Re: Time for a player ban?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They had more skill than most of us, so it wasn't too much fun.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's crazy. They played within the rules, it's just that they knew how to play poker? This should be posted in the "I didn't get invited back because I played too well" thread, not the "Ban the cheaters" thread.
-Sam

Edit: Wow. I guess you DID post there.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm guessing the reason they were banned was because they misrepresented themselves when they first arrived at the game. Claimed not to know much about the game, played poorly at first on purpose, etc... Basically hustled the rest of the players.

That's fine to do at a casino, but this is a guy's home game. A guy running a home game has every right to not invite players like that (ie skilled) back. You don't make a big deal out of it, or ask them for their money back, but you also don't play with them in the future.

Re: Time for a player ban?
 

This MIGHT be offtopic [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] , but I agree that the McDonald's case was not frivolous. I actually sat on a similar case vs. Starbucks. Three of us thought Starbucks was partially at fault (nothing in the range of millions, however).

But since it was a civil, not criminal, case, only 9 jurors needed to agree. Too bad one of them spoke no english at all, one fell asleep during the trial, and at least one was "slow". The three others (including me) were extremely wise and just. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Ok, back to poker 'n' guns 'n' stuff....

-ptmusic