|
|
#11
10-16-2005, 05:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Moral dilemma? (When a low-limit fish challenges you HU)
Fish take shots at games far too big, frequently. When they sit in your game you will only notice them in passing, unless the get hit by the deck. Do you want to screen the people who sit in your game?
Perhaps he would have clocked your A$$, since he plays 100/200 and was also slumming at pineapple. Perhaps you were as good a person to teach him a lesson while busting him, as anyone. 
|
|
#12
10-17-2005, 02:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Moral dilemma? (When a low-limit fish challenges you HU)
The poker table is a warzone.
Anyone who enters a warzone voluntarily automatically is responsible for their own safety while they are there. [ QUOTE ] But I had nothing against the guy, as he wasn't being an ass at the table or anything like that... [/ QUOTE ] I think there is a quote from some war movie, probably Full Metal Jacket, that goes something like "If we shot each other and died at the same time, within five minutes we could be embracing and rejoicing together in the next life." You don't have to have anything personal against someone to fight against them in a warzone.
|
|
#13
10-17-2005, 02:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Moral dilemma? (When a low-limit fish challenges you HU)
[ QUOTE ]
In fact, I wound up winning about $5 from him in the pineapple game, and this didn't bother me in the least. However, if this guy had been annoying or abusive at the table, I wouldn't have thought twice about taking him up on his challenge, for $5 or $5,000. [/ QUOTE ] The value of money is subjective. That $30 may have amounted to twice his total net worth, in which case your $5 win took a huge chunk out of him. Or he may have been a multibillionaire. You are trying to judge the value of a loss of a certain amount of money based on your idea of what that money is worth, but the loss means something different to each person based on how much they have. I don't understand why you would try to judge money this way.
|
|
#14
10-17-2005, 02:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Moral dilemma? (When a low-limit fish challenges you HU)
Poker is about taking money from worse players. If you have a problem with that then you shouldn't be playing. Take the guys money. You play poker to make money, so put yourself in potential money making situations.
If you have a real problem with that, then try informing him that you are a good player and you most likely will win. Of course he will most likely take that as an ego challenge so what can yah do.
|
|
#15
10-17-2005, 08:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Moral dilemma? (When a low-limit fish challenges you HU)
Maybe the guy pegged you as a solid player (or an easy mark [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]) and just wanted to gain some experience playing at a low limit. I can see refusing to play because the stakes were small and weren't worth your time.
Refusing to play him on moral grounds shows an alarming bit of hubris on your part. I have found that I learn a lot from playing against lesser players and it has nothing to do with taking their money (or watching them take my money [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]) I don't know you and we don't post in the same strategy forums, so this may be off-base and perhaps harsh (but with the best of intentions), but I will say that humility is one trait that a successful player needs. I suck at poker and try to repeat this at least 5 times a session (usually not hard considering the way I play).
|
|
#16
10-17-2005, 10:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Moral dilemma? (When a low-limit fish challenges you HU)
[ QUOTE ]
The value of money is subjective. That $30 may have amounted to twice his total net worth, in which case your $5 win took a huge chunk out of him. Or he may have been a multibillionaire. You are trying to judge the value of a loss of a certain amount of money based on your idea of what that money is worth, but the loss means something different to each person based on how much they have. I don't understand why you would try to judge money this way. [/ QUOTE ] I wasn't trying to judge money, just explaining a bit further my rationale, or lack thereof. I found (find) it odd that I would have felt bad for taking $30 from the guy in a heads up hold'em match, but didn't feel at all bad for taking $5 from him (or 1/6th of his current bankroll, on that site at least) in a full ring game of pineapple. I suppose that part of that could stem from the fact that I rarely play pineapple and wouldn't consider myself at all good at the game; but I still recognized that I was quite a bit better at it than he was. In a way, though, I can see your point and I suppose that it reinforces my OP...if the guy had $200 on the site vs. the $30 he said he had, I suppose that I reckoned that the $200 would mean a lot more to him than to me, at least in a bankroll sense (his net worth may indeed be considerably higher than mine). Again, though, I've gladly sat in at a table while somebody went through buy-in after buy-in (with pauses in between that made it fairly obvious he was reloading his account each time). Actually, I think I've figured it out...I guess it's a sort of "turf" thing. I consider LHE, or at least the limits I play at & below, to be "my turf"...anyone who steps into it is fair game. So if I'm sitting at a table, or happen to see a LHE table with one or more live ones at it, I have no problem taking their money. But in this case, I was on neutral ground and somebody who probably had no business on "my turf" made a friendly offer to play me, and I shied away because I was content to keep the game where it was.
|
|
#17
10-17-2005, 10:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Moral dilemma? (When a low-limit fish challenges you HU)
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know you and we don't post in the same strategy forums, so this may be off-base and perhaps harsh (but with the best of intentions), but I will say that humility is one trait that a successful player needs. I suck at poker and try to repeat this at least 5 times a session (usually not hard considering the way I play). [/ QUOTE ] Point taken. Those who have shared a (2+2) table with me know that I repeat this mantra quite often, and usually mean it. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Seriously, though (and not to sidetrack the thread), I know that I have a lot to improve on when it comes to poker in general, and limit hold'em in particular, but I am also quite confident in my game up through the limits I've played. I know that there are many tables out there where I would be the fish, if I chose to sit in. But against the typical small- or micro-stakes opponent, I believe that I could at least hold my own. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#18
10-17-2005, 11:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Moral dilemma? (When a low-limit fish challenges you HU)
[ QUOTE ]
You made some impressive moves the last time I played with you. [/ QUOTE ] Was this on a 2+2 table? I'm just trying to place you. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
|
|
#19
10-18-2005, 01:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Moral dilemma? (When a low-limit fish challenges you HU)
I think your actions contradict eachother. If you think you can beat him you should play him. If he was a compulsive or addicted gambler with financial problems that would change things. But this is just straight poker.
Though I don't think it is a great choice, I think it is great that you value people above money.
|
|
#20
10-18-2005, 05:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Moral dilemma? (When a low-limit fish challenges you HU)
[ QUOTE ]
Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You made some impressive moves the last time I played with you. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Was this on a 2+2 table? I'm just trying to place you. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, it was last week on one of the skins. Good thing it was just a .5/1 game b/c I had you on my left.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
