Do you enjoy gambling?

[TStoneMBD]

i think the old phrase that all pro poker players go broke at least once is now outdated if they play internet games. its just simply not true anymore. in the days of the brick and mortar, in order for a player to make a good living he has to play higher and higher limits and often times with only a 300BB bankroll. in the internet age, bankroll growth can explode at much lower limits through magnification of hands.

[sweetjazz]

Interesting thread. I am probably one of those don't-like-to-gamble people -- I answered 'No' to your question. But I do enjoy playing games, and so would recreationally play losing games for small stakes (e.g. blackjack), with the goal of playing optimally nonetheless.

I'm also not necessarily dazzled by the pros who play the highest stakes games. Opting for a reasonably good chance of earning 50K in a year with some risk of ruin, versus a guaranteed 25K, makes some sense to me. Change the numbers to 500K and 250K, and it seems like a worse decision to me. But I don't value material things to much, and enjoy living a simple life. I play poker largely for enjoyment and the challenge of beating the game -- the fact that I profit off of it is an added bonus, as I don't have to limit how often I play in my leisure time. (Whereas I would be limited if I were playing a losing game like blackjack.)

For every success story of a pro risking his bankroll and becoming rich, you hear so many stories of players who are so attached to the money that they end up making bad decisions with disasterous consequences, either risking money they shouldn't have to play in games above their bankroll or by playing losing poker after going on tilt from some bad beats. I think that there is a lot to be said for being very detached from the gambling aspect of poker. Ultimately, one needs to accept that poker is a gambling game and not deviate from optimal strategy in order to try to guard against the inherent gamble in the game, but most enjoyment of gambling qua gambling is detrimental to a player.

[pokerhooker]

At my local 20-40 a few months ago, I had a guy's number, generally outplaying him and winning the majority of his $1500 in chips in a very short time.

I picked off a bluff once again to bust him, and he reached into his pocket, slams $2000 down onto the table, which roughly matched my stack and said he would "high spade" me on the next hand for it (higher spade between us wins).

I politely refused and said I'd rather try to win it playing poker. Very angrily, he said "That's what I thought. I just wanted to see how much gamble you have in you!" To him, this was an insult, but I didn't really mind, since I preferred my chances outplaying him.

So, how many of you would have accepted his bet, considering it was essentially a freeroll with his lost money?

Coincidentally, I was dealt the A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] on the next hand. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] However, I'm not sure if the floor would have even allowed it, since sidebets aren't allowed.

Pokerhooker

[Nigel]

[ QUOTE ]
it was essentially a freeroll with his lost money

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, it was your money now.

[pokerhooker]

I guess it depends on how much of a gambler's perspective you have... [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[TStoneMBD]

this is money that this player will continue to play poker with. if you win it off him he will probably quit. if he wins your money he will probably stop tilting.

[flawless_victory]

[ QUOTE ]
At my local 20-40 a few months ago, I had a guy's number, generally outplaying him and winning the majority of his $1500 in chips in a very short time.

I picked off a bluff once again to bust him, and he reached into his pocket, slams $2000 down onto the table, which roughly matched my stack and said he would "high spade" me on the next hand for it (higher spade between us wins).

I politely refused and said I'd rather try to win it playing poker. Very angrily, he said "That's what I thought. I just wanted to see how much gamble you have in you!" To him, this was an insult, but I didn't really mind, since I preferred my chances outplaying him.

So, how many of you would have accepted his bet, considering it was essentially a freeroll with his lost money?

Coincidentally, I was dealt the A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] on the next hand. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] However, I'm not sure if the floor would have even allowed it, since sidebets aren't allowed.

Pokerhooker

[/ QUOTE ]first, this post makes you sound limke a D-bag, so id work on that..
second, id have takebn this guys bet... very good for your table image... and eff the floor! no sidebets?? where was this?

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
first, this post makes you sound limke a D-bag, so id work on that

[/ QUOTE ]

You once told me you were going to "punch me in the face"

So yeah, take your own advice

[muck_nutz]

Correct.

[muck_nutz]

[ QUOTE ]
So, how many of you would have accepted his bet, considering it was essentially a freeroll with his lost money?


[/ QUOTE ]

freeroll? The chips are mine. I can go spend them as I wish. This is no more a freeroll then spending money from a paycheck or money from my bankroll is a "freeroll".

But I might have flipped a coin with him. It depends. If he is the type to stay until he gets even but then to bail as soon as he is even I definitely am not flipping a coin with him. I have an edge. I want to execute that over as long a period as I can. OTOH if this is someobdy that I will be gambling with a lot over time and/or I expect he won't leave if he wins the cointoss and I have money available I might flip with him. It also depends on how I want the rest of the table to see me.

FWIW I'll offer to flip coins with the nits when they whine about not getting action. That usu. stops that behavior.