I'm a card mechanic.

[toots]

As I noted previously, a heavyweight boxer might figure he just wants to win and therefore only chooses to fight featherweights. Just because he then follows the rules of boxing doesn't make it a fair fight.

[msb]

Quick question... Call me naive, but wouldn't a cut-card and having the player to the right of the dealer (assuming they weren't in cahoots) cut the deck pretty much take care of most of these things?

If not... please explain.

[warewulf]

Yeah, most of my games, the dealer doesn't handle the deck until it's ready. Last dealer shuffles, next person cuts.

I know there are ways to try to rig a deck so someone cuts where you want them to. That's why I always square the deck before cutting.

[CaptLego]

[ QUOTE ]
As I noted previously, a heavyweight boxer might figure he just wants to win and therefore only chooses to fight featherweights. Just because he then follows the rules of boxing doesn't make it a fair fight.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK.
We're using a different definition of "fair". I see your point, and that is indeed common usage.

From my definition/usage, I'd have to say that if the rules of boxing allow heavyweights to compete in the featherweight division or vice-versa, and both combatants are aware of the rules ---- then yes, the fight would be "fair" albeit quite one-sided.

So if I were to sit down at the Belagio w/ Mr. Brunson, I'd consider the game "fair", but still expect to lose all my $.
If I thought I was good enough to even understand why I was losing, I might consider the poker lesson worth the cost.

[WeirdoC]

I've been doing card tricks for years, and I doubt it would take a whole lot more practice for me to get to where I could give myself a little edge in a home game. But the fact you seem to overlook is that most home games are easy to mop up using legitimate poker skills without stooping to cheating.

Card manipulation is a wonderful ability to have if you like to entertain people with sleight of hand. But what you are talking about doing is using that skill to make up for a lack of skill at playing poker. The analogy made earlier about a Heavyweight fighting a Featherweight is a great poker analogy in that if a Featherweight is stupid enough to fight a Heavyweight in an otherwise even match, he's an idiot and the Heavyweight deserves to win. But if the same Featherweight gets into the ring, pulls a pistol, and shoots the other guy halfway through the fight, that just makes him a pathetic loser who couldn't win without cheating.

If you need to make money by sleight of hand, go perform card magic for a living. Or learn how to play poker and beat the game straight up. But don't be so pathetic as to cheat. And if you are that pathetic, don't bemoan your fate when you get the crap kicked out of you by some ex-soldiers that catch you cheating in a home game. It's nobody's fault but your own. And it's gonna be awfully hard to bottom deal with eight broken metacarpals...

[FatMan]

I'm sure Doyle is always looking for a soft game. We all are, but that is very different than cheating. Doyle's point is you can make more money in the long run by playing honestly against weak players rather than trying to hustle them. Remember you can only skin a sheep once, you can shear them over and over and over.......

[toots]

Different from cheating, but very close to cheating.

Nothing ruins a poker player's day more than a level playing field. The last thing in the world a poker player wants is an evenly matched game, meaning that poker players tend to be about the poorest sports when it comes to competition you'll ever find.

Drawing some arbitrary line between that and cheating is just drawing an arbitrary line. I just have to laugh when I read of people going out of their way trying to find some unsuspecting people to fleece (while avoiding those of similar or greater skill), who are the first to jump up and scream "cheater" when someone tries this.

Yeah, it's cheating, but looking for soft games is little better.

[Felix_Nietsche]

Lets talk about something practical that can benefit 2+2ers.

I have read that you can spot a mechanic by listening when they shuffle the deck. I have also heard it is practically impossible to catch a mechanic. The only clue being how they hold the deck... Any advice on how to protect yourself from a mechanic?

[The_Tracker]

[ QUOTE ]
Lets talk about something practical that can benefit 2+2ers.

I have read that you can spot a mechanic by listening when they shuffle the deck. I have also heard it is practically impossible to catch a mechanic. The only clue being how they hold the deck... Any advice on how to protect yourself from a mechanic?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have been more than happy to when I started the original post. That was the point.

The childish name calling and insistence on me being a gun weilding thug for practicing card mechanics ended the discussion for me.

Intelligent discussion is not possible on this forum. To many insecure adolescence.

[Arsene Lupin III]

[ QUOTE ]
The childish name calling and insistence on me being a gun weilding thug for practicing card mechanics ended the discussion for me.

Intelligent discussion is not possible on this forum. To many insecure adolescence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe if you didn't ignore the sound counterarguments I presented, instead deciding to focus on the flames...