on the flop and turn (or at least that's my best guess as to what caused his misfire).
I said, "I haven't acted yet." He apologizes and pulls back the $10.
Well, I know that action out of turn will be binding if when it is his turn the action has not changed. That is, if I check, he is now committed to betting the $10. So I said, "OK, I check."
He then checked, too. The dealer alertly and correctly told him that he could not check, that he had to put out his $10 bet again. He did so. I then check-raised to $25. He called, saw my hand, mucked, and looked seriously disgusted.
What's perfectly clear is that I did nothing against the rules. Furthermore, I did nothing to encourage or entice his error. I wasn't even taking more time than I needed hoping that he would act prematurely. (It was maybe 10 seconds.) It hadn't even occurred to me that this might happen. But I did unequivocally and deliberately take advantage of the situation once he had made his mistake. It was a snap decision, made without time to reflect. If I had wanted to be nice to him, I could have bet the $10 for him. He might have folded, might have called. Heck, he might have even raised, though that seems unlikely. Alternatively, I could have checked then just called the $10 he had to bet.
So, dear readers, what say you? Did I pull a sleazy, slimy move? Was it unethical? Would you have done the same thing?
I can tell you that although I likely gained an extra $15 profit from the hand as a result, I'm not sure that it was smart strategically. He was two seats to my left, and we had had a decent rapport before this happened, and it completely soured the mood. Mike Caro repeats endlessly that you have to keep the atmosphere at the table light and sociable, avoid letting people see that you're serious about taking their money, be the person that is the most fun to lose to. I'm sure he would disapprove of what I did--and it's certainly possible that it cost me more money over the next couple of hours than it made me, if it alerted both my opponent and other players that they needed to be more wary of me than they had been. There's just no way to know that. But it's a legitimate consideration, independent of the ethics of what happened.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Was I a dirtbag?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
21 comments:
I'm new to your blog, having been guided here by my doctor. I find the blog an interesting set of lessons (both good ones and bad), along with just being interesting. I look forward to using your advice during my first trip to Vegas.
And having admitted I've never actually sat down at a Vegas table, I have to say you did nothing wrong, and should be guilt-free. If I had been the errant player, I would have been upset with myself for setting myself up like that, but not at you. OK - you would have received a little grumbling from inside my head, but unless you started talking trash about making a stupid move, I'd hold nothing against you.
I would have learned from it, though, and have been more wary of you, which gives some weight to your later thoughts on the strategic value of the move. Not enough to not take my money, though.
IMHO:
in a vacuum, you did nothing wrong. Poker is a predatory game - people make money by taking advantage of other people's mistakes. This is a rather unconventional example of it, but in the end it boils down to just another mistake.
HOWEVER:
you also make an excellent point about "metagame". Bringing up Mike Caro is brilliant - he talks about always having the laughing, jovial, devil-may-care attitude, because people feel better about giving away their money to friendly people. You could have checked there, called his $10, and he would have been appreciative of your play, and may have given you more money later (along with the rest of the table).
It has nothing to do with "ethics", it's a purely monetary decision - did your image (after the checkraise) cost you more than $15 at this table?
Not a dirtbag move. Maybe a slight angleshot.
He misplayed the hand by not beting it harder to give you the wrong odds to call. He probably had something like a set and was pissed for letting you get there.
Whenever I make a mechanical mistake like that that ends up costing me mobnies, I get a bit annoyed. For example, I have a bad habit of drumming my fingers on the table, which people who want to get to showdown cheap will claim that I was checking. Is that a dirtbag move? Not really, since I was doing it...
Anyway, I wouldn't beat yourself up over it...
I don't think you did anything wrong, except for the Mike Caro comments, to which, in my book, hold little water. However, as I'm reading this post, a thought came to my mind: You are a fully aware live player (particularly of the rules), whence you know if a player bets out of turn, he is committed to making that bet if the action is checked to him. Had the dealer not "forced" the player to bet, would you have called the floor? I can imagine that some dealers may not enforce this rule (ignorance, or whatever), thus your ire would have been turned on the dealer instead of [potentially] yourself. What would you have done in the above scenario, though?
-Poker Meister
http://lowstakeshands.blogspot.com/
Part of being a good poker player is letting your opponent make mistakes and taking advantage. He was really mad at himself at his blunder. You also must consider the opportunity to tilt players to come after you (an unGrump-like strategy based on what I've read about your personality). You can play fast or slow but can you play nice or mean? Good luck, love the blog.
You acted within the rules and essentially he made the decision you were contemplating for you. Is it taking advantage of a mistake, sure, but it's his mistake.
If it were a basketball game and you were playing one on one and the player tripped and fell down and lost the ball wouldn't you still try and score?
I not only see nothing wrong in what you did, I firmly believe that your action was not even in the same zip code as an angleshot.
You have the stone cold nuts. Your goal is to get maximum value from your hand. You are first to act and have to debate the merits if a small bet, an overbet, and a risky check hoping to check-raise. Suddenly, your opponent bets small out of turn. This actually harms you significantly. Your action at this point is likely to give your opponent valuable information about how strong your hand is. Thus, your opponent's rules violation potentially could cost you money. The rules for handling this type of situation are in place to prevent someone from profiting from acting out of turn, and to protect other players in the hand (here, you). In this case, the rule protects your right to maximize your profit when holding a strong hand. Think nothing further of it. Your opponent should be happy his stupidity only cost him $15.
Agree with pretty much everyone else, not a dirtbag move at all. In fact, I think you taught the guy a pretty valuable lesson and he'll be a better player because of it (if he's inclined to learn from such things). You simply have to punish mistakes in this game. It speaks volumes of your integrity that you're second guessing the ethics of this move, but really I think you taught him a nice $15 lesson.
Not even close to an angle shoot. Move was fine.
You did nothing wrong. I know that you play low stakes and so there are some beginners at the tables. If this guy struck me as a beginner, I would treat it the same as someone exposing their cards. I would have just check called, pointing out the mistake one time. If he did it again I would take full advantage of the situation. However, if the player was not just learning the game, I would most likely check raise as well. The only thing I try to keep in mind if a player is new to poker is that I want his money but at the same time I want him to have a good time and come back.
I guess I don't see how his out of turn bet hurts you--seems to me that it's GOOD for you, and it's unnecessary to point out his error. His bet answers your question of what he would do if checked to, and saves you the risk of leading out. There's no need to say anything--just put in a raise. It doesn't anger him, and the end result in the hand is the same...right?
Don't feel quilty for doing what a professional would do. Almost automatically you took advantage of a situation when presented with the opportunity. Isn't the goal of a professional to maximize profit and minimize losses? If you didn't raise there you would not be gaining the most from the hand.
Don't forget, although it is always nice to play at a "fun" table, you are not there to have "fun". You are a professional that is there to pay the bills. The day you forget that is the day you are no longer a professional.
If people act out of turn that's their mistake and I see nothing wrong with taking advantage of it. I remember being Short stacked UTG one time in a tournament with a some what questionable pushing hand when the person to my left folded and like magic everyone else to the blinds did before the dealer said he hasn't acted yet. Made my decision easy. I pushed. The blinds folded. I picked up the blinds.
I think the only mistake you made was to draw attention to the fact that you hadn't actually checked.
As you said, you were thinking about checking if you thought he'd fire again. He said (with action) that he would. It's not much different than the players who, if you pause briefly before acting, will pick up the chips they're going to bet with.
If you look at your options, you essentially have:
1) Say "I didn't act yet", have them take the bet back, and check.
2) Say "I didn't act yet", have them take the bet back, and bet.
3) Accept that you checked, and call.
4) Accept that you checked, and raise.
If you have the nuts, #3 is clearly the worst option.
I would argue that #1 is the next worst option, for a lot of reasons. You just said you're the type of player who cares about things like rules, and making money (rather than drinking and having fun). But the action stands. If the action stands, how does making a scene help?
So, it's between making a scene and betting, or going with the flow and raising.
If you make the scene, and bet <= $10, that's only a good option if you think they will raise. Given that they had been betting small, unless they were "trapping" with top set, a raise is unlikely. So, do you think they're more likely to call a big bet with no money in the pot from someone who has stated that they're there to win?
Basically, any time I'm pondering check or bet, and the person to my left bets out of turn, I'll go along with check every time, and see how the table reacts. If they check out of turn, I'll usually stop the action, though, because that can go around pretty quickly.
Is there an ethical difference between pointing out his error and using it or just straight raising after his out of turn bet without saying anything? I don't think the dealer would have said anything and I don't think it would have effected his mood as much as pointing out the error and then having the dealer force his hand to replace the $10 bet.
I understand the Caro comments and agree with them to a point; however, in games where I see someone just call on the river with while holding the nuts makes me raise an eyebrow. I suspect immediately one of two things. One, is this guy an idiot that doesn't know what he is doing. I might be able to stack him.
Or... Is there some collusion going on in at the table?
I think that if I was playing in a game with you I would immediately rule out the first scenario my paranoid mind would jump on the collusion train.
Nothing at all sleazy about your move.
Assuming you rivered the nuts, I would have raised more than $15 because as you said, potentially pissing him off for $15 is NOT worth it.
Repop to $50 and what will be will be.
The best way to handle it would be to not mention the fact that you failed to act (if you were able to think that quickly) so that he would gain no information about your holdings.
Since you had a big hand, his out of turn bet really doesn't hurt you because it only commits him to the $10 and nothing else.
There is also a good chance (better than you might think) that HE was doing the angle shooting on this hand.
Think about it. If he has a hand that he will call $10 with, its a brilliant (and slimy) way to get some free information.
There was a player some years back in Atlantic City who was a notorious angle shooter and this was certainly prominent in his bag of tricks.
I think you nailed it in your conclusion. There is no need to make this play for a lousy 15 bucks.
Caro also preaches about "treating your customers fairly...if you want return business."
What you did was unethical imo. Pure shenanigans. While its within the rules, you should have either lead out $25 or made a sympathy call. Making that C/R play is adding insult to injury.
It's still a gentleman's game. You are not above the game. You can still succeed mixing business with benevolence. (I shudder at how bad some of these "players" would be IRL situations, maybe it's good they confine themselves to this GAME.)
Once in a cash game, it was folded around to me and the small blind. Before he completed I told him, "If you call I'm going to raise."
I'm not sure what he heard but he proceeded to call and I then raised. He looked at me funny and I said, "I told you I was going to raise." He folded and said he though we were going to race.
That was the last time I tried to do something nice at the poker table.
Thanks for all the comments so far. Yeah, as many people have pointed out, if I were going to do the check-raise, it would have been better to just silently accept his bet rather than pointing out that it was out of turn; same outcome, probably less resentment, no risking that the dealer wouldn't enforce the commitment rule, etc.
But there just wasn't time to stop and think. It's a long-standing habit to speak up immediately when my turn has been passed over, because if you don't, you may lose the chance to do anything other than check. So the speaking up was just a habitual reflex, before I had had an opportunity to consider the implications and alternatives.
In my mind you did nothing wrong, and Grange95's response regarding the potential harm to you was spot on. My only wonder was, why didn't you just raise his out-of-turn bet, I then saw your response, and having read your blog for so long, I understand. Rest easy.
FWIW - to all reading this... click through the google ads as long as you're here. I just did :)
Post a Comment