Home Poker House Etiquette (Long)

[Burnt Toast]

I am looking for some advice on how to host a home poker game. I have a lot of casino poker experience, and I am under the impression that a home game host should take on many of the same responsiblities that the casino takes on in a casino poker room. Like the casino I should be keeping the banking accurate, interpreting the rules, etc. Ultimately after all arguements are heard I should be the one to make a final clear cut decision. Of course all of this should be done within reason, but many of the players I have started playing with do not seem to agree with my intentions. While the game is usually low limit antes and between friends, I still feel that the house rules should be strictly enforced whenever there is a disagreement. The rules may only be bypassed by a player that is agreeing to give up on his own benefits/privaleges (not someone elses). This is mostly to protect the integrity of the game. There are some unknown players that show up every now and then, and also some games with progressive pots get excessive.

Before I ramble on anymore I would greatly appreciate any websites or articles on this subject. (www.pokerpages.com had articles but they only mentioned the dealers responsibilty)

Specficially, here is what happened. Last night we had an unknown player playing (a friend of a friend, we'll call him UP). I am as usual trying to be fair and keep the game running. This has already led to a number of comfrontations with UP. An example would be that he persistently insited that no legal poker game allowed check raises. It seems that I maybe the only person at the table that understands the play. Ironically most of the players seem to side with UP (even though they know I am a regular casino poker player. Of course they have never experienced a game with me.)

Anyway we start playing some kind of 1 card pass the trash type game. Basically, everyone is delt 1 card. The player to the left of the dealer starts. That player has the option of either trading with the player to his left or keeping his card. It then goes to the next player who has the same option. When it gets to the dealer he has the option to trade with the top card on the deck. The player left with the lowest card in his hand pays one of his antes into the pot. The deal then rotates and we play again untill all the antes are gone.

Misunderstanding #1
The action gets to the dealer. He turns his card face up (with no indication of whether he is playing this card or not). He then proceds to deal the top card off the deck, while everyone else has began turning thier cards over for the showndown. I suggest he leave his original card face down if he is trading with the deck. The peanut gallery responds with "stop being so anal" comments. I let it slide and now others decide to start doing the same thing.

Misunderstanding #2
New hand. Its the UP's turn to act. He asks me if I am going to look at my card. I say no, assuming that he'll declare his action and then I'll look (just to avoid giving off tells). Almost at the same time I realize I should have been more clear, and I move my hands to protect my card. As UP sees me going to protect my card he snatches it away. I then tell him he can not grab my card away from me like that no matter what I say. There is not place for snatching cards in any kind of poker game. As usual nobody wants to here my point of view even though I believe (and they all know by now that I believe) the host has the final say. UP says its a normal part of this game. I disagree. tell him no to do it again and let it slide. This really aggitated me though.

Misunderstanding #3
UP is the dealer, and it is his turn to act. He turns over the Qs and clearly says I stay. This card has previously been explained to him as the losest possible card in this game (outside of normal order). About 2 seconds later he says wait a minute and deals one off the top of the deck as his new card. Again I interject. I say if I am not allowed to renig then you can't either. Of course many people again disagree, and I again am unable to get in an explanation.

Usually this kind of error is easy to forgive, but my aggiation had been building. Mostly due to the card snatching. So at this point I tell them I cannot play under these conditions. I surrender the rest of my antes and exit the game. Arguements are still flying. I'm still too anal, etc. The game breaks up and I buy the chips back into the bank.

Now, I personally dont want to break the game up permanently. And yes most of us were drunk, but I don't understand why these guys dont see the importance of maintaining this games integrity. I also didnt think that it bothered them that I often win. I dont rub it in when I do, and I often play down to there level just to keep the game social. Afterall, I do not play these games to make money. On this particular night I was down twenty. Maybe they that my antics were me being a sore loser.

Anyway thats my sad story. Please give me some advice.
thanks

Toast.

[punkass]

I also "host" a table. One of the things about being a host, is, it's your house. All your house rules apply also, with poker, such as, no arguing with the host when he's made up his mind. It could be about what music to listen to, where you can sit, or what the rules to your poker game are.

Kick his ass out. If your friends are all this clueless, and disrespectful, I wouldn't play with them. It might be a tough loss for the game, but I'd rather have no game than people snatching my cards.

Just my 2 cents.

[DoctorK]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
yes most of us were drunk, but I don't understand why these guys dont see the importance of maintaining this games integrity

[/ QUOTE ]

That's probably 99% of the problem. If you're da boss, you're da boss, and if they don't like the way you run your game, they can leave. Your house, your rules.

Of course, you might just break up the game.

Doc.

[broomcorn]

For starters, see if you can find the rules posted for any public cardroom on the internet. print them out and highlight the "check and raise permitted" line.
show the guys in your game next time. i mean literally put the pieces of paper on the table and show them. then say, "look---i'm not trying to make rules to screw anyone over or gain any advantage. i am trying to host a fair, structured game. i'm not going to research and document every rule that i try to enforce in this game. I've done that once (see the papers in front of you), and that is enough. if you don't like the house rules here, PLEASE do not play".

wow. anti-check raise. i could barely pay attention to the rest of your post.

as stated by others, its your house and your game.

[Burnt Toast]

Just joking there aren't any results yet.

I am hoping that a little sobriety will help the situation. Me and them.

As a side note. At the end of the night I placed a "friendly" wager with mister "check raise is illegal" for $50. If he can't prove that legal card rooms do not allow check raises he must pay me $50 if he ever wants to play at my table again.

Thanks for the responces

Toast

[Easy E]

If your game survives that evening, and he welches, you've gotten rid of an idiot for no cost.
If he comes back, you're $50 richer and he should hopefully stay quiet for a while.... unless he's drunk.
As to your original post:

"I am looking for some advice on how to host a home poker game. I have a lot of casino poker experience, and I am under the impression that a home game host should take on many of the same responsiblities that the casino takes on in a casino poker room."
*** Only if it's agreed to and/or common knowledge that you will be in charge. Otherwise, resentments and problems occur.
Make up a rule book, is my first comment, if people are being that confrontational.

"Ultimately after all arguements are heard I should be the one to make a final clear cut decision."
No- if you are not INVOLVED, you can be the first arbitrator. You need two others, to cover:
a) situations you are involved in
b) situations you and another arbitrator are involved in.
Or, make it a group vote binding arbitration situation, then UPDATE YOUR WRITTEN RULES!

"Of course all of this should be done within reason, but many of the players I have started playing with do not seem to agree with my intentions. While the game is usually low limit antes and between friends, I still feel that the house rules should be strictly enforced whenever there is a disagreement."
***Major problem if they don't agree. You need to come TO an agreement on what should be enforced and how, and what can be decided on the fly (nothing, IMO, in order to avoid this interpretation bullshit, but casual groups do not always take to that level of control)

"This has already led to a number of comfrontations with UP."
***After 2 times, you need a time-out to walk through understandings with this guy about how the games are run. Having been a new player in an unfamiliar game with unfamiliar poker games, it can be very aggrivating to be on the other end of what seem like random, whim-like rules and structures... even if they're common knowledge to the "regulars"
Bend over backwards initially for newbies- you need them to keep the games supported (and replace vets who drop out)

" An example would be that he persistently insited that no legal poker game allowed check raises. It seems that I maybe the only person at the table that understands the play. Ironically most of the players seem to side with UP"
*** Many home players that I know of also don't accept or understand the need for check-raising. They insist that, if you are first action, it's bet or fold.
Also, in California, I think, certain games such as lowball in "real" card rooms (if I remember what I read correctly), you can't check a 7-low and then call or raise and benefit from the extra bets- you'd have to give those back.

"Anyway we start playing some kind of 1 card pass the trash type game. "
***Screw your Neighbor- do you use hidden blockers? Those are fun, preventing people from trading with you, or blocking the dealer from getting a new card... hidden blockers are best... (but I digress)

"Misunderstanding #1
The action gets to the dealer. He turns his card face up (with no indication of whether he is playing this card or not). He then proceds to deal the top card off the deck, while everyone else has began turning thier cards over for the showndown. I suggest he leave his original card face down if he is trading with the deck. The peanut gallery responds with "stop being so anal" comments. I let it slide and now others decide to start doing the same thing."
*** Let them, even though it is technically wrong, and TAKE advantage of the extra information this gives you (that most of the drunks won't pick up on) on the play of future hands out of that deck.
They are only screwing themselves.

"Misunderstanding #2
New hand. Its the UP's turn to act. He asks me if I am going to look at my card. I say no"
*** Wrong answer- "Why?" is the response to that

"As UP sees me going to protect my card he snatches it away. I then tell him he can not grab my card away from me like that no matter what I say. There is not place for snatching cards in any kind of poker game. "
*** Correct, though it may be common practice for things like this that are "wrong", such as looking at others' hands that haven't been exposed, when you have folded. Our home game generally lets this go, though some people stop you from doing it.

"As usual nobody wants to here my point of view even though I believe (and they all know by now that I believe) the host has the final say."
*** Part I is the big problem here- if "usually" no one wants to hear your point of view, either you're regularly an [censored] or your friends are.
Part II, as I've said elsewhere, HAS TO BE verbally accepted and SHOULD be in written form, if your group is prone to these types of situations/arguments.

"UP is the dealer, and it is his turn to act. He turns over the Qs and clearly says I stay. This card has previously been explained to him as the (lowest) possible card in this game (outside of normal order). About 2 seconds later he says wait a minute and deals one off the top of the deck as his new card. Again I interject. I say if I am not allowed to (reneg) then you can't either."
*** While technically you are correct, home games are generally looser in their firm application of the rules. If the incorrect action that is changed has not gained information (others' bets/folds, other info gained somehow as a result), then games I've experienced will often let you correct what is an obvious mistake (such as this one, standing on the lowest, losing, card).
In this case, I side with the others, since normally the Queen is a high card. If you're drunk/tired/changing lots of game types, it's easy to forget.
This one was NOT worth arguing about- he was last to act and taking from the deck.

" Of course many people again disagree, and I again am unable to get in an explanation."
** If you are constantly facing a gang of opinion against you, you need to re-think some things:
a) Communication of and BUY IN AGREEMENT of the house rules (if you have to, WRITE THEM DOWN)
b) Communication to new players of house rules, BEFORE they start playing, AND THEIR buyin/agreement for these rules.
c) Your relationship with the other players, and why you are considered the heavy (could be their problem or your problem, probably is both)

" So at this point I tell them I cannot play under these conditions. I surrender the rest of my antes and exit the game. Arguements are still flying. I'm still too anal, etc. The game breaks up and I buy the chips back into the bank."
**Arguments happen- did it kill your game? Your actions COULD be seen as a very arrogant, over-heavy application of the "My house, so I rule" concept... they WERE drunk, remember!

"I also didnt think that it bothered them that I often win. "
** Don't necessarily assume that. Could be part of the problem.

I hope some of this helps you and you get your $50 and your game goes on.

Easy E

[Al Mirpuri]

I play alot in a home game; it can take time for the game to settle down and establish a set of rules everybody is willing to play by. Try to establish a consensus amongst the group. You may well have to give in on certain points in order to gain on other points. If you insist that it is your house and so your house rules should apply then they just might find themselves a different house to play in.

Our home game is in England and check-raising and all sorts of angle plays go on. At the poker table we beat up on one another. Away from that arena we are all law abiding regular folks.

Some players, in your game, are uncomfortable with check-raising. If you insist upon it then you may lose them from the game. Bottom line: a game with flawed rules is better than no game.

[Easy E]

If you didn't mean to make that association, then "or" instead of "and" would have worked....

I'm assuming you DON'T have a problem with the check-raise as a poker procedure...

[Ignatius]

I occasionally host a (very small) home game, so for what it's worth, here's how I go about it:
.
- I never play with strangers: OK, this might be a problem if you want to mantain a weekly full game, still it goes a long way in avoiding the kind of problems you mentioned
.
- Any newbie will get emailed a short 4-page summery of the rules before the session: Even if most ppl. won't read much more than the hand-chart, it's a non-confrontive way to send the message that we're playing a game with fixed rules which are not up to be bargained about.
.
- At the beginning of the session, if there are newbies, we play a few sample hands w/o money until everybody understood the mechanics of the game (we usually only play pot limit Hold'em)
.
- We use a fixed buyin and ppl. may only rebuy for the same amount if their stack goes below the original buyin: This has the great psychological advantage that ppl. can never lose more than twice their buying in one hand unless they've won it before.
.
- I keep track of the amount of money (we play cash, not chips) at the table as well as any money that has been borrowed between players.
.
- Rules which ensure the integrity and tracability of the game are strictly enforced (no deal w/o a cut, no money into the pot before the betting round is closed, no short or overbets, no additional money at the table etc.), even and esp. at 6am.
.
- Minor issues (like someone wanting to retract his bet b/c he misread his hand or unintentional string bets) are solved amically. Nobody should be forced to take an action he obviously didn't intend, as long as nobody hasn't yet acted on it.

[Al Mirpuri]

I have no problems with check-raising.

Some players do think of check-raising as an angle play. I hasten to add I am not one of them.

I have no problems with keeping quiet when a guy is exposing his hand to me every other deal all night long because he does not know that playing your cards close to your chest is more than a figure of speech.