Is this unethical?

[X-Calibre]

I was at a 6 max stars table the other day and one player kept buying over and over at the table with the min buy-in. He was bad, so obviously i wanted him at the table. However his strategy of always min buying cost me some money for sure. After many orbits it was clear what he was doing. When ever he would get somewhat short stacked, down to his last few bets, he would wait till he flopped a drawing hand and then raise once or twice to get all his money in before the turn with everyone else calling along. Once the hand ended he'd either keep playing with his winnings or immediately rebuy for the min.

It was obvious he would change his play when down to the felt. He would make irrational raises and reraises in multiway pots whenever he was short stacked. He would get 1 to 2-3 on his money then on the turn when the flush misses i would bet (if my hand was good) others would fold and i couldn't charge him to see the next card because he'd already be all in. Essentially, he was able to eliminate reverse implied odds on his drawing hands.

[daryn]

i'm not sure what you mean exactly. what is your question? is what unethical.. a certain style of play? no.

[spamuell]

Essentially, he was able to eliminate reverse implied odds on his drawing hands.

Exactly. Every time he did hit his flush against your TPTK or his straight against your set, or whatever, you saved like 3 bets paying him off, probably more.

You're complaining?

[morgant]

it is withing the rules of online poker, he is just buying in for the min. and there is nothing you can do about it. certain live casino's have a rules like on 2 or 3 minimum buy-ins etc....but in cyberspace dems da rules, so the rules are the code of ethics.

[X-Calibre]

Well, to me, this is like all-in abuse in a tournament. Get your money in when you have proper pot odds to do so without having worry about paying more later.

In both TOP and holdem Sklansky has a specific example for when its improper to play a drawing hand. The example explains that you need to be mindful that there are 2 more streets to play. That is, even though you are getting 1:2 pot odds on the flop for your flush draw reverse implied odds make it so that you will be getting less than 1:2 on your money by the river. This players style of always min buying frequently allowed him to ignore the 4th and 5th street and what they would cost him to see his draw hand to the finish.

[X-Calibre]

On party, it is also the rule that i get one disconnect protect per tournament. Would you agree then that it is ok for me to use that to my advantage on one drawing hand per tournament?

[Lori]

Would you agree then that it is ok for me to use that to my advantage on one drawing hand per tournament

No, because it is expressly forbidden in the rules.

3. Disconnect protection is in no way intended to be used for any purpose other than a genuine disconnect. Any misuse of this policy by intentionally disconnecting from the poker site may result in; forfeiture of any monies won, tournament disqualification, the loss of the disconnect protection privilege or expulsion from the site.



Party discon policy

Lori

[rhinoceros]

What is strange is that a weak player is adept at modifying his play for a short stack.

[driller]

I thought that implied odds meant, that while the currtent pot odds would not justify a certain play, the money that would be in the pot in the future justified the play. Seems to me that by going all in, this player denied himself the future winnings that hitting his draw would yield.

[namknils]

I understand what you are saying X, it kind of seems like he's cheating or bending the rules, but I wouldn't worry about it. This strategy is not going to do much for him, so I don't think it would hurt you other than being a bit annoying.