Take the money

[ceskylev]

Well, like I said in my very first reply: we're working with incomplete information.

I take the attitude of a bartender. There are a lot of addicts/alchoholics out there, but the percentage of these addicts is low enough that it's reasonable for me to assume that I'm dealing with a non-addict until I'm presented with evidence to the contrary.

I'm not a mind-reader, and there's only so much I can reasonably do to avoid playing against a compulsive gambler. So I do what I can, which is to find another place to play when I do have evidence. That's the balance I've struck between wanting to enjoy the game and wanting to be responsible. It's flawed, but it's the best I can come up with.

[xniNja]

This is more or less my stance. The bartender serves everyone alcohol, everyone's getting drunk... some people are drinking more and being more irresponsible... on any given night the bartender doesn't know or care who is a raving alcoholic and a few more shots might give them cirrhosis... So he does his job, serves everyone... and if a raving deadbeat drunk comes back after 2am for a last drink, I myself might refuse on occasion.

[ QUOTE ]
on any given night the bartender doesn't know or care who is a raving alcoholic and a few more shots might give them cirrhosis... So he does his job, serves everyone...

[/ QUOTE ]
No, a bartender's job is also to identify people who need to be cut off. Sometimes he's even legally responsible to do so, which if anything gives him the backup he needs to make the right decisions.

[ QUOTE ]
and if a raving deadbeat drunk comes back after 2am for a last drink, I myself might refuse on occasion.

[/ QUOTE ]
Funny.

[xniNja]

Yea, in some places a bartender's job is also to identify the "too drunks" to drink more at the time, but never to identify who is an alcoholic with a serious drinking problem. I'll also remind you there's no corresponding trait for a poker player to identify addicts. Glad you liked it; to explicate, if I beat an addict in a ring game (what I consider serving him drinks) and after the game he wants to take a shot at me to get even, I might take it occasionally, but refuse sometimes feeling sorry for him. The key point is I view the ring game as fair game, no matter who is involved... I can't think of a good way to explain it, but I don't think you're giving him any unique action in a ring game.

[ QUOTE ]
For me, the positive value of the tainted money (as you call it) does not cover the negative value of the damage I do (to myself and to the addict) by knowingly enabling his addiction and (if he has one) adding to the misery of his family./quote]
As long as you are aware that you are giving up profit by leaving these game conditions, then it seems that you understand that this is a poor decision when it comes to maximizing profits... unless it will drive you to insanity to play with an addict and cause you to give up profits in future games.

You need to measure the importance of table selection versus the importance of keeping yourself slightly more happy by not playing with an addict. There will be days when sacrificing one for the other will be the difference between a winning and losing session, and there will be days when it has no effect.

[DCWGaming]

Just gonna add some thought to the whole "younger kids play more ruthlessly" idea.

I'm 20, and people from my generation are very used to the internet and the fact that you arent held personally accountable for much of anything that goes on. So it is much easier for us to not care about people with gambling problems.

For the most part, people born before 1980 arent used to this freedom because they didnt grow up with the internet.

Thought i'd toss that in there [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Repost, because the first one is ugly.

[ QUOTE ]
For me, the positive value of the tainted money (as you call it) does not cover the negative value of the damage I do (to myself and to the addict) by knowingly enabling his addiction and (if he has one) adding to the misery of his family.

[/ QUOTE ]
As long as you are aware that you are giving up profit by leaving these game conditions, then it seems that you understand that this is a poor decision when it comes to maximizing profits... unless it will drive you to insanity to play with an addict and cause you to give up profits in future games.

You need to measure the importance of table selection versus the importance of keeping yourself slightly more happy by not playing with an addict. There will be days when sacrificing one for the other will be the difference between a winning and losing session, and there will be days when it has no effect.

[Al Schoonmaker]

I wrote a two part series on this subject, "Would you bust your own grandmother?" You can read it at cardplayer.com. In it I stated that it is arrogant nonsense to insist that there is only one correct way to play.

You have just insisted that it is the ONLY way to play, which is, in my opinion, arrogant nonsense.

Regards,

Al

[ QUOTE ]
I wrote a two part series on this subject, "Would you bust your own grandmother?" You can read it at cardplayer.com. In it I stated that it is arrogant nonsense to insist that there is only one correct way to play.

You have just insisted that it is the ONLY way to play, which is, in my opinion, arrogant nonsense.

[/ QUOTE ]
Can you post a link?

[Goodnews]

consider this situation, you find a group of players who play for a good amount of money, adn they are just horrendous. The kind of game we dream of, however, these people do not like to lose if you are a newcomer and have had a history of violent behaviour.

do you still play in this game? do you still play in this game under your philosophy of cut-throat poker?