Am I being ridiculous? (3 Viewers)

[BadCardHaver]

So hes not offering you the thing you've previously turned down and probably disparaged. That seems pretty normal.

It really sounds like you and the host just have fun in different ways. I can't understand circus games being more sober and more serious, I dont understand why lol. We introduce those with rounds most of the time.

The circus games being more 'serious' to me is because if it's a game people (or me) aren't familiar with I need to be more focused on the actual rules, and having a drink or two more than I should and cutting up with my buddies doesn't help with this. I have messed up and misread a hand, or not realized how many hole cards I can use etc when we are playing 10+ random and sometimes brand new games a night. If I screw up, I shake it off and move on, but to inexperienced players or guys that barely ever play hold 'em (which we sometimes have) tend not to come back. I like having fish in the game.

Anyway, the circus games thing isn't really the issue, I just mentioned it to point out that they may consider me a whiner since I mentioned it and they made a rule to accommodate me already.

The main issue is the squeezing and artificially small pots while running it twice when nobody is all in, or really at risk of stacking off.

 

[doctorchips]

As shitty as it is, he's the host. Unless you're hosting, either put up with these circus games or find a new game IMO.

 

[AlbinoDragon]

The 6 hands in one hour night really made me realize that this was bad for the game.

What circus games are being played that only get six hands an hour?? Sounds like a combo of bad game choice and players who are probably slow anyways.

This thread and some of the discussion here tells me you might think about starting to host yourself. Cherry pick the players from this game you know will work well in your game and start recruiting from there?


[EDIT] Just saw that there are 10+ games a night. I've played circus, but that's a bit much.

 

[BadCardHaver]

What circus games are being played that only get six hands an hour?? Sounds like a combo of bad game choice and players who are probably slow anyways.

This thread and some of the discussion here tells me you might think about starting to host yourself. Cherry pick the players from this game you know will work well in your game and start recruiting from there?


[EDIT] Just saw that there are 10+ games a night. I've played circus, but that's a bit much.

Before the new dealers choice button rule we played Short Deck, Pineapple, Crazy pineapple, Omaha, Omaha Hi/Lo, Big O, Drawmaha, 7 card stud, whatever the hold em variant is with 3 hole cards, SOHE, (and the one that tilted me) SOHE with the Omaha being high/low. Counting out 1/8 or 1/6 of the pot on a chop seems ridiculous.

I know I am forgetting a variation or ten, but it was all over the place. Stopping to constantly explain the rules and some of the split pot action or going to short deck really slowed things down. I don't see how you can justify playing circus games because 'I like action' and then limiting action by running it twice with no further betting every time you get heads up now.

 

[BadCardHaver]

As shitty as it is, he's the host. Unless you're hosting, either put up with these circus games or find a new game IMO.

I am happy with the new way we play, and appreciate the fact the host has compromised on this. I can handle one out of every 7 or 8 hands being circus or non-hold 'em games. I just didn't like when it was 95% circus with new games constantly. Especially when we have one or two inexperienced players playing.

 

[doctorchips]

I am happy with the new way we play, and appreciate the fact the host has compromised on this. I can handle one out of every 7 or 8 hands being circus or non-hold 'em games. I just didn't like when it was 95% circus with new games constantly. Especially when we have one or two inexperienced players playing.

What I'm saying is that what you or anyone else who isn't hosting wants doesn't really matter.

 

[BadCardHaver]

Once again, the circus games thing isn't really the issue, I just mentioned it to point out that they may consider me a whiner since I mentioned it and they made a rule to accommodate me already.

The main issue is the squeezing and artificially small pots while running it twice when nobody is all in, or really at risk of stacking off.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

The main issue is the squeezing and artificially small pots while running it twice when nobody is all in, or really at risk of stacking off.

They're not colluding, they're just playing the game the way they'd like to and they know you dont like playing that way. No other answer. Bringing a random rulebook will just make them think of you as even more of a whiner.

 

[davislane]

Just sounds like your host wants to gamble more but doesnt realise this isnt the playing group for it and that the game is at risk of not getting up. Also mention that the "capped RIT" can be seen as collusion regardless of the intention. Just have a frank discussion with them and try and find a common ground. Maybe introduce a bomb pot that is also capped post flop during the circus hand so everyone can see the flop and maybe he can get his fix that way so people might feel more comfortable gambling it up with him when they feel comfortable to do so. Ultimately you are facing the age old dilema of people finding the equilibrium of how much action one is willing to give.

 

[BarrieJ3]

While we don't have a regular game, we have a go to group on the rare chance we do have a game.

My favorite 3 players in that game are all 3 people who would and do do this. Especially when it's circus games. If every other nit is going to fold to me betting 100 Big Blinds without looking at my cards, and only one other person is/pending calling, I'm happy to say let's run it to the river.

I'm not being devil's advocate, I just happen to be the exact opposite of you OP. You can love action and still be fine tossing in some money and running it down. I love action, I like to try and keep my VPIP somewhere in the 90%+ range, literally. And I'd still be happy to run most hands down at any point.

I'm also like your villian, I'm stoked to play 7/8/T unsuited multiway.

Honest Opinion: It seems like this game is far, far outside your comfort zone so I don't think it's one where you can coach them or try and get it closer to what you'd like to see. Maybe ask for every other or 1 out of every 3 games to be pure hold em and then enjoy those nights and just attend these nights for fun?

Also, why not just wreck them? Stay in hands, opt not to see it down, punish them for playing so wide, etc. I'm always super confused when people complain about someone playing their hands blind, jamming pre on repeat, etc. It's such a gambly, exploitable style of play.....just take my money? Err....villain's money?

 

[ArielVer18]

This isn't running it twice; it's soft playing, a form of collusion. Whether or not this is a serious enough rule violation is up to you to decide

 

[BadCardHaver]

I am definitely leaning towards not mentioning anything and just not going anymore. I started an online tournament during COVID every Mon and Thu night that we still play, and it is very profitable for me. Every other guy in the game except the host plays in it and I don't want to run off any of those guys or limit participation when I host occasionally. I can see two or three of the guys thinking I'm being a jerk about it. Not worth the hassle.

 

[Natskule]

I am definitely leaning towards not mentioning anything and just not going anymore. I started an online tournament during COVID every Mon and Thu night that we still play, and it is very profitable for me. Every other guy in the game except the host plays in it and I don't want to run off any of those guys or limit participation when I host occasionally. I can see two or three of the guys thinking I'm being a jerk about it. Not worth the hassle.

That might be issue. I don't play poker at home with friends to be profitable, but for fun. Yeah, I want to win, but not worth sacrificing friendships or running people out. I don't always play great, take more chances, drink way more and play some games that I just don't care for but it's a fun night with friends within a price range that all involved are willing to spend. I win more than I lose, but it's all spent on booze for the group. Now when I go to a casino or card room, I don't drink, I pay attention and only play games that I'm proficient at and I expect to be profitable. I also play about 10x larger stakes at the casino. Different goals,

 

[BadCardHaver]

That might be issue. I don't play poker at home with friends to be profitable, but for fun. Yeah, I want to win, but not worth sacrificing friendships or running people out. I don't always play great, take more chances, drink way more and play some games that I just don't care for but it's a fun night with friends within a price range that all involved are willing to spend. I win more than I lose, but it's all spent on booze for the group. Now when I go to a casino or card room, I don't drink, I pay attention and only play games that I'm proficient at and I expect to be profitable. I also play about 10x larger stakes at the casino. Different goals,

Hanging with my buds during live games and the conference call 5 or 6 of us do during the online is the reason I do home games as well. The profitability is nice though.

 

[BGinGA]

Selectively capping losses by hand is soft-play collusion. I wouldn't play in a game that allows it.

I also would not play in a game where the game being played changes every hand (wtf?). Play the game for an orbit, then change the game -- this allows all players to equally have positional advantage (instead of just the dealer). This will also help with the slow play / time issue, fwiw.

 

[abby99]

Sure smells like collusion to me.

 

[Moxie Mike]

I haven't read any posts in this thread but the title reminded me of a conversation with my wife.

Me (after a social evening where I might have had a few more than a few): Was I too ridiculous last night?

Mrs. Moxie: No I don't think so. You were alright.

Me: Hmmm... should I have been more ridiculous?

Mrs. Moxie: NO!!!!! Definitely not.

Me: So I was the perfect amount of ridiculous?!?!?!

(using a Mel Tucker smiling image for added effect)

 

[ngmcs8203]

Hes the host. Goofy annoying way to play but its his way. Doesnt sound like hes playing optimally lol.

I’ve not returned to a game before because of some wacky games. ‘Next hand jacks and suicide kings are wild. If the moon is out, deuces are aces and red 4s are jokers. Everyone put in a blind and swap seats before I toss the cards at you and you can choose your starting cards…’

 

[Machine]

Once again, the circus games thing isn't really the issue, I just mentioned it to point out that they may consider me a whiner since I mentioned it and they made a rule to accommodate me already.

The main issue is the squeezing and artificially small pots while running it twice when nobody is all in, or really at risk of stacking off.

I think its fair of you to point it out, its context.

I use to feel that if one player didn't want to do something it should be tossed out, I've changed, I am happy to cater to the player base but 1 person isn't going to hold the game hostage. I like circus games and push the guys to try them when we have a bomb pot, its mixed reviews.

I think you are absolutely on key with this feeling like its collusion, it would be if it was anywhere else, and honestly it shouldn't be done. If they are going to run it twice without 1 or 2 ppl being all in, then its slowing the game down. I hope they are only doing this in holdem and Omaha variants.

That said, I'd agree this game doesn't sound like its for you, there are a ton of OMC games out there, you should look for one of them

On a serious non razzing note, maybe open up to playing the circus games, they will make you a better holdem player and all around player. It will also help you see strats in additional games, you may find you're a poker player after all

 

[chippitydoodah]

The circus games being more 'serious' to me is because if it's a game people (or me) aren't familiar with I need to be more focused on the actual rules, and having a drink or two more than I should and cutting up with my buddies doesn't help with this. I have messed up and misread a hand, or not realized how many hole cards I can use etc when we are playing 10+ random and sometimes brand new games a night. If I screw up, I shake it off and move on, but to inexperienced players or guys that barely ever play hold 'em (which we sometimes have) tend not to come back. I like having fish in the game.

Anyway, the circus games thing isn't really the issue, I just mentioned it to point out that they may consider me a whiner since I mentioned it and they made a rule to accommodate me already.

The main issue is the squeezing and artificially small pots while running it twice when nobody is all in, or really at risk of stacking off.

Heads up, when a player is all in, that ends any further betting. All he is doing is ending the betting then offering to run it twice. Isolating a player is smart and he could be either weak or strong when doing this. In your example he was weak so in essence he bluffed out players with the big bet then improved his chances to win by offering to run it twice when he got called.

 

[JustinInMN]

One hand we were playing some variant of hold 'em where you get three hole cards. I raised to $3 (standard raise in this game), host raised to $10, which is a very large pre-flop raise in this game. Of course, this folded me and everyone else out except one of the regulars. They then put in $10 and ran it twice. The host turns over 7-8-10 rainbow. This hand allows for no flushes or full house possibilities, which I thought was strange to be aggressive with in a game that usually will take a bare minimum of a high straight to win. I folded 8-9-10 and would have hit a straight on the first board and won the hand. I folded because with a $10 pre-flop raise, I realized I was probably looking at somewhere between $60-$100 in bets if I continued to the river and didn't want to get in a big pot with this hand. Of course, If I knew I could call and end the action with a max risk of $20 (presuming the other regs folded) I would be a lot more likely to play the hand.

Let me be clear, I do not think I was intentionally being angled. One of the regs is a very good friend of mine, and the host and other reg are good dudes. A more likely scenario is that he saw it being run twice in a TV show and thinks this is something 'good' players do.

I have a very important question. Am I reading this correctly that he is offering to run it twice without anyone being all in? If so, that is a huge red flag and yes, this is a form of collusion, especially if he's being selective about it.

 

[Jimulacrum]

I raised to $3 (standard raise in this game), host raised to $10, which is a very large pre-flop raise in this game. Of course, this folded me and everyone else out except one of the regulars.

Blinds are $0.50/1. A raise of $3 is on the small side. Going to $10 total over $3 is a small reraise that practically invites you to come play. The fact that you call it a "very large" raise and consider it an "Of course" fold says a lot.

You and the friends you bring are too tight—or at least playing over your heads—and the host and the players he brings are loose gamblers.

This game is probably very profitable if you learn to play it right instead of approaching it like a Hold'em tournament nit. Circus games in particular can offer you a huge edge if you get good at them. (Not a fan of Super Hold'em, though, which is the 3-card Hold'em game you played. Kills action. Too many possibilities.)

The run-it-twice thing is a little weird and I can see why it would rub you the wrong way. But the test is whether he'd run it like that with you (in which case it's fair) or only with his buds (in which case it's not). Most likely, he just wants to gamble gamble gamble and isn't so concerned with playing the hands out in a skilled way.

My recommendation is that you learn to adjust. I can see you're a thoughtful player because you get how to assess Super Hold'em opener values. Apply that same perceptiveness to all the other aspects of this game, and crush it. You'll be a much better player in the end.

 

[JMC9389]

Reading threads like this reminds me of how lucky I am to host and play in another game where all the players know each other and don't try to pull this angly/soft play collusion crap. I'd have zero tolerance for it in a home game. I'd stop going if this happened in a low stakes game. This is shit I'd expect at a casino with randoms, which is why I don't like playing in casinos mostly.

 

[upNdown]

You are not being ridiculous. The host is being ridiculous.

You and the friends you bring are too tight—or at least playing over your heads—and the host and the players he brings are loose gamblers.

Not so sure I agree with this assessment. Yes, OP sounds tight. But loose gamblers?

I raised to $3 (standard raise in this game), host raised to $10, which is a very large pre-flop raise in this game. Of course, this folded me and everyone else out except one of the regulars. They then put in $10 and ran it twice.

The host is capping the pot at like 23bb and then running it twice? Doesn't sound gambly. Doesn't sound like poker. Frankly it just sounds stupid.

 

[JustinInMN]

The host is capping the pot at like 23bb and then running it twice? Doesn't sound gambly. Doesn't sound like poker. Frankly it just sounds stupid.

This is the part that's collusion. Pots get magically "capped" before all in if it's between his friends. Where as other players are putting their whole stacks in. If this description is correct, what the host is doing is extremely unethical and @BadCardHaver should be avoiding this game.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

This is the part that's collusion. Pots get magically "capped" before all in if it's between his friends. Where as other players are putting their whole stacks in. If this description is correct, what the host is doing is extremely unethical and @BadCardHaver should be avoiding this game.

I'd avoid the game anyways if I was them because it doesnt sound like a good fit, but somewhere in the thread they spoke about the host offering this to everyone and hes turned it down before. I dont see this as the host capping it between friends I see it as the host wanting to play random hands at a capped but still gambling amount.

Not speaking to that being okay, just wanted to point out that it sounds like host only runs it this way with his friends because others have turned him down and he (maybe erroneously) thinks his friends like it this way. Dont see it as chasing the rabbit away then checking it down, more as 'I know _____ doesn't like doing it this way so I dont offer it to them or his nitty friends.'

This would annoy me for sure. Occasional, hey lets basically do a $5 flip? Sure, shake on it and deal the cards out, winner takes it, whatever. But many times a night plus double board would be obnoxious.

 

[upNdown]

This is the part that's collusion. Pots get magically "capped" before all in if it's between his friends. Where as other players are putting their whole stacks in. If this description is correct, what the host is doing is extremely unethical and @BadCardHaver should be avoiding this game.

Oh it's definitely collusion. My point is that aside from that, it's neither good poker nor gambling. You want to play loose pre and fire away at all three streets, good for you and good luck. But this guy wants to play loose and fire away at no streets and reduce his marginal risk by running it twice. How lame.

 

[JustinInMN]

I dont see this as the host capping it between friends I see it as the host wanting to play random hands at a capped but still gambling amount.

That's still a violation of standard poker rules, and fairly severe one at that. Table stakes means everything in front of each player is always in play. If you can't handle that, play limit. (Which I don't mean in a derogatory way, I love me some limit.)

Not speaking to that being okay, just wanted to point out that it sounds like host only runs it this way with his friends because others have turned him down and he (maybe erroneously) thinks his friends like it this way. Dont see it as chasing the rabbit away then checking it down, more as 'I know _____ doesn't like doing it this way so I dont offer it to them or his nitty friends.'

I suppose a generous interpretation of this could take it out of the realm of collusion/favoritism. But it's still very much against poker rules.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

That's still a violation of standard poker rules, and fairly severe one at that. Table stakes means everything in front of each player is always in play. If you can't handle that, play limit. (Which I don't mean in a derogatory way, I love me some limit.)


I suppose a generous interpretation of this could take it out of the realm of collusion/favoritism. But it's still very much against poker rules.

100% against standard poker rules, but this is the host's game. Im not saying its fun or standard or good, simply saying I dont think its the host colluding against any player, hes just playing in his own way . Do you think bringing a poker rulebook will change this host's way of offering deals at his own game?

I dont see it as that generous of a look at it: OP told us hes offered it to everyone and that OP and his friends say no, he stopped offering to them while still offering it to people who say yes. Shitty way to play and boring, but doesnt seem to be purposeful favoritism.

Maybes its just assuming positive intent but I host most of the games I play in and Im fine with being accused of not playing by standard rules but Im not fine if people are saying Im purposefully excluding players. I wouldn't bother discussing the odds and why its problematic, sounds like a goofy loose home game that I would just fade out from.

 

[JustinInMN]

Do you think bringing a poker rulebook will change this host's way of offering deals at his own game?

Nope. My suggestion is stay away.

I guess you are having issues that I am disparaging the host for this. Perhaps you are right that there isn't anything unfair here, but at first glansce to a newbie, it would look like that.