Ethics of Intentionally Putting People on Tilt

[warlockjd]

Michael Jordan talked more trash than any other basketball player I've seen.

Hmm....

[Ed Miller]

I'm certainly no authority on this issue...

I don't try to put people on tilt for the sake of putting them on tilt. Occasionally I have been known to egg on a steamer who is being whiny/abusive to others. I have little tolerance for people who are abusive to others at the table... especially to live ones or inexperienced players.

If someone is doing that, I might say something if I think it will humiliate him or push him over the edge a bit.

[The Dude]

Ed,

The basis for my question is this: I believe firmly that the poker industry will benefit TREMENDOUSLY from its ability to remove itself from problem gambling behavior.

Statistically, poker is much less likely than other forms of gambling to cause/attract addictive or problematic behavior. Even so, those interested in promoting the industry should do everything they can to reduce the connection between poker and problem behavior... and that means keeping people off tilt.

Am I wrong here?

[Lunamondo]

Bad manners are bad ethics, more or less be barred, but there are also player who know that someone goes more or less to some sort of tilt or imbalance when he loses many hands or something, faces type of play he is not comfortable or skilled with, and so some of his opponents might adjust to it by trying to draw out more often in marginal cases, change their way of play to get the best of it, like check-raise someone who can't handle it emotionally.

The only problem here is that if one becomes a personality that tries to produce nastiness out of people, even without being nasty (we are more or less like that when we tilt, while here we do not, but just try to make money with it), it comes to the boarder of ethics, even though it's so only because of the other's weakness of tolerating them.

We adjust to the way the opponents play, also weighting their egos etc., as it affects especially the actions of the less skilled/experienced (= less controlled) players. We create some confusion if necessary to make us less predictable, and we can try to imbalance the opponents psychologically, causing them to not play their best game; these tricks are part of poker and are ethical, while if someone can't handle something emotionally, why one would not be ethically allowed to take advantage of it? As long as it does not make one a nasty person, I don't see there is anything wrong about it, even though it's not part of card skills, just part of the psychological factors.

[Dov]

I think you are.

Take this common scenario...

A 20-40 player is playing 10-20 while waiting for a seat in his regular game. He is raising almost every hand on every street because he knows that the other players at the table aren't comfortable playing at that level. He is essentially putting them on tilt. (one form anyway)

I agree that there shouldn't be bad behavior at the table. The difference is that people play this sport with their own money, and that same money is used to keep score. Many people are emotionally attached to money and if that attachment is too great, then they shouldn't play.

But who is to say when enough is enough? Do you really want some floorperson to come over and tell you that you're done for the night because you're tilting? How does he know? It's your money! Right?

The nature of the game makes it very difficult to implement what you are discussing in the middle of the game. Someone with tilt issues should address them outside of the game or expect to lose.

[The Dude]

Dov,

Thanks for your replies. You think logically, and you explain your position well.

[ QUOTE ]
...He is essentially putting them on tilt. (one form anyway)

[/ QUOTE ]
I will grant that not all forms of tilt lead to problem gambling (perhaps even most forms). As long as that form of tilt doesn't cause emotional instability and/or problem behavior (not the same as poor poker play), it's fair game. I see no ethical dilemma.

Here's one example of unethically tilting someone. When you bust someone out, goading them on so they will continue to rebuy, especially if this happens more than once. I saw this happen where a good player egged on a complete fish in a live NL game. The fish rebought four times, and it was clearly more than he was willing to lose.

Here's where it becomes a problem:
1.When we lose respect for the other person as a human being (i.e. not caring about the damage we are doing to someone - financially, emotionally, etc. - the way we would if it were a good friend)... the idealism.
2. When we fail to make efforts to remove poker from the stereotyped "dirty gambling industry." The long term benefits of the industry as a whole must be weighed against the one-time profit we make from exploiting this tiliting customer. Do we want to take all the customer's money this one time, or would we rather build the industry as a whole and have more repeat customers?... the realism.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you really want some floorperson to come over and tell you that you're done for the night because you're tilting? How does he know? It's your money! Right?

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe there is a great deal of responsibility on the casinos themselves to recognize problem gambling and stop it when they can. As much as we love the poker industry, we cannot ignore the truth that gambling addictions are real, and we cannot adopt the "not on us" philosophy that leads to social apathy. This is the reason most bars and restaurants across the country do not let people leave intoxicated.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
As much as we love the poker industry, we cannot ignore the truth that gambling addictions are real, and we cannot adopt the "not on us" philosophy that leads to social apathy. This is the reason most bars and restaurants across the country do not let people leave intoxicated.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the reason bars and restraurants do not allow overly intoxicated persons to leave by themselves is because of the physical harm they may inflict on themselves (e.g. passing out in the snow) or someone else (e.g. driving). I have never seen an establishment refuse to allow a patron to spend too much money on drinks, especially if the patron is buying drinks for others. This is no different from allowing a poker player to lose all of his money.

[The Dude]

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre> No, the reason bars and restraurants do not allow overly intoxicated persons to leave by themselves is because of the physical harm they may inflict on themselves... or others... </pre><hr />

Are you denying that those with problem gambling behavior do major harm to themsleves and those in thier lives? I hope not, because that position is simply undefendable in light of real data.

Granted, intoxication is much easier to observe/ predict than problem gambling, but let's not be naive here and pretend we haven't all seen it clear as day.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre> No, the reason bars and restraurants do not allow overly intoxicated persons to leave by themselves is because of the physical harm they may inflict on themselves... or others... </pre><hr />

Are you denying that those with problem gambling behavior do major harm to themsleves and those in thier lives? I hope not, because that position is simply undefendable in light of real data.

Granted, intoxication is much easier to observe/ predict than problem gambling, but let's not be naive here and pretend we haven't all seen it clear as day.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your response, while valid, has nothing to do with my response, which was to explain that places that serve alcohol try to prevent some drunks from leaving alone do to the immediate harm they may cause to themselves or someone else.

Bars and taverns that wanted to help alcoholics would not serve them at all...which only happens in Fantasyland.

Indeed, casinos that wanted to help gambling addicts would refuse to take any of their action...also occurs only in Fantasyland.

[bomblade]

I find very few things unethical at a poker table. I look at what other perceive as unethical as my edge. If a player is flashing his cards, I peek. If a player prematurely throws his hand over, I raise. If a player is on tilt, I try to put them on worse tilt.
Is it unethical to exploit someone's tell for maximum profit? No one would think so, because reading someone is a skill. So is putting someone on tilt.
There are a few different kinds of tilt player however. The most common would be the one who loses with AA a couple times and starts playing all suited cards. They loosen up their game, but after the flop, they're not necessarily a maniac. This player you don't really put on worse tilt, this is basically the limit to their tilt.
One other type is the one that starts raising and trying to bully his way into pots. This player often times acts like a complete [censored], talks a lot of trash, and seeks revenge against those who took advantage of his poor play. This is the player I want to put on worse tilt.