The 7 Deadly Sins of Poker

[Tosh]

1. Posting in MP or earlier.
2. Asking what is the right level for your VPIP.
3. Sitting at a table at any time with less than 12 big bets.
4. Saying 'No worse hands will call me', when referring to a low limit online game.
5. Berating poor players the times when they suck out.
6. Thinking that going up a limit will help improve your results because 'The players will know what they're doing'.
7. Asking questions about your results based on the very short term.

[GuyOnTilt]

8. Uttering the words, "All hands please" or "I want to see that hand."
9. Folding when checked to.
10. 3-betting my open-raise when my hand sucks (e.g. KQs, ATs).

GoT

[Bob T.]

How about, limping, instead of raising, because 'they always get cracked.'

[Tosh]

11. Asking whether there is ever any point raising as everyone will call anyway.
12. Moaning about people chasing with nothing.

[The Dude]

13. Not raising the hell out of Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif when you get it. Someone who can't play Granny Mae faithfully has no business at the poker table.

[bunky9590]

That should be posted in the Zoo.

While ot raising the heck out of it, we here would call it a "value bet" with Grannie Mae.

[geaux99]

14. Trying to win your money back from the hot maniac,by lowering your standard of play to him.
15.Im going to play the trash too,every else is and running me down.
16.Ill pay you off
17.Telling yourself you are on tilt and still put money in to win your loss back.

[Tosh]

18. Playing a 'rush'.

[bdk3clash]

[ QUOTE ]
4. Saying 'No worse hands will call me', when referring to a low limit online game.


[/ QUOTE ]

I've been seeing this one a lot lately in the Small Stakes forum. As I said before, the concept of betting the river only when you want to be called is an important one. But at the low limits, believe me, you want to be called.

[ggano]

[ QUOTE ]
8. Uttering the words, "All hands please" or "I want to see that hand."

[/ QUOTE ]

I played in LA for the first time last weekend, where things seem just a little bit different from everywhere else I've played. For example, at showdown time, any player at the table can ask that all hands be shown - no mucking. I'd never seen that before. If that's the rule, I'd sure ask for it on occasion - do you think that's bad or are you talking about something else?

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
1. Posting in MP or earlier.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont really think this is a big deal as it's only a very small fraction of the whole session one will play. even more-so if it's a great game.

sometimes too much is made of this. sometimes ill do it just so guys who jump to conclusions based on this too quickly will get the wrong impression.

b

[Bob T.]

That is what he is talking about. It slows the game down, and it is classless.

[Bob T.]

If you do it in a game that I am in, I always make a note, so you have definately bought yourself a little image for part of a small bet. Maybe posting in EP, because you don't know better should be the sin, instead of just posting in EP.

[joker122]

I disagree, #5 is one of my favorite past-times.

[Bob T.]

I think most people agree with that one. It is bad form, because: 1) it isn't nice. 2) bad players are your customers, and you want them to return. 3) it might make them better players, if they listen to you.

[Tosh]

Please never do it in a game I am playing in.

[Tosh]

Agreed. In a game with some observant players it can do a bit for your table image.

[bdk3clash]

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree, #5 is one of my favorite past-times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? Do you want them to play better or something?

[ggano]

[ QUOTE ]
That is what he is talking about. It slows the game down, and it is classless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm. It slows the game down by 10 or 15 seconds, doesn't seem like a big deal to me. Why is it classless? There are times when the hand might be quite informative, it seems dumb not to acquire that information. (I don't know if there's established etiquette on this, like I said I'd never seen it before.)

In 20 hours of play this was requested maybe 5 times. (None of them was requested by me.) If it happened all the time it would be annoying, I agree.

[BugsBunny]

Never mind you want them to return - you first want them not to leave. I hate it when someone starts abusing the fish and the fish just leave to find a different game (not that I blame them)

[brian0729]

10. 3-betting my open-raise when my hand sucks (e.g. KQs, ATs).

LMAO /images/graemlins/grin.gif . Yeah this gets on my nerves to GOT.

And how about "folding big pots on the river for one bet with a decent hand"

[GuyOnTilt]

Why is it classless? There are times when the hand might be quite informative, it seems dumb not to acquire that information. (I don't know if there's established etiquette on this, like I said I'd never seen it before.)

It's classless because you have absolutely no right to see my hand, unless you suspect collussion. Whenever anybody asks to see my hand at showdown after I call, I make it very, very clear that nobody at the table is EVER to do that again, either by forceably inserting my cards into the muck and giving it a quick wash, or by giving them a very nasty look if the cards have already left my possession and informing them that it's very bad etiquette. I absolutely HATE it when players use the rule for reasons other than it was intended. For some reason, LL players feel a need to satisfy their curiosity, both through the IWTSTH rule and by burning and turning the river themselves after a pot is taken down on the turn. Both are completely inappropriate.

GoT

[ggano]

OK - I didn't realize what this rule was intended for.

The hand histories for all the online sites will tell you every hand that makes it to the showdown, right? How do you feel about that? I guess I'm wondering if the days of not having to show your hand at showdown are numbered, so maybe your rule of etiquette is outdated.

[EVIL]

I disagree, because you can't simply compare the cost of posting to your expected P&L for the session. You have to compare the cost of posting to the expected P&L over the extra time you have gained by posting now as opposed to waiting for the BB. E.g. if you post UTG then you are spending on expectation nearly 1 small bet (since most of the time you will be dealt a hand you would have chosen to fold) to gain an extra two or three minutes of playing time. Unless your a winning player to the tune of of 10 bb/hr or so, posting UTG like this is -EV.

[JTG51]

It's classless because you have absolutely no right to see my hand, unless you suspect collussion.

Does that mean you never look at another players cards in a hand history when playing online?

[slavic]

I watched a guy do this 3 times in a round a few weeks back. I finally just told him the reason for the rule and that what he was doing was wrong. The rule is not a free oportunity to dial up a player.

The player called the floor and asked the floor what the rule was for. Of course the floorman didn't have a clue. Nice....

[bernie]

what moron would post UTG? a drunk maybe. but not really anyone with any coherency.

were talking about maybe, around MP.

even then, the initial post is of small signifigance in the big scheme of things. especially when on a table of very weak and easy opponents.

b

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

It is totally classless, but there is a good reason not to do it beyond good taste. Often when all cards are requested, some nice poker moron who makes a lame call or bluff gets humiliated by their poor play and becomes less likely to do it in the future. Furthermore, typically (not always) those who ask to see all hands are jackasses. And even though someone might be a bad poker player, they are likely to be smart enough to see that they are being ridiculed by a jackass, adding serious insult to injury making the game less fun for them.

This makes the game less fun for us when there is any humiliation, when bad players play better and when bad players take their money and leave.

If someone gives up their interest in a pot, unless their is real reason to suspect collusion, I don't think anyone has a right to see any cards not flipped over voluntarily.

[EVIL]

I just used UTG as sort of an extreme example to illustrate my point. The same type of reasoning can be applied to posting in other positions as well. For example, let's say you post in MP1, i.e. 3 to the left of the BB at a full table. Since you are likely (80% or more) to be dealt a hand you would not voluntarily play, this means that it is costing you (let's say) 1/2 small bet or so on average to play now in MP1 instead of waiting for the BB. Unless you expect to make 1/2 small bet or more on average by the time the BB gets to you, your choice of posting in MP1 was a -EV choice.

On the other hand, for the CO, since you are nearly a full rotation from the big blind, then posting is not bad since if you are a profitable player, you are able to win on average significantly more than the BB+SB (and in particular significantly more than the BB) per rotation.

[The Dude]

ggano,

Your thoughts are exactly what mine were when I started playing poker. At the 2-4 tables, I would occaisionally ask to see the hands, because - like you said - good infmation.

The problem was, that I didn't realize the rule is there only to stop collusion and that it is EXTREMELY poor etiquette. As the stakes get higher and the players more serious, this becomes even more offensive. Since I was told the intent for the rule, I have never asked to see a hand since.

At the low-limit tables I tolerate it only because the opponents at that level aren't good enough to really use the information and I actually cost myself more by giving them the impression that I play seriously (I would rather them think I'm a gambling kid) than I do by showing the hand. (Read the section on loose games in HPFAP for more discussion on this.)

BTW, internet poker and WPT are a bit different than live games, because you get to see hands you otherwise wouldn't. In B&M cardrooms, asking to see hands is extremely poor taste, and by no means is this outdated. In fact, I believe it is the Bellagio that allows a player to ask to see a hand only once - ever (maybe it's the Mirage). A local told me that while I was playing at the Luxor, I believe.

[JTG51]

It is totally classless, but there is a good reason not to do it beyond good taste.

You don't have to convince me, I've never asked to see someone's cards in a B&M game.

If someone gives up their interest in a pot, unless their is real reason to suspect collusion, I don't think anyone has a right to see any cards not flipped over voluntarily.

I'll ask again, does this mean it's wrong to look at a hand history to see someone's cards online? Does looking become OK when you can do it in anonymity? I'm not just trying to give you guys a hard time. I'm seriously interested in opinions.

I'm guessing almost all of us think it's rude and classless to ask to see someone's cards at the showdown for all the reasons you gave, but I bet all of us also look at TONS of hand histories when we play online. I know I do. This seems more than a bit hypocritical. Can anyone justify this, or is it just that since we aren't embarrassing our opponent (or ourselves) by asking to see the hand we suddenly don't care about the intent of the rule?

Anyone?

[NLfool]

I never ask for it but for once in a moon but I don't mind others asking for it helps to see what is going through the players mind. Last time it was asked some guy flipped over J10d on an Ad7x6x flop. I then proceeded to bet any time this guy checked. Definitely helped me that night that someone asked.

[Mike Gallo]

You left a sin out. I saw it happen yesterday and I must confess it angered me. A player who had chopped earlier in the session chopped with a player to his left. For this hand he refused to chop with the player to his right. In fact he raised because he had pocket 9's.

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

I don't play online, but if I did, you can be sure that I would use hand histories if it would help me. Those players have turned their cards over and 'entered' them into the public record. No problem as far as I can tell.

[tripdad]

at least in party poker hand histories, you only get to see other cards if that person voluntarily showed his loser. what does this have to do with compelling someone to show?

cheers!

p.s.---a few more deadly sins of hold'em players:

a) playing blackjack
b) playing craps
c) playing the ponies

[Dylan Wade]

Rushes certainly exist in No limit. It's a psychological phenomenon. If you totally break someone in NL, and immediately after you are dealt a premium hand.. you can semibluff stronger thanks to the psychological effects of the rush. If your hand holds up, you can then continue to pick up the blinds. Yesterday, I won 12 hands in a row at a No Limit table. So fun.

[Ulysses]

On Party, all hands that call on the river (or all hands, if it's checked around) are shown in the hand history.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll ask again, does this mean it's wrong to look at a hand history to see someone's cards online?
....
This seems more than a bit hypocritical.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's hypocritical at all. It's simply a different game.

In B&M, IWTSTH exists for a specific reason. And most players don't abuse it.

Online, all hands are shown (in the hand history) regardless. That's part of the rules online, so I look at them.

However, I do think one could perhaps make a case that it's acceptable to muck out of turn on the river for that reason.

[Dylan Wade]

Yes! This is possibly my biggest pet peeve from live games. I was talking to a dealer one time and he said that if the dealer is "good" he will protect the muck at the showdown (by keeping the muck stacked neatly, and holding his left hand over it like a cage), so that players cannot forcefully muck their cards.

I kind of get sick of starting little "muck-wars" where I try to sneak my cards into the muck, or try to annoy the opponent by having the dealer turn his cards.

Anyway one time I was drunk and stuffed my cards in the drop box. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway one time I was drunk and stuffed my cards in the drop box. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Dylan Wade]

# 234: Typing "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz" online
# 235: Telling bad jokes refering to "the dealer" as a person online.
# 236: Trying to tip the dealer online.
# 237: Asking for a deck change over and over ( both online and at B&M.)
# 238: "your stupid"

[Joe Tall]

I believe there is a time where the rule is warrented.

The only time I've ever asked to see someone's cards is when they have shown a few players at the table just before they went to muck. It also has to do with what type of players viewed the whole cards and what transpired in the hand. Giving those players who viewed the hand an adavantage over that particular opponent.

Normally, it happens when a player raises his hand up, going to muck, over the table in the 1,4 or 7,10 seats and the and the 2,3 or 8,9 seats get the free view.

I may have asked twice, ever, and one time it wasn't even needed as the player tabled his hand anyway.

Peace,
Joe Tall

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll ask again, does this mean it's wrong to look at a hand history to see someone's cards online? Does looking become OK when you can do it in anonymity? I'm not just trying to give you guys a hard time. I'm seriously interested in opinions.


[/ QUOTE ]

I personally hate this about hand histories. For a while I was reading posts and was utterly confused when someone said "I pulled up the hand history and it turned out that so and so had such and such." Then somebody explained that Party hand histories (I am not sure if all sites do this) revealed all hands that went to the showdown. Although this probably benefits me more than my opponents, since I actually review hand histories and many others do not, I would gladly change the system if I could. I would like to keep my mucked cards a secret and let others do the same with theirs. However, I do not make the rules. I have to assume that others will look at mine and, therefore, don't hesitate to look at theirs. In practice, I only do so in the context of writing up hand histories for posts. I don't pull up hand histories mid-session to get a better read on an opponent although I suppose I am entitled to. As Ulysses said this is part of the online world, whether I personally like it or not. I think B&M is completely different for all the reasons that others here have stated.

[bicyclekick]

[ QUOTE ]


Anyway one time I was drunk and stuffed my cards in the drop box. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


LOL, that has to be one of the funniest things i've ever heard.

[Dylan Wade]

There's a certain type of player who will not show his cards at the showdown until everyone has shown their cards. This type of player is sort of angle shooting imo, since he will not show his cards even as first to act.

[chesspain]

#247 Flirting online with a player you assume is female

[ArchAngel71857]

# 250. Reading Ken Warren.
# 251. Applying Ken Warren.
# 252. Telling others to read and apply Ken Warren.



-AA

[JTG51]

Those players have turned their cards over and 'entered' them into the public record.

But most online hand histories don't only show hands that were turned over. They show all hands that made it to a showdown. In other words, all hands that you can ask to see in a B&M game.

[JTG51]

It's simply a different game.

I suppose I agree. I have occasional bouts of conscience about looking at hand histories, but I always end up concluding the same thing.

[Bob T.]

I agree with you. It should be a level playing field, and show one, show all, is different than IWTSTH.

[Bob T.]

Online and live are different. When you are playing live you have a bunch of different cues to put together the hand, and you can use all of them. When you are playing online, it pretty much is down to style of play, so it is OK that we get hand histories, to get a better grasp on our opponents style of play.

I use hand histories all the time, and I don't think it is a coincidence that my best win rate is on UB, where they have the instant HH feature.

Good luck,
play well,

Bob T.

[Bob T.]

I should add that, it really doesn't take that many data points to identify a players style of play.

What do you think a player that Cold calls preflop, and then folds for a single bet on the flop had?

How about someone who you see limping in MP with AK off?

Or someone who turns over JT suited after they coldcalled preflop?

Or someone who shows down A5 off in EP?

Or someone who fourbets preflop with 99?

Or someone who threebets and EP raiser, with T8 suited?

I've seen all of these players in the last week, and with
one data point, you have a lot of information about the player, and probably know how some approaches that you could use to put them farther -EV.

Good luck,
play well,

Bob T.

[mosch]

I've asked to see somebody's cards, I think, three times.

In each case it was somebody who was abusing the rule, and it was done as part of an effort to get them to stop embarassing bad players. I don't know if it's +EV or not, but I'm more than happy to take the heat from a table jackhole if it'll make things friendlier for the fish.

[CrazyEyez]

#253. Admonishing another player for raising too much, since you're "only there for the bad beat jackpot."

(Witnessed that one a few weeks ago.)