Poll: Home games friendly vs by the book (3 Viewers)

[aildeokl]

I'll preface this that I have played and officiated Trading Card Games LONG before I started playing poker, so my experience there may be biasing my opinion here. That said:

I think it is to EVERYONE'S benefit that rules are clearly defined and religiously followed. The rules are there to protect players, not to punish them. Anglers and cheaters will use any lack or ambiguity of rules to their benefit. They will do it as much as they can. And they will do it while being the nicest guy you ever met, to the point that people will stick up for them, fully believing that they "just made an honest mistake". That's how these people skate by.

If the rules are clearly defined, and enforced religiously and equally, the angler has no opportunity to do these things.

If your game is kept to a small circle of long time friends, and you are certain there is no chance one of them would ever be inclined to angle you, then maybe this doesn't apply. But even so, I'd recommend following it still because it makes sure there can't even be the IMAGE of impropriety. The rules are the rules, and when something happens that shouldn't, everyone already knows how it's going to be fixed.

 

[DZPoker]

My question to you is how do you know
but yet you don't know exactly how many official rullings?


Kidding. Just trying to be the @$$#*//!

1 Chip from every casino in a wall display sitting just to the left of me when I was typing the post They're in rows of 10 so even I can count pretty quickly
Oh...and the states are listed on a sheet of paper just below

 

[DZPoker]

I think it is to EVERYONE'S benefit that rules are clearly defined and religiously followed. The rules are there to protect players, not to punish them. Anglers and cheaters will use any lack or ambiguity of rules to their benefit. They will do it as much as they can. And they will do it while being the nicest guy you ever met, to the point that people will stick up for them, fully believing that they "just made an honest mistake". That's how these people skate by.

If the rules are clearly defined, and enforced religiously and equally, the angler has no opportunity to do these things.

I get what you're saying, but it just hasn't been a problem for me personally. And at least not for some others...so maybe the world's not quite that bad of a place!

 

[krafticus]

Sorry if I wasn't clear...

Yes - the low/mid limit games you play in typically need the host/floor to deliver a ruling to settle a disagreement over something that happened in the game.

No - the low/mid limit games you play in rarely if ever need the host/floor to deliver a ruling to settle a disagreement over something that happened in the game.

In that case, my NO vote stands. we have a few little things here and there, but nothing major. More a long the lines of newer players making mistakes. we're a friendly game though.

 

[JustinInMN]

I voted no, but I don't know what yes or no represents.

That's how most people vote, in fact.

 

[allforcharity]

I think it is good form to make sure general rules are followed. Because players in your games can become players in other games. And you don't want lazy play to perpetuate itself among different gaming groups. Because one day someone will end up doing something stupid in a card room or casino and get majorly slapped for it, and wonder why.

 

[DZPoker]

So the ‘NO’s’ are losing at a 4-1+ rate right now. Bummer that you all can’t have more fun in your poker sessions but happy to see I’m not alone!!

Thanks for your input all!!!!

 

[JustinInMN]

So the ‘NO’s’ are losing at a 4-1+ rate right now. Bummer that you all can’t have more fun in your poker sessions but happy to see I’m not alone!!

Thanks for your input all!!!!

I don't equate enforcing rules as the antithesis of fun. I think players that are confident in a fair game will loosen up and have more fun. I think players that are worried about angles will become far more guarded, and if someone benefits from a breech bad enough, they won't show again.

 

[CHP TD]

Ive been hosting a poker league since 2012. rules are what keeps the peace - Period. I rarely need them but the the point is if a argument starts - rules usually stop it in its tracks.

I dont understand why any host would not have rules.

Rules ARE what keeps things friendly.

Just my 2 cents worth...

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

I voted yes not because someone's gotta wear a ref shirt, but its helpful to have me as host be able to arbitrate random situations that happen with newbies. I don't see this as official floor duties or anything but it keeps the game fair. If I'm involved and don't want to be biased I ask one of the other experienced players what they think, and that flies.

I've never formalized it, but when something comes up my players look my way.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

So the ‘NO’s’ are losing at a 4-1+ rate right now. Bummer that you all can’t have more fun in your poker sessions but happy to see I’m not alone!!

Thanks for your input all!!!!

Well we do have fun, but if I’m hosting I let people know I’ll make the final decision. Doesn’t mean I’m draconian, if a mistake or accident happens we don’t play rules nazi but if something serious happens then everyone needs to know who will make the final decision when it is needed.

It has rarely ever been needed but at least we know who will be doing it. And we have plenty of fun.

 

[Irish]

So the ‘NO’s’ are losing at a 4-1+ rate right now. Bummer that you all can’t have more fun in your poker sessions but happy to see I’m not alone!!

Thanks for your input all!!!!

I'd wager the poll is trending more towards answering the actual poll question, and not the real question you're asking. Any good host would likely agree that "A typical low/mid limit cash game needs someone to ‘rule’ on a hand or hands". But the frequency in which that provision - the casino equivalent of needing to call the floor to make a ruling - is actually physically needed, may be pretty low. And that's often because if folks know you run a tight game and will get called out, they behave better (well, most of them lol), and those who don't on a regular basis don't get invited back (unless they're fish).

That's my home game experience, I've probably been called over for an official rules/dealer mistake decision 10 times in 15+ years. But I (and others at the table) make small corrections (1 chip rule, out of turn, etc) much more frequently.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

I'd wager the poll is trending more towards answering the actual poll question, and not the real question you're asking. Any good host would likely agree that "A typical low/mid limit cash game needs someone to ‘rule’ on a hand or hands". But the frequency in which that provision - the casino equivalent of needing to call the floor to make a ruling - is actually physically needed, may be pretty low. And that's often because if folks know you run a tight game and will get called out, they behave better (well, most of them lol), and those who don't on a regular basis don't get invited back (unless they're fish).

That's my home game experience, I've probably been called over for an official rules/dealer mistake decision 10 times in 15+ years. But I (and others at the table) make small corrections (1 chip rule, out of turn, etc) much more frequently.

Exactly. Stated better than I did.

 

[krafticus]

I'd wager the poll is trending more towards answering the actual poll question, and not the real question you're asking. Any good host would likely agree that "A typical low/mid limit cash game needs someone to ‘rule’ on a hand or hands". But the frequency in which that provision - the casino equivalent of needing to call the floor to make a ruling - is actually physically needed, may be pretty low. And that's often because if folks know you run a tight game and will get called out, they behave better (well, most of them lol), and those who don't on a regular basis don't get invited back (unless they're fish).

That's my home game experience, I've probably been called over for an official rules/dealer mistake decision 10 times in 15+ years. But I (and others at the table) make small corrections (1 chip rule, out of turn, etc) much more frequently.

^^ this.

Yeah, every game will have that one-off situation that someone will need some clarity on. You go to the turn, but the card is boxed .. what do we do?? Or the new guy acted out of turn but didn't realize their mistake. Quick fixes.

My game has those every once in a while. I also have enough regulars that know all of the rules, and can fix everything really quickly too. The really strange ones where I get called over .. maybe once a year .. once every other year. There is no angling in my game because 80% of the players would recognize it and nip it before I got to it. We have tight rules, but they are followed well. We also have some flexibility, when 2 cards come off the stub while dealing for example, and we just let random be random.

I play at MD Live on occasion (maybe 50 times total), and I think I've seen the floor called once for an issue, and it was minor (I think it was a green player that made mistakes, but could have been seen as angling).

Mark

 

[DZPoker]

I dont understand why any host would not have rules.

Again, this is not about having rules or not having rules.

It has rarely ever been needed but at least we know who will be doing it. And we have plenty of fun.

So you're in the "No" camp with me!

I'd wager the poll is trending more towards answering the actual poll question, and not the real question you're asking. Any good host would likely agree that "A typical low/mid limit cash game needs someone to ‘rule’ on a hand or hands". But the frequency in which that provision - the casino equivalent of needing to call the floor to make a ruling - is actually physically needed, may be pretty low

Agreed and well put. I tried to clarify in Post #29...I can't edit the pole question itself unfortunately.

Post #29:

Sorry if I wasn't clear...

Yes - the low/mid limit games you play in typically need the host/floor to deliver a ruling to settle a disagreement over something that happened in the game.

No - the low/mid limit games you play in rarely if ever need the host/floor to deliver a ruling to settle a disagreement over something that happened in the game.

I'm going to close the pole but thanks for everyone's input!!

 

[DZPoker]

LOL...looks like the best I can do is set it to close tomorrow!
Again though, thanks everyone for the discussion...in a round-about what I got my question answered!!

 

[JustinInMN]

Again, this is not about having rules or not having rules.
So you're in the "No" camp with me!

Post #29:

I'm going to close the pole but thanks for everyone's input!!

Ah I get it, the vote hinges on the interpretation of "rarely." A lot of people are probably voting yes that you probably think should be voting "no" based on your interpretation of "rarely." This also hinges on what "need" means in the original question. Does it mean the actual act of ruling on a dispute, or is the "need" just to have it in place every game even if it will "rarely" (ha, full circle) require use.

Ask most PCF hosts, most will say a decision making process "needs" to be in place every game, but honestly only used in rare circumstances.

Anyway, i think I see how you intended the interpretation of the question is very different than how I (and I assume others) interpreted the question.

 

[DZPoker]

Ah I get it, the vote hinges on the interpretation of "rarely." A lot of people are probably voting yes that you probably think should be voting "no" based on your interpretation of "rarely." This also hinges on what "need" means in the original question. Does it mean the actual act of ruling on a dispute, or is the "need" just to have it in place every game even if it will "rarely" (ha, full circle) require use.

I think the definition of "game" may have caused a lot of the issue too. I was using "game" to mean an actual single game with a start and stop time, where I think many are interpreting it as "my game...the one I run weekly", etc. Which I think may have muddled the term "need". Yes, I was using it to mean the actual act of ruling in that specific game.

"A typical low/mid limit cash game needs someone to ‘rule’ on a hand or hands"

to me meant...

If I think about the last x times I played poker in a low/mid limit cash game ("game"), more of those games than not ("typical") actually needed the host/floor to deliver a ruling to settle a disagreement over something that happened in the game ("need").

Like I said, poorly written but apparently the question for surveys can't be edited!