Is checking out "unethical"?

[jba]

I was playing in a live limit holdem game this weekend and got an odd comment from an otherwise nice guy/decent player next to me.

Long story short, I was first to act on the river with a busted draw that I had played in an unorthodox way. Due to the general flow of the hand I was 99.99% certain that my ten high was no good, there were several "i want to see that hand" nits at the table, there was a chance that the river would check through, and I really didn't want my hand shown. So I decided to fold rather than check/fold.

The guy next to me says "you really shouldn't do that", and I tell him no big deal my hand was definitely no good. He said that my open fold "devalued" the hand of the last person to act --- I told him the rules allow me to check bet or fold in that spot, and he agreed that I was allowed but asserted that it was "unethical". I argued that betting or checking in certain situations has the possibility of changing the value of hands yet to act and if my legal action happens to impact another player in an adverse way, well that's poker, but he was steadfast.

Does this make sense to anyone? Has anyone else ever heard anything similar?


thanks.

[Boris]

in low limit, limit hold'em it's probably not a big deal. But it is a poker pecadillo. It is a big time no-no in no-limit. I imagine you would get your ass chewed if you did it in a game of any size.

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]
in low limit, limit hold'em it's probably not a big deal. But it is a poker pecadillo. It is a big time no-no in no-limit. I imagine you would get your ass chewed if you did it in a game of any size.

[/ QUOTE ]


Can you explain why? You make it sound more like a collusion issue.

Also, does flop vs. turn vs. river make any difference?

thanks

Quite simply, the people who acted behind you had more information than those in front of you. In a low-limit hold 'em game, this information is fairly insignificant, but in a bigger game, it really could make a difference.

[MustangMarc]

I never found it unethical when a few players at my local cardroom throw their hand away instead of checking. I find it hilarious when they do it on a constant basis.

Folding a big pot for one bet can be a big mistake even with a weak holding, but folding for zero bets? If you do it once for a specific reason that's one thing, I'm talking about players that do it several times an hour.

[etizzle]

the idea is that it makes a bluff much easier for the middle person to run against the last guy, as he no longer has to bluff out two possible calling hands.

If its no limit its even worse. If the middle guy thinks you were on a draw that mightve gotten there, and that the last guy has a mediocre hand, it can become very profitable to throw a big bet out there ifc he knows he doesnt have to worry about your hand any more. It can put a real squeeze on the person last to act in that type of situation.

Sorry that was kinda rushed but hopefully you get the general idea. Just check next time, and if it gets checked around then you can just throw your cards in the muck.

[SheridanCat]

How can a, presumably, experienced player with nearly 2000 posts on this forum ask this question? This is basic stuff. I usually assume the guy checking out is a weak fish.

Regards,

T

Well he was first to act so there was no one in front.

Honestly I see this happen pretty regularly, and no one at the low-limits has ever made a fuss about it, but I can see people in a high stakes game getting upset.

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]
Quite simply, the people who acted behind you had more information than those in front of you. In a low-limit hold 'em game, this information is fairly insignificant, but in a bigger game, it really could make a difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

as I said in my post I was first to act.

[Boris]

In no limit, the decisions are more difficult when your action doesn't close the action.

so say you are the 2nd to act and there are 3 people in the pot. On the river, P1 checks. For whatever reason you decide to make a play at the pot and you make a big bluff. Now P3 has a marginal hand. He is much more likely to call if he knows P1 is going to fold. This is also somewhat true in higher limit hold'em games.

same concept on 4th street or the flop if the last person to act is on a draw and contemplating whether to call or maybe even raise.