Tournament Home Game Issue - Player continually going all in within the first hour (3 Viewers)

Styleman

Sitting Out
Joined
Sep 29, 2024
Messages
12
Reaction score
22
Location
Canada
Hey everyone - First time poster here. Please be gentle, I may not be using all the correct terminology that everyone is accustomed to, etc.

I have a very stressful situation and looking for advice on a long running home game that I manage. We play every month and have been going strong for about 7 years now. The home game is mainly just friends, usually between 6 - 10 people, tournament style with freezeout (no rebuys). The games last around 3.5 - 5 hours long.

For years, everyone has taken the game quite seriously, even though the actual stakes are low. As a bunch of middle aged men, it often feels like it's one of the few things we can still be competitive in, and we each take pride in our game and improving upon it as we can. Most of us are hyper competitive and results are tracked including several metrics you wouldn't expect such as endurance (how many hours and minutes prior to elimination, cumulative over the course of a year). We treat it like a league in many ways.

Here's the main issue. We have one player in our group who has started a somewhat new trend. They go all-in nearly every hand pre-flop, sometimes right from the very first hand of the tournament. There may be anywhere from 3 to 10 all-ins preflop from this player within the first hour of play, in certain cases back to back hands. As serious poker players, most of us simply fold to this play. The player in question has let us know on some nights that they are tired and it almost seems like they are looking for an excuse to leave early within the first 90 minutes. Remember there are no rebuys in this tournament so an elimination is permanent.

To be completely transparent, no one at our table can figure out why this player makes the effort to drive to the game and seemingly make it their life's mission to be out of the tournament in the first 90 minutes.

Some of the players have confided in me as the host that they are starting to find the games no longer enjoyable when this particular player is in attendance. The reasons are two-fold:

1) 90+% of the time, this player just donks their chips away to whoever has a hand strong enough to call their all-in, giving the other player an early unfair advantage. The rationale is that if a player is too tired to play, and just wants to give away their chips that early, why show up at all?

2) the other 10% of the time, when the player actually does make early double up knockouts and often with very questionable hands such as Q-6 offsuit, he just continues making the same all-in play. It's not poker, it's BINGO. We had always prided ourselves at having a thinking man's game. Sure, tournaments get rowdy in the mid to late game when blinds get higher and short stacks get desperate. That I understand but I can never understand an All-in preflop in the first hour of play even if you held pocket aces (or maybe especially if you held pocket aces).

I understand you can't tell a poker player how to play or how not to play. But is it ok to tell a poker player not to show up if they are too tired to potentially last the duration of the evening? It's a different situation, but I've heard before that if you were in an emergency situation and needed to leave a tournament, the ethical approach is to surrender your chips to the tournament director and not donk them off to another player (giving them an unfair advantage?).

We are now at a crucial point where certain people are no longer having fun at the games and hinting that they may no longer come to play if the core issue is not addressed. I've looked at some other threads that covered this problem but they mostly dealt with online play. I very much realize that in 2024 this is a part of online poker and it's something that must be adapted to in your own play. Is this rational applicable to our home game as well or are the complaints I'm getting justified?

Any constructive feedback or comments on how to deal with this is very much appreciated. I personally feel like I'm going to lose players no matter what route I take. What about moving from no-limit hold 'em to limit hold 'em? Any other solutions?
 
I understand you can't tell a poker player how to play or how not to play. But is it ok to tell a poker player not to show up if they are too tired to potentially last the duration of the evening?
I think the real question you want to ask is, "Is it ok to tell a poker player not to show up if they aren't a good fit and make the game less enjoyable for the rest of the group?" The answer to that question is a resounding yes.

That said, I would first talk to him and explain the problem - maybe he doesn't know that he's screwing up the game for everyone else.
 
Interesting question. On one hand, the game is *no limit* Texas hold ‘em. Smart, serious players as you describe yourselves should be rushing to play against a player shoving Q6o pre.

On the other hand, there are issues beyond money if your players value this game for the entertainment and social value.

If players are threatening to quit, you can either talk to or not invite back player as others have suggested, or find new players. I imagine you would rather have the former since it seems like this game and these players mean a lot to you.

Best of luck and keep us posted.
 
I’d talk to him and explain you have two options - lose multiple players or lose him unless he stops his annoying behavior. If he ignores your warning, you lose him and keep the others.
I think the real question you want to ask is, "Is it ok to tell a poker player not to show up if they aren't a good fit and make the game less enjoyable for the rest of the group?" The answer to that question is a resounding yes.

That said, I would first talk to him and explain the problem - maybe he doesn't know that he's screwing up the game for everyone else.
I appreciate the early responses.

I like the idea, but if I were to take this approach and talk to them, how do I do so without making them self conscious about their early play in future games? It opens all sorts of cans of worms by somewhat controlling how they play.

I might get the question from this player after a discussion "At what point in the tournament is an all-in deemed acceptable?" for example.

Right now, I wouldn't know how to respond to that or potentially other questions.
 
Interesting question. On one hand, the game is *no limit* Texas hold ‘em. Smart, serious players as you describe yourselves should be rushing to play against a player shoving Q6o pre.

On the other hand, there are issues beyond money if your players value this game for the entertainment and social value.

If players are threatening to quit, you can either talk to or not invite back player as others have suggested, or find new players. I imagine you would rather have the former since it seems like this game and these players mean a lot to you.

Best of luck and keep us posted.

Yes. In this particular case, it's the specific people who make the game. The stakes are low but our competitive nature lets us play as if the stakes were much higher for the sake of our own egos.

For one particular player, he has to drive a considerable distance to come and play. The game has no rebuy feature. He would possibly fold something exceptionally strong pre-flop to an all in shove just to avoid getting knocked out 30 minutes into a tournament because this is an event that everyone looks forward to. It's also our socialization time as friends and no one wants to play for less time than they need to drive to get here.

Is that optimal play? Maybe not, but it's the position we are in.
 
Yes. In this particular case, it's the specific people who make the game. The stakes are low but our competitive nature lets us play as if the stakes were much higher for the sake of our own egos.

For one particular player, he has to drive a considerable distance to come and play. The game has no rebuy feature. He would possibly fold something exceptionally strong pre-flop to an all in shove just to avoid getting knocked out 30 minutes into a tournament because this is an event that everyone looks forward to. It's also our socialization time as friends and no one wants to play for less time than they need to drive to get here.

Is that optimal play? Maybe not, but it's the position we are in.

I totally get that. Do you have the option to introduce rebuys? Or start a cash game for eliminated players? I’m sure there is a good reason why you do a freezeout to begin with.

I get why a player who has to drive awhile to get to your game wouldn’t want to bust out only a few minutes in.
 
I totally get that. Do you have the option to introduce rebuys? Or start a cash game for eliminated players? I’m sure there is a good reason why you do a freezeout to begin with.

I get why a player who has to drive awhile to get to your game wouldn’t want to bust out only a few minutes in.

We chose not to have rebuys from the very start to ensure we didn't attract 'all in action junkies with deep pockets' and focus more on sound, calculated and strategic poker. It also gives some of our players a bit of relief knowing they will only lose a specific amount at most.

Adding rebuys would also make the previous league statistics and records less meaningful.

A cash game for eliminated players is possible. I can suggest that but I'm not sure that would satisfy everyone's discontent.
 
If you say that he just recently began doing this, I would just ask him about his approach to the game. You can say that you noticed a change and just wanted to see if its poker related and hopefully not something personal. And if it is personal and he needs to step away from the game, he has no obligation to attend. I don't think bringing up the fact that hes mentioned he's tired should offend him either.

If he denies everything and just says thats how he plays now, should probably just let him know that the boys aren't enjoying the game anymore and explain why.
 
I am so confused, there's this one guy who continually making -EV play and people complain about that rather than adjusting their play and taking advantages of it.

This will never end, what next?

They going to complain about people playing too tight, people tanking too much, people talking too much?
 
Bad play is bad play, and should be allowed. If the guy isn’t fun for the table, tell him and/or cut him loose. Another option is to perhaps allow one rebuy for others to stand up to him. He will get one rebuy also, but the rest of the table will be a ~7:1 favorite to knock him out. Just my $0.02, best of luck
 
has he been watching live feeds from TX card rooms - Or just playing to much free poker on Pokerr2 - lol.

Seriously though, that would get on my nerves as well. Based on what you’ve shared, sounds like it could kill the game.

I’m not one for the HR level conversations, that just feels like work and I deal with that kinda crap all day. I’d just start giving him a ton of shit every time he does it. See if he catches a clue.
 
Last edited:
They are ways to introduce rebuys without attracting "all in junkies." Not sure how many players usually play in this tournament, but, i play in a regular monthly that regularly runs 3-4 tables, and, their approach is there are a total of 5 rebuys for the entire tournament, a player my only rebuy once, and,only until the end of the 4th 30 min blind level. This allows the freedom to get involved in big hands early without the fear of busting out completely.

With only a limited number of rebuys, and, with a player only able to rebuy once, it limits the all in bingo play.

Might be something for your group to consider, especially since it seems like you're uncomfortable with addressing the situation with this individual.
 
More great replies. Thanks everyone.

For the people who consider this behavior as no big deal, are you mostly cash game players? This type of play would be strongly welcomed in a cash game I feel, whereas a no rebuy tournament is obviously a completely different animal.

No one has chimed in on this part of my post either. Most of the time when this guy makes the all-in play and finally gets called, he does lose.

However, even in that case it's still viewed as game disruptive as it gives one lucky player who had the right hand to call the equivalent of 2 starting stacks gaining an table advantage that wouldn't otherwise be seen normally in a no-rebuy tournament 30 to 60 minutes in. Is that a valid rationalization or are we being too sensitive? Of course I realize the early tournament chip leader isn't always the winner but it sure gives them a nice cushion to fall on.

It's just the concept of a guy who seemingly doesn't want to even be there donating his chips to someone else. It feels like the equivalent of drawing a players name out of a hat and giving that player double the starting chips to begin the tournament while everyone else gets the standard amount.
 
I am so confused, there's this one guy who continually making -EV play and people complain about that rather than adjusting their play and taking advantages of it.

This will never end, what next?

They going to complain about people playing too tight, people tanking too much, people talking too much?
Yep.
Let him bust early and the others can enjoy the +ev. Rather than awkwardly discuss with donkey, I'd talk to the grumbling players. Reinforce with them it's good for their profits and perhaps point them toward a strategy article on how to counter continuous all-ins. All part of being a poker player, adjust your game, get dead cash.
 
Yep.
Let him bust early and the others can enjoy the +ev. Rather than awkwardly discuss with donkey, I'd talk to the grumbling players. Reinforce with them it's good for their profits and perhaps point them toward a strategy article on how to counter continuous all-ins. All part of being a poker player, adjust your game, get dead cash.
In a cash game sure, 100% agree. In a no re-buy tourney, not sure I care about EV as much. Variance happens, I can always re-load and take advantage of the continued bad play in a cash game.

The no rebuy structure changes the tactics. (cash vs tournament strategy).
 
We chose not to have rebuys from the very start to ensure we didn't attract 'all in action junkies with deep pockets' and focus more on sound, calculated and strategic poker. It also gives some of our players a bit of relief knowing they will only lose a specific amount at most.
I get this, and it makes a lot of sense. On the other hand, bad beats happen (especially when Q6o ends up cracking someone's pocket K's). Can you tell someone that they can't go all in? Well then it really isn't No Limit anymore, is it? Having the ability to force pressure with bet sizing is an integral part of the game.

One group that I play in (@grantc54's Langley Poker League) has a fairly elegant solution (IMO). There is a single rebuy or add-on included in the buy-in amount. If you bust before the second break, you can use your rebuy chip to get the same stack size as the original starting stack. If you still have your rebuy chip at the break, then you get a free add-on (usually about 20-33% larger than the original starting stack). Only one or the other, not both. After the second break, then it's freeze-out poker.

This format rewards players who play a "thinking" game by giving them a larger add on to their stack if they survive the first few hours. Action junkies can still jam away with debatable hands, but they can only get caught once and the second time they are gone (plus they risk missing out on the bonus chips included in the add on). Players that have a bad beat by getting their premium hands cracked by the action junkie's questionable hands still have a chance to keep playing. And most importantly, deep pockets are removed from consideration, as everyone gets the rebuy or add on included in the original buy-in amount, with no ability for richer players to buy their way to victory.

Having said that, if the player in question is no longer a good fit with the character of the game you want to host, then a conversation, and possible dis-invitation seems in order.
 
Last edited:
If he’s a friend and someone you’d like to keep at the game, I would explain the problem to him before I stopped inviting. If not, I would just stop inviting. You can’t tell someone they can’t play a certain way, but you can tell them it’s ruining the game for everyone else and have them choose the way forward.

I get people saying you should all welcome these EV- moves and adjust accordingly. But in a micro stakes poker game, it isn’t just about trying to win as much money as possible. It’s about having a fun experience.

If I’m playing a tennis game at 20 bucks a game, I’d like my opponent to play his/her best because I want a fun competetive match. If they suddenly started hitting the ball in random directions, I wouldn’t lick my chops over the money I’m winning, I would ask what the hell is wrong with them.
 
Here's the main issue. We have one player in our group who has started a somewhat new trend. They go all-in nearly every hand pre-flop, sometimes right from the very first hand of the tournament. There may be anywhere from 3 to 10 all-ins preflop from this player within the first hour of play, in certain cases back to back hands. As serious poker players, most of us simply fold to this play. The player in question has let us know on some nights that they are tired and it almost seems like they are looking for an excuse to leave early within the first 90 minutes. Remember there are no rebuys in this tournament so an elimination is permanent.

Why should you or anyone care? Lovely is what I say. One more buy-in added to the prize pool.

Let's break it down. Tournament comprises of 6 to 10 players and lasts 3.5 to 5 hours. Excellent! That leaves plenty of time on the clock for anyone to win, regardless of who Willy B. Jammin donks his chips off to early in the game.

If other players are following Willy's lead - even better. Your crew needs to uncrumple their panties and stop crying about Willy Jammin. Willy's money is as good as anyone else's. Welcome him.

Matter of fact, I would embrace his playing style by adding a bounty to the buy-in. (Or you can incorporate a bounty into the buy-in.)

~ My 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
Why should you or anyone care? Lovely is what I say. One more buy-in added to the prize pool.

Let's break it down. Tournament comprises of 6 to 10 players and lasts 3.5 to 5 hours. Excellent! That leaves plenty of time on the clock for anyone to win, regardless of who Willy B. Jammin donks his chips off to early in the game.

If other players are following Willy's lead - even better. Your crew needs to uncrumple their panties and stop crying about Willy Jammin. Willy's money is as good as anyone else's. Welcome him.

Matter of fact, embrace his playing style by adding a bounty to your buy-in.

~ My 2 cents.
I like your energy and your reply made me laugh (in a good way). Incidentally, we do have a bounty on each player already.

Care to respond to my message 5 replies above yours which goes into a little more detail why we consider it a problem in a no-rebuy tournament where negative EV is less relevant since one wrong call can eliminate you permanently.

If this were a cash game, we would welcome this player with open arms all day, every day.
 
This isn't only about expected value measured in money, it is about expected value measured in fun.

It might not be fun for the rest of the field to set aside time for the game, drive there and then "roll the dice" all or nothing in the first ten minutes. Sure, they get an overlay measured in cash, but they give up "fun". Even if someone doubles up vs the villain, it might spoil the competitive spirit of the event.

As for the all-in player: We have to assume he/she is enjoying something about the game as played. Could be an action junky. Could be the player would rather get ahead really fast or bust and have the evening to do something else. Could be they read a book and decided the advice says to do this all-in thing.

Keeping the field happy is more important than keeping villain happy. The OP will have to decide what form that might take.

I have some suggestions that only apply if the host wants to try and salvage the villain:

Make the tournament a limit event. No one is going broke the first few levels in a limit game. Anyone so inclined can call down the villain without risking their tournament life in the early levels. I do realize people often don't care for limit poker. Here are some big bet poker approaches.

A more moderate option: The game is pot limit rather than no limit. At low blind levels this will greatly throttle the all-in man while allowing more traditional play as the tournament progresses.

An even more moderate option: The game is pot limit preflop and no limit after that. You still might face the unwelcome all-in post flop. But that lets the rest of the field play a "safe" fit or fold play style if so inclined.
 
Polish_20240930_024511497.jpg
 
An even more moderate option: The game is pot limit preflop and no limit after that. You still might face the unwelcome all-in post flop. But that lets the rest of the field play a "safe" fit or fold play style if so inclined.

Thanks for your well thought response.

I like the 'pot limit preflop and no limit after that' idea. I remember seeing this on Pokerstars 'Big Game' (Cash game format).

Can anyone share if they do this for tournaments what that might add to the run time of the tournament. Obviously it's going to make it longer, especially closer to the end with 2 - 4 players remaining.
 
However, even in that case it's still viewed as game disruptive as it gives one lucky player who had the right hand to call the equivalent of 2 starting stacks gaining an table advantage that wouldn't otherwise be seen normally in a no-rebuy tournament 30 to 60 minutes in. Is that a valid rationalization or are we being too sensitive? Of course I realize the early tournament chip leader isn't always the winner but it sure gives them a nice cushion to fall on.

It's just the concept of a guy who seemingly doesn't want to even be there donating his chips to someone else. It feels like the equivalent of drawing a players name out of a hat and giving that player double the starting chips to begin the tournament while everyone else gets the standard amount.

I consider myself primarily a NLHE/PLO cash player even though I currently play in an $8/$16 FL dealer's choice Hold-em/Omaha-hi game. I have played in tons of NLHE tournaments over the course of my poker years, winning my share of NLHE MTT's in Hollywood's rinky dink four table card room pre-covid.

I can see how Willy's behavior can de disruptive, but what experience has taught me is that chip dumping early in a big stack tournament where the blinds go up incrementally doesn't give the recipient player as big of an advantage as is often perceived by other card players.

So the answer to your question from my P.O.V., is yes, your players are being too sensitive to the variance that Willy introduces to the table by jamming his stack repeatedly.

Thanks for your well thought response.

I like the 'pot limit preflop and no limit after that' idea. I remember seeing this on Pokerstars 'Big Game' (Cash game format).

Can anyone share if they do this for tournaments what that might add to the run time of the tournament. Obviously it's going to make it longer, especially closer to the end with 2 - 4 players remaining.

There are multiple ways in which you can implement Dr. Strange's PLO idea. PLO pre-flop throughout the tournament or until first break. Alternatively, you can play PLO every street until the first break or throughout the tournament. Whatever option you choose will not stretch out the length of the game by more than a blind level. (Maybe two on a rare occasion.)

Reading your other posts about wanting to stay true to the stats and keeping the event enjoyable, you need to do what is best for your game.

Few like to play outside of their comfort zones, even though in poker (if embraced) that is a great catalyst for growth.
 
My suggestion is to convert your holdem tournament to a PLO cash game. This will teach your player pool the fun that comes from embracing variance. Your player pool sounds pretty tight and passive, so it might be a long shot for success. But a quick death of the game is better than a slow and painful one, which I think is also the philosophy of the fun player your group wants to ban.
 
Your player pool wants to come and unwind and get some entertainment value from their buyins, they don't want to be out within the first few minutes or forced to just fold and fold while this guy keeps pressing the all-in button.

I'd speak to him first and see what's going on.

Aside from that, switching the game to pot-limit hold em or even limit hold em will help slow down his silliness.

At the end of the day, you need to cater to the majority of your players, imo. I'm sure there's plenty of games that would welcome this guy to go click buttons given his chosen playstyle.
 
My opinion is like a few others don’t jeopardize the game over one bad player. Also don’t care to his needs and change the style to cash games just because of him. Stick to your guns! Treat your game like a business . In a business whenever there is one bad apple who becomes a ‘cancer’ don’t let it spread. Bring him into your office have a word with him try and encourage him to better . If he doesn’t 0 tolerance show him the door!!
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom