Winner's Guilt?

Wayfare · #1 01-18-2005, 10:40 AM

I'm not expecting to get much sympathy here, but does anyone ever feel bad for the people who dump large sums (often thousands) of dollars at games they are just not prepared to play in? If they are determined to gamble of course not, but what if you can tell they really care about / need the money?

There was this one guy (two chip dude as scrub says) who had about $600 in a 1-2 NL game and in four hours lost it all. He kept getting more and more sullen as he lost his chips, and when I finally cracked him he just shook his head for a while and went to the corner of the club to read. I half thought he was arranging to jack us when we left with his money, but the more I think about it he was probably just depressed.

On a side note, around seven of us at the table were twoplustwo's and the other three were completely hopeless. However, the twoplustwo'ers knew who the good players were since we all met for dinner before, and didn't announce ourselves as anything special or come in together. Is this an angle shot? I don't really feel bad about the second part, but it definately seemed like we had a huge advantage simply because we all stayed out of each other's way (well, except edtost).

AngryCola · #2 01-18-2005, 10:52 AM

[ QUOTE ]
However, the twoplustwo'ers knew who the good players were since we all met for dinner before, and didn't announce ourselves as anything special or come in together.
Is this an angle shot?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. Not at all.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not expecting to get much sympathy here

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh...
That's probably a good call.

I know what you mean though. Still, these guys decide for themselves to play short/bad. Nobody forces them to sit down in any games. That's the only reason I never feel bad about it. It's not as if I held a gun to their head and said, "Sit down in our game or die!"

It's their own choice.

Wayfare · #3 01-18-2005, 11:02 AM

But people choose to do lots of stuff that is bad for them...I usually don't directly profit in such an obvious way from it though.

This guy was really hopeless, and seeing him so sad at the end left me wanting to slip him a little card that said "www.twoplustwo.com."

I'm definately a softie.

AngryCola · #4 01-18-2005, 11:11 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm definately a softie.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Still, there are far worse things to be than sympathetic.

Pepsquad · #5 01-18-2005, 11:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
It's not as if I held a gun to their head and said, "Sit down in our game or die!"

It's their own choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. No guns were involved. All they did is all 7 of them sat down at the same table and silently agreed to "stay of each others way." Hmmmmmmmmm...

AngryCola · #6 01-18-2005, 11:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
All they did is all 7 of them sat down at the same table and silently agreed to "stay of each others way." Hmmmmmmmmm..

[/ QUOTE ]

There is nothing wrong with that. Especially if it's such a "silent agreement". It's what most good players do. They concentrate on the bad players and generally stay out of the better player's way.

It's not at all cheating or dishonorable, if that's what you were getting at.

Pepsquad · #7 01-18-2005, 11:46 AM

I just have a difficult time with this. I know Wayfare from his posts and there's no way in hell I'd ever think he's capable of angle-shooting. But it seems a little shady the way this whole thing went down don't you think? Yes, good players find each other and don't butt heads, that's just smart. But isn't it also up to the individual to determine who it is that they should stay away from? The minute they sat down, they knew there were 6 opponents which they didn't really want to tangle with. That's a HUGE advantage. I guess I just mentally have this picture in my head of seven 2+2er's all lined up in a row. fold. fold. RAISE. And because I know I don't want to "butt heads" it goes fold fold fold fold into the field. What essentially has happened is that 7 players have silently chosen the best hand with which they will go to war against 3 random opponents. I don't know, maybe that is fair. There's really nothing different between that and 6 or 7 pros sitting at 30-60 game, just trading blinds until a Hawaiian shirt comes along before cleaning him out his wallet. I don't know. I couldn't do it and remain completely unbiased in my play.

Pep.

steamboatin · #8 01-18-2005, 11:50 AM

If you decided at dinner to all sit at the same table and fleece some fish, then the prior agreement is collusion and a problem. What if you went into a casino and seven people at the table had agreed to gamg up on you? How would you feel about that?

If, and I believe this is the most likely scenario, you guys all sat down to play together and simply stayed out of each others way because that is smart poker and you didn't discuss it beforehand, then the fish just picked the wrong table.

AngryCola · #9 01-18-2005, 11:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
There's really nothing different between that and 6 or 7 pros sitting at 30-60 game, just trading blinds until a Hawaiian shirt comes along before cleaning him out his wallet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly.

Pepsquad · #10 01-18-2005, 11:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's really nothing different between that and 6 or 7 pros sitting at 30-60 game, just trading blinds until a Hawaiian shirt comes along before cleaning him out his wallet.

[/ QUOTE ]

So is it right? Sincere question.