How to handle disinviting players (2 Viewers)

[Eriks]

Currently there’s a fish in my game that puts in good money but is really annoying to play with do you think they are still good for the game

Depends on what the purpose of your game is. I host rather infrequently and the stakes are low so my priority is having a fun evening. I don’t put up with jackasses regardless of how much money they’re willing to throw around.

 

[snowu]

Depends on what the purpose of your game is. I host rather infrequently and the stakes are low so my priority is having a fun evening. I don’t put up with jackasses regardless of how much money they’re willing to throw around.

some people play for more fun but i think as the players are get better they are playing for more money if that makes sense

 

[BNM]

Depends on what the purpose of your game is. I host rather infrequently and the stakes are low so my priority is having a fun evening. I don’t put up with jackasses regardless of how much money they’re willing to throw around.

 

[UniLover]

Must be nice to live in such a simple and uncomplicated world!

In the one where I live, you may actually run into the disinvited player again, either socially or another game. You may have a relationship with their family. You may work with them. Your other players may ask what happened to the guy they were used to playing with. The disinvited player may contact other players to either get an explanation, lobby for reinstatement, or just sow dissent. Other regs may have questions about what happened and how you handled things.

In each case, it is worth having thought through the decision, its ramifications, your communication, and how your handling may make any fallout harder or easier to manage.

Running a home game is not like managing a casino room. You don’t have unlimited potential players and the ability to always just cut people off cold.

When I have done so, it was only because the alternatives were worse, for example if engaging with the problem player is going to incur even more headaches than ghosting them.

O yeah I would run into them at another game or socially. I just don't care.

My house, my rules. When people bitch about stuff I tell them I can cash them out or they can host their own game.

I like my one table game to have 8 players anyway so not hard to fill up.

 

[Taghkanic]

This. I feel like if you're a host you can't be a non-confrontation type.

Where it gets probably awkward is the "bad for the game" type, where nothing is outwardly being done wrong. But in the op example, if someone is eating all of my food and nitting it up to the extreme, then maybe I am going to pipe up. Or instead start the nit game so he has to pay a price for playing like that.

I both agree and disagree.

Obviously you have to have the stomach for confrontations when they become necessary.

But IMHO generally the host’s role is to try to smooth out arguments and friction, so that players want to come back and don’t feel like it is going to become a shitshow every game.

As a player I don’t return to games where there is always a sour atmosphere and the host thinks his role is just to be the biggest hardass in the room... Even if the action is great. Hosts need to have as many diplomatic skills as going-to-war impulses, or more.

 

[thePokerClub]

Well said and agreed.

That is the ideal, but if a player takes it there (as you have described) also a good opp to make an example of them as needed.

As they say, whenever possible, praise in public - criticize in private.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

Outside the cheater option, shouldn't this be vetted in an initial game? If the tendencies are bad for the game/disruptive - just don't add them to the long term list. A "trial" game (without calling it that).

And he didn’t even mention masturbators.

 

[MrCatPants]

And he didn’t even mention masturbators.

"Nutters"

 

[Taghkanic]

Outside the cheater option, shouldn't this be vetted in an initial game? If the tendencies are bad for the game/disruptive - just don't add them to the long term list.

No one gets automatically added forever after their tryout. Not sure why you’d assume they are. Goes without saying.

Anyway, newbies tend to be on their best behavior at first.

There have been a few players that I tried out, but immediately didn’t think were a fit. When someone is really obviously wrong, and has no built-up goodwill, those aren’t difficult decisions.

The tough ones are when someone who has been in the game for a while starts to go off the rails.

Humans often take a while to show their true colors. And not just in poker.

 

[Machine]

You know what's worse for the game than scared-money nits? Skilled players who pull an hourly wage from the game.

Some of my guidelines for invites:

No nits get invites
Nut setters don't get invites
Degens get priority
I shy away from inviting fish
If you can't hold a conversation or don't know how to laugh, you don't get a second invite.
If you can't afford 3 buy-ins, you're likely not in the right game
I have a sensitive sense of smell. If I can smell you, you're out; BO or too much fragrance is a non-invite

if you don't value the rules and can't conform to them, no invite - Offering to check it down really gets to me
If the dealer feels you slow the game down too much because of delay of action, its considered and may result in no invite
On your phone too often / much
If you nut on the table, dealer, player or yourself at the table, no invite
If you are a card licker / chip licker, or hooker juice eater, no invite

Things I don't mind at all:

Occasionally cursing the dealer
Bluffing
'FUCK YOUs'
Jerking the game off for the sake of humor
Smoking 'broccoli' outside
having to explain the game to you every single time
donk bets
shuffling chips

 

[MrCatPants]

Some of my guidelines for invites:



Things I don't mind at all:

Im not a big fan of players who berate the dealer or other players. It adds negativity to the room.

 

[MrCatPants]

No one gets automatically added forever after their tryout. Not sure why you’d assume they are. Goes without saying.

Anyway, newbies tend to be on their best behavior at first.

There have been a few players that I tried out, but immediately didn’t think were a fit. When someone is really obviously wrong, and has no built-up goodwill, those aren’t difficult decisions.

The tough ones are when someone who has been in the game for a while starts to go off the rails.

Humans often take a while to show their true colors. And not just in poker.

Pull them aside and talk to them then. If they have been on the rails prior they can get back on.

 

[frugal]

Must be nice to live in such a simple and uncomplicated world!

In the one where I live, you may actually run into the disinvited player again, either socially or another game. You may have a relationship with their family. You may work with them. Your other players may ask what happened to the guy they were used to playing with. The disinvited player may contact other players to either get an explanation, lobby for reinstatement, or just sow dissent. Other regs may have questions about what happened and how you handled things.

In each case, it is worth having thought through the decision, its ramifications, your communication, and how your handling may make any fallout harder or easier to manage.

A few months ago, I dealt with this for a board game night I host and I 100% agree with this. Except for a lack of concern about cheating because no money is changing hands, the social dynamics probably aren't too different for board games. I could have unceremoniously kicked the person out but the player and other people have asked about it and if I told them the unvarnished truth most people would think I'm the asshole. I might get uninvited from games I don't want to be uninvited from and I might also lose players I don't want to lose. I polled my players about the person I ejected. A few see the issues but most people don't see the problem and make excuses for her. Maybe it's because the person in question is an attractive young woman or maybe it's because my players are nicer people than me or but, in any case, most people would think I'm being an asshole if I annouced the reason this person isn't around. If I quietly tell a few people, word will get around and it's not all that different from me making an annoucement.

I have enough people interested that I could replace anyone I lose but there's a reason the people who are invited are invited. I like them. I don't want to fill the space with other people just because I can.

Outside the cheater option, shouldn't this be vetted in an initial game? If the tendencies are bad for the game/disruptive - just don't add them to the long term list. A "trial" game (without calling it that).

I've only once had anyone over who's so blatantly bad that it shows up on their first visit. Unless someone is totally oblivious, they're going to be on their best behavior on the first visit and the issues don't start showing up until they've been around for a while. This person's problem behaviors didn't start showing up until their 3rd or 4th visit and didn't rise to a level where I'd think about uninviting them until they'd been around over a double digit number of times. One thing they do is they'll insult someone and then look at them really intently to observe their reaction. Another thing they do is they damage a lot of stuff, more than everyone else combined. I don't think it's on purpose, but they have a kind of extreme carelessness about other people's possessions (but not their own). They must have some control over these things because they didn't do them when they were new and on their best behavior, but I've talked to them about it and they never take responsibility and will deny they did it even if it's something everyone just saw them do. I don't think they're going to change, but it's not as simple as a trial game where they act like a jerk and are never invited back.

 

[Taghkanic]

Maybe it's because the person in question is an attractive young woman

Ya think?

 

[Taghkanic]

Currently there’s a fish in my game that puts in good money but is really annoying to play with do you think they are still good for the game

I guess it depends on how annoying?

(A) A little annoying once in a while
(B) A little annoying most of the time
(C) Really annoying once in a while
(D) Really annoying most of the time

————

A: Just take his money

B: Take his money, but talk to him between games about toning it down

C: Same as B but put him on a short leash. If he keeps it up, give him the boot

D: Just give him boot

 

[Poker Zombie]

In the one where I live, you may actually run into the disinvited player again, either socially or another game. You may have a relationship with their family. You may work with them. Your other players may ask what happened to the guy they were used to playing with. The disinvited player may contact other players to either get an explanation, lobby for reinstatement, or just sow dissent. Other regs may have questions about what happened and how you handled things.

The disinvite isn't your problem then. Knowing how to get along with a disinvited player outside the game is your issue.

An invite to your game is a privilege, not a right. If you cut someone from the invite list, you probably have a reason, but you don't have to have a reason. I've cut a fair number of players down to the B-list. They simply do not get invited. If they are there for actions, I would have no problem discussing it if I were asked.

• "You spilled wine on the floor, looked at it, and shrugged"
• "You're too loud"
• "You didn't show but once a year, and we were looking to fill the seat with a more regular player"
• "People find you insulting/condescending"
• You were cheating on your (ex)wife, who is a regular player in our game"

The list is endless. The net effect is you aren't a casino. You are a homeowner looking to have a good time. Nobody is entitled to a seat, and every single player should contribute to your enjoyment of the night.

 

[ekricket]

The disinvite isn't your problem then. Knowing how to get along with a disinvited player outside the game is your issue.

An invite to your game is a privilege, not a right. If you cut someone from the invite list, you probably have a reason, but you don't have to have a reason. I've cut a fair number of players down to the B-list. They simply do not get invited. If they are there for actions, I would have no problem discussing it if I were asked.

• "You spilled wine on the floor, looked at it, and shrugged"
• "You're too loud"
• "You didn't show but once a year, and we were looking to fill the seat with a more regular player"
• "People find you insulting/condescending"
• You were cheating on your (ex)wife, who is a regular player in our game"

The list is endless. The net effect is you aren't a casino. You are a homeowner looking to have a good time. Nobody is entitled to a seat, and every single player should contribute to your enjoyment of the night.

This. We invite who we want. Currently in the process of losing a player and his occasional family members because of some two faced back stabbing activity. He knows why he’s persona non grata, nobody sugar coated it.

People (anything) cannot improve without feedback. It’s that simple.

Plus I’m too old to beat around the bush being “polite” - if grown people can’t act like grown people I got no problem telling it to them the same I would a teenager.

 

[Taghkanic]

The disinvite isn't your problem then. Knowing how to get along with a disinvited player outside the game is your issue.

An invite to your game is a privilege, not a right. If you cut someone from the invite list, you probably have a reason, but you don't have to have a reason. I've cut a fair number of players down to the B-list. They simply do not get invited. If they are there for actions, I would have no problem discussing it if I were asked.

• "You spilled wine on the floor, looked at it, and shrugged"
• "You're too loud"
• "You didn't show but once a year, and we were looking to fill the seat with a more regular player"
• "People find you insulting/condescending"
• You were cheating on your (ex)wife, who is a regular player in our game"

The list is endless. The net effect is you aren't a casino. You are a homeowner looking to have a good time. Nobody is entitled to a seat, and every single player should contribute to your enjoyment of the night.

I agree with all of the above. However, my right to run my game the way I want does not change the fact that axing a familiar player may have consequences beyond me and/or beyond my game, whether in my community or among my other regs.

I would never keep a disruptive or disrespectful player because of such considerations.

But I also would not pretend those other consequences don’t exist. Precisely because I’m *not* running a casino. I’m running a game among friends.

So both the way I handle the disinvited player and others often requires more thought than just blustering, “It’s my game, he’s off the island, everyone else just deal with it!”

 

[Poker Zombie]

I agree with all of the above. However, my right to run my game the way I want does not change the fact that axing a familiar player may have consequences beyond me and/or beyond my game, whether in my community or among my other regs.

I would never keep a disruptive or disrespectful player because of such considerations.

But I also would not pretend those other consequences don’t exist. Precisely because I’m *not* running a casino. I’m running a game among friends.

So both the way I handle the disinvited player and others often requires more thought than just blustering, “It’s my game, he’s off the island, everyone else just deal with it!”

I disagree, but maybe that's just me. I have players that I could have at low stakes and at circus games. Many players could be invited to both games, but there are some that I would invite so one game and not the other. "The other group just doesn't fit with you" is a kinder way of saying "you don't fit".

 

[thePokerClub]

I agree with all of the above. However, my right to run my game the way I want does not change the fact that axing a familiar player may have consequences beyond me and/or beyond my game, whether in my community or among my other regs.

I would never keep a disruptive or disrespectful player because of such considerations.

But I also would not pretend those other consequences don’t exist. Precisely because I’m *not* running a casino. I’m running a game among friends.

So both the way I handle the disinvited player and others often requires more thought than just blustering, “It’s my game, he’s off the island, everyone else just deal with it!”

So many words.....so little said. Sorry TaghKanic, I have had a few tonight and reading this post is literally hilarious.

 

[Taghkanic]

So many words.....so little said. Sorry TaghKanic, I have had a few tonight and reading this post is literally hilarious.

Not many words. Simple message:

It’s not all about you as host, or just about the disinvited player, but also about your group and the place you live.

Another piece of advice: If your idea of fun is getting drunk and reading message boards about a game, maybe reconsider your priorities?