Chopping the blinds

[Dan Rutter]

This past week I spent more time playing live poker at casinos then I ever had in the past. I am sure this topic may have been discussed before, but I am going to ask again. If the game condition is a game that people are just having fun, and throwing around money, is it better just to chop when they want to. I thought in the past I would never chop if someone wanted to, but after I saw others were chopping the blinds, I thought if I didn't I would look like a jerk, and people wouldn't have fun anymore. So I chopped. Thoughts?

[bobdibble]

Chop. Not only for the reasons that you mention, but if you are playing low stakes, the rake is a real killer, especially if it is heads up. The rake is the main reason that most people chop and most will stop chopping if you get short handed with a reduced rake.

[Dan Rutter]

This was actually a $10-20 game.

[moomoocow]

I've seen it played both ways (chop/no chop) at 5/10. I generally ask once each way, left and right (blind - without looking at my cards) and try and make that binding (not that there's much chopping going around at 5/10 tables). As a matter of preference, I like to chop in the small blind and play it out in the big blind, but those are just very slight preferences.

[d10]

Still not big enough limits to justify not chopping. You'll usually lose 10% of the pot to the rake if you want to play heads up vs the other blind. You can't expect to have that much of an edge on your opponent simply from your superior skills to justify playing. And for most people, you're either never chopping or always chopping, you can't choose to play your good hands and chop your bad hands. Don't chop to keep the table friendly, chop because it keeps the game moving and it is +EV for you.

[d10]

[ QUOTE ]
I like to chop in the small blind and play it out in the big blind, but those are just very slight preferences.

[/ QUOTE ]

You realize chopping is more advantageous to the BB right? Of course it's advantageous to the SB as well, just not as much.

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

I chop, except short-handed. For a while, I did, then I didn't, now I do. At Canterbury, chopping is relatively rare at the 6/12 & 8/16. Since there are always three or more 6/12 and 8/16 games running when I play, there is no reason to stay at any table where chops are frequent. If there are frequent chops, I usually ask for a table change.

[goofball]

I don't chop. I just tell people I came to gambOOOOOl.

Or I say what i learned from barry tannenbaum. "i used to chop so people would like me, but then i figured out they didn't like me anyway"

[Derek in NYC]

The problem with chopping is that the guy with whom you're sharing a blind may be a selective chopper. I sat in a 10/20 game with a guy for several hours chopping, until one time from the SB he puts a bet out to raise my big blind. I asked him what the story was, and he says, "I never chop this hand." So I three bet him (more or less blind), and he capped it. He had aces, and I sucked out when I flopped two raggy pairs. The point of this story is that some people may play by the selective chop rule, and a no-chop policy can be easier.

[xniNja]

If you want to be slimy, selectively chop. If you want to be friendly, always chop. If you want to make enemies, wait until the guy asks for a chop and then raise.

I think more or less people are selectively chopping. Is this in fact slimy like I originally said? I don't think so. So you look down at your cards as the BB, you have 27.. it's folded to the SB - you should ask for a chop. Same situation, except you have AA... you should keep quiet and hope he raises you or calls. I think this is legitimate.

[LIRob23]

[xniNja]

I don't really buy the moral of the story. Chopping usually applies to limit games; why would you chop in NL where there may be a significant take regardless of the amount of players in the hand? Also, I don't like that the dealer "for fun" dealt out the flop- Ok, so there was an 8.. maybe the turn and river were aces?

I'll leave the poker Gods alone.