Was this bad play?

[Maxriddles]

...
Don"t let what someone says in the chat box (or at the table in a live game) put you off or adversely affect your game.  Wayne"s advice is good for those who do get worked up about what people say - switch the chat off.  I like to use it, but make sure that I don"t get upset by what people say. 

Good point - I find the chat box can be very useful for assessing peoples mood and their skill level.

Poker is a game of incomplete information, if other players want to leak lots of information to you by what they say in the chat box then that is to your advantage.

Obviously if it does affect your play adversely then that benefit is going to be outweighed by the negative effect it has on your play so switch it off, but I would suggest the most profitable option is to find a way to not let it affect you.

Couldn"t agree more about the benefits of keeping the chat box open, but ONLY if it doesn"t adversely affect your play. If it does upset or distract you it may be best for your game to close it down. Personally I often find it very useful and particularly enjoy when I can see that a couple of players at my table are letting this affect their game. 

As for the situation I may well even have folded pre flop after the only person at the table who can hurt me has already called. I may well have flat called but I would not have raised (unless knowledge of the player made me think he"d fold) as K, 10 (even suited) is not a hand I"d be calling a re-raise with.  

[ThePiranha]

nah this is definately bad play in my opinion. If i was the other person calling the raise, 1 reason why i would be calling the raise is because i would be trying to knock somebody out so i would probably be giving you the same abuse as this guy did lol.

You will be doing yourself no favours by betting into small side pots with nothing because people often think you are inexperienced and you will probably get no respect later on in the comp and was probably why you ended up getting knocked out soon after

[Jon MW]

...
You will be doing yourself no favours by betting into small side pots with nothing ...

I"d have to disagree with this.

Firstly the side pot was larger than the main pot, so it"s worth winning.

And because it was worth winning I think a significant number of players would agree that it was a perfectly valid play.

Obviously there will always be disagreement, but as long as you know which players are respecting your bets (and which aren"t) you can always turn that to your advantage

[hi_am_chris]

Too early still to be bothered bout knocking someone out, id rather have the sidepot and him win a small main pot then him get knocked out and lose the side pot

[CrizzyConnor]

Firstly, thanks to everyone for replying. I can see from reading that I maybe shouldn"t have been in the hand in the first place. It"s playing hand like K 10, KJ, JQ and AJ that usually get me into trouble. I still see myself as definitely learning the game... I"ve only recently started folding aforementioned trouble hands UTG and in early position when a friend told me I probably shouldn"t play them from here and I have noticed myself get into much less trouble since. I personally figured my hand was decent for a raise against one flat call of the big blind and me in the place directly before the button. I also figured that the small blind would have a good chance of being dealt garbage but would still have to go all in - which was my reasoning behind the raise.

I also subscribe to the unwritten rule of checking it round when it is one pot (no substantial side pot) and when a move up the money etc is likely if a player is knocked out...

Maybe my biggest mistake like many of you said was playing the hand in the first place. I know it"s because I"m just a beginner and I know it"s wrong a lot of times but I find it"s hard to lay down a hand if both cards are suited and above 9 (J10, Q10, QJ, KQ, KJ etc). I"ve started to be able to fold cards like QJ in early position like I mentioned before so maybe in future I wont get myself into pots like this and wont have to worry about being taunted.

Thanks to everyone who took the time to read and reply. I prefer playing live to playing on the net so i"ll hopefully see some of you at APAT events next year (I"m hoping to make it to the Scottish Amateur in May next year!)...

[Swinebag]

On a slightly different theme (but not a thread-jack).....

What is the ruling if in a live game a player finds himself allin and the other 2 verbally collude to check it down?

I"m pretty sure its a serious breach of the rules which should have a severe penalty.....but I"m not sure?

[HaworthBantam]

[ThePiranha]

yeah i have had my wrist slapped before, i got a warning, but to be fair, i never really realised hat what i was doing is in a way collusion until i thought about it later.

I run poker nights across the area and since this warning i have become a lot firmer on people verbally agreeing to check down a pot.

Its not an issue that will get you ejected from a tournament but take every care to make sure that what you say to another player isnt collusio. Why have unneccesary greif right?

Hope this helps

[kinboshi]

nah this is definately bad play in my opinion. If i was the other person calling the raise, 1 reason why i would be calling the raise is because i would be trying to knock somebody out so i would probably be giving you the same abuse as this guy did lol.

If you called in this position to knock out a player when there are still over 100 runners in the competition, then I"d raise to get you off the hand, as it would mean you haven"t got a strong hand, and I want the chips.  Getting hold of more chips is far more important to me than reducing a 100+ field by one runner.

Also, giving anyone abuse for playing a hand the way they want to play it is wrong.  They"ve paid their money, the chips are theirs to do what they want with them.  Why give them abuse?

Seriously, people who think that implicit collusion (which is what we"re talking about when we check it down to increase the chance of knocking someone out) is relevant at this stage of the tournament are just wrong.

You will be doing yourself no favours by betting into small side pots with nothing because people often think you are inexperienced and you will probably get no respect later on in the comp and was probably why you ended up getting knocked out soon after

If you were looking to check down a pot here, I"d say that would signify that you"re an inexperienced player - and I"d be very surprised if any seasoned pro would be looking to check down a pot here when there"s a chance they can bet out and increase their chances of winning the pot.

[ThePiranha]

ok, find me 1 example, be it a video or anything where you have ever seen a succesful pro bet into a side pot with nothing and i will silence myself on this issue.

Fair enough??

Oh and this comp had 1600 runners in, so for it to be down to the last 100, id definately say that you were deep enough to be checking the pot down and trying to knock somebody out.

[AMRN]

...but if the side pot was bigger than the main pot, surely you have to agree it was worth going for.

[kinboshi]

ok, find me 1 example, be it a video or anything where you have ever seen a succesful pro bet into a side pot with nothing and i will silence myself on this issue.

Fair enough??

Oh and this comp had 1600 runners in, so for it to be down to the last 100, id definately say that you were deep enough to be checking the pot down and trying to knock somebody out.

Ignore the side pot - you"re looking at all the chips that are in the middle and trying to make them yours.  You know the short-stack is on a huge range, and the other player in the hand knows that too.  Get him out of the hand, increase your chip stack.

I"d never, ever, ever check down a pot just to increase the chance of short-stack being knocked out when there are a 100+ players left.  I might check it down if I think I"ve got no chance shifting another player off the hand, but I"m not checking it down to ladder.

Looks like we"ll have to agree to disagree here.  You play it your way, and I"ll play it mine.  One thing I"d have to say though is that you"re wrong to abuse anyone here who bets.  I don"t think that"s a matter of opinion, it"s just not right.

[Jon MW]

ok, find me 1 example, be it a video or anything where you have ever seen a succesful pro bet into a side pot with nothing and i will silence myself on this issue.
...

You"re not likely to see this on TV.

(i) Virtually all the televised stages of tournaments are the latter stages and final tables of tournaments where the implicit collusion in question is the best choice of action.

(ii) On a similar note, a lot of televised tournaments (specifically those that are made for television, as opposed to just having cameras at an existing tournament), become very crapshooty. This means that the other player in the pot wouldn"t be able to fold because they wouldn"t have enough chips left to be able to do so.

(iii) Once you"ve eliminated the 99.9% (and this may be an understatement) of televised tournament poker the above 2 points cover, you would then have to happen to have a  hand, not only with a substantial side pot but also being played by an established pro and at the feature televised table.

The situation itself will occur on a fairly regular basis around the world - but because of these reasons (especially (i) and (ii)) you would be very lucky to catch it on TV.


And that...

is why you shouldn"t learn poker from watching it on the telly.

[ThePiranha]

apologies, the lol at the end of my sentence saying i was going to abuse him to was implying that i was joking.

And that...

is why you shouldn"t learn poker from watching it on the telly.

Ok, i agree here, but still, can you tell me if you have ever seen any seasoned pro bluff into a relatively small side pot?

That was the point i made

[kinboshi]

apologies, the lol at the end of my sentence saying i was going to abuse him to was implying that i was joking.

OK - my bad.  Misinterpreted what you were saying - easy to do on a fourm.