A Guilty Conscience

[Harry Demetriou]

I posed this question in the 'interview' thread, but I thought I'd throw it up in the air for everyone to answer.

I'd really like to know how you guys felt on the matter.


So here it is:

If a winning poker player is causing bankruptcy and depression in opponents by hunting them down, outplaying them, and encouraging them to refill, does that make him a bad person and his actions immorale?

Causing Bankruptcy? A bit far fetched...you do not force your opponent into bankruptcy he does it to himself and if he doesn't lose to you he loses to someone else as he is obviously a compulsive gamblker and determined to go broke one way or another regardless of whoevers going to get his money. He has chosen to gamble and subsequent depression has also been brought upon by himself as he has chsoen to gamble at poker and the winning player has possibly accelerated the rate at which his opponent will get to that position of banruptcy and depression.

I'm not sure what you mean by hunting them down unless you mean you actively go after them with bad cards to give them a bad beat and put them on tilt which means that they will easily be goaded into buying more chips and losing more to you as they will be seeking revenge for the bad beat.

Outplaying an opponent is part of the game and if hunting them down means looking for easy opponents in a game then thats just too bad and imo it is defintiely not immoral. You make money from weaker opponents and it would only be immoral if you were forcing someone to gamble with a gun to their heads or playing against minors.

Morality is for Priests and not poker players and unless you are actively cheating or gaining an unfair advantage by devious means that break rules I can't see how iyour actions can be deemed immoral but if you're a catholic and feel bad about winning money in this way you can always go to a confessional on a Sunday or give it to charity to ease your conscience.

[Royal Flush]

Question is, if you were a stock broker and you made a good trade, say sold something short and the price dropped, would you feel bad that the guy who bought them bottomed out??

Poker is investing, if someone makes a bad investment that is thier fault. Be it poker or buissness, i am not going to go easy.

As a catholic if they later come to me for help, then i will. I don't think they would listen though!

[RED-DOG]

I like the 'holding a gun to their heads' strategy, but would it be considered a moody?

[Harry Demetriou]

Question is, if you were a stock broker and you made a good trade, say sold something short and the price dropped, would you feel bad that the guy who bought them bottomed out??

Poker is investing, if someone makes a bad investment that is thier fault. Be it poker or buissness, i am not going to go easy.

As a catholic if they later come to me for help, then i will. I don't think they would listen though!

Whenever someone makes money be it in gambling, trading or business there is always going to be a winner and a loser as the money has to come from somewhere or someone.

If you get some kind of value for money, entertainment or service then its not immoral.

However whilst on the subject of immoral activities......I nominate Insurance companies, estate agents, lawyers, accountants and banks as the most immoral as I am always left with a feeling of having been mugged by each and every one of them when I have come into contact with them.

[Royal Flush]

Maybe it's just more transparent with poker, people SEE thier money going to someone else. And they know damn well who it is.

Having said that i wouldnt encourage someone to cash back into a game just because i thought i could take them.

[tikay]

You hear that Robert?

[divaflava]

I think it's quite simple. Adults take responsibility for their own actions. So if someone is at the tables it is perfectly acceptable to 'hunt them down' and outplay them.

It's the "encouraging someone to refill" bit I have an issue with. Especially as the question implies knowledge that your 'opponent' is not in a fit state of mind to recommence play.

I don't think it makes you a bad person but it isn't something I would feel comfortable doing, it seems a shabby way to conduct yourself.

[patman]

the basic premise of playing for money is that you want to take it off other people. - thats understood by all.
If you felt strongly enough asbout it you could take his money and then pm him or tell him that you genuinly think he should give it a break for his own sake as he is playing bad/a fish/not thinking straight.
he then has a choice to make - he can listen and do the smart thing and take a break or he can continue and bankrupt himself which is his responsibility

self responsibility is all but a helping hand sometimes isnt a bad thing.

all you are responsible for is being an honest person with some humanity who listens to their own conscience...everything else is up to other individuals

[Robert HM]

You hear that Robert?

Harry, I'm shocked! 

OK there are bad apples in many barrels and law is one of them. I feel satisfied that I have never given just cause for complaint, but as a lawyer who's paid out of public funds the client is not often given to complaining about being ripped off.

[The Baron]

The vast majority of poker players lose. In my dissertation I discovered that the majority of big winners are funded by lots of smaller losers rather than one big loser. (Obviously this isn't always the case but the big loser tends to be the exception, not the rule.) In honesty, yes that does make me feel better when I win.

From my experience if it feels wrong it usually is. For me, it would feel wrong cleaning one guy out totally if he couldn't afford it. There are always other games to win at.

[Junior Senior]

When I play and someone makes a huge error, giving me all their chips, they may say 'I can't believe how unlucky I was'. I might then say 'Yes, you were, you got done there m8. Unlucky' when I actually mean, 'No. You're a fish. You got what you deserved.'

I'm encouraging that player to carry on playing under the false pretence that he is just unlucky.

I'm encouraging him to continue playing and, more importantly, I'm encouraging him to continue playing badly.

If this guy is an addict, perhaps with wife, kids, and big financial debt, then what does that say about me?

Does that mean that a winning poker player is not only failing to contribute financially to society through not having to pay taxes, but also making it worse by taking money off guys who can't afford it and, quite simply, can't stop themselves?

stop it spoonster - your making me cry

[Harry Demetriou]

You hear that Robert?

Harry, I'm shocked! 

OK there are bad apples in many barrels and law is one of them. I feel satisfied that I have never given just cause for complaint, but as a lawyer who's paid out of public funds the client is not often given to complaining about being ripped off.

But don't most convicted criminals blame their lawyers for not defending them properly and cite that as the reason for them being sent down?  ;-)

I placed the list in no particular order but the very worst of them WITHOUT DOUBT are the banks and if we had a poll I would offer no odds about which industry/group would top the list of most unscrupulous and immoral.

[Harry Demetriou]

PS Rumpole "Only Defends" of The Old Bailey was the only decent lawyer around and alas he's no longer with us.

[ifm]

i agree with the banks bit
Mine still owe me £5,800 from a stolen cheque!!
Despite the FACT their own banking code dictates it should have been returned to me, i am currently pinning my hopes on the ombudsman service.

[mikkyT]

I posed this question in the 'interview' thread, but I thought I'd throw it up in the air for everyone to answer.

I'd really like to know how you guys felt on the matter.


So here it is:

If a winning poker player is causing bankruptcy and depression in opponents by hunting them down, outplaying them, and encouraging them to refill, does that make him a bad person and his actions immorale?

Can one feel sympathy without feeling guilt? Yes, I believe one can. I certainly do. The golden rule of poker is to induce your oppoent into making a mistake. I feel bad for the person commiting all his chips when it is not EV+ for him to do so, but thats poker. Do I feel guilty when I disguise my hand so well that I get a guy to commit all his chips on the river when he just rivered a pair of kings against my trip 10s? No, not in the slightest. It was good play from me.

I did feel a small amount of guilt last night when I make a bad play and hit, betting and then calling a pot sized raise with an up and down straight draw and hitting - but there are other factors to consider than just pot odds.