Moral Dilemma

[boldie]

I expressed the opinion to one of the supersivors that he shouldn't be allowed to play as he was obviously incapable.

As a grown man i'm crying reading this!

you of course meant: "I expressed the opinion to one of the supervisors that the opening hours of the casino should be extended to whatever time the young lad wanted and that he should be given a bar tab as quickly as possible"

I dont even know where to start with everyone else that had said, yeah quiet word, etc, LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL.

how many times have you played against the biggest donkey you ever thought you'd played against online, making $100 bluffs into $16 pots etc, and sat out? e-mailed the site to question the guys competency? refused to take his money? seriously leave it out!!!

as for the business with his bird whats that got to do with anyone else? just because theyre having a ruck in public doesn't mean you have to look, its nothing to do with you.

you're a hard man, Bolt.

[Compo]

Some very interesting comments. To clarify...i spoke to the cardroom before I saw the crying girlfriend, who had moved from his side to the cash desk,  so this factor didn't affect my train of thought.

And it wasn't that he was pissed or a bad player .....he just could'nt , and didn't know how, to play. If any-one took pleasure in taking that money then they need to take a good long look at themselves...in Laxies expensive mirror.

I am not preaching. I am not being holier than thou. I like to win at poker as much as anyone else. But for me the money is a way of keeping score, it thankfully  is not the be all and end all. For those who play to win at all costs...if your'e that desperate for £100 or so you should find another way to make money gambling.


I can't counter the internet argument and I don't really need to. I am not the Poker police, and don't wan't to be. It was THIS situation at THIS time. No more and no less.

[doubleup]

...if your'e that desperate for £100 or so you should find another way to make money gambling.

Why?

[doubleup]

I expressed the opinion to one of the supersivors that he shouldn't be allowed to play as he was obviously incapable.

As a grown man i'm crying reading this!

you of course meant: "I expressed the opinion to one of the supervisors that the opening hours of the casino should be extended to whatever time the young lad wanted and that he should be given a bar tab as quickly as possible"

I dont even know where to start with everyone else that had said, yeah quiet word, etc, LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL.

how many times have you played against the biggest donkey you ever thought you'd played against online, making $100 bluffs into $16 pots etc, and sat out? e-mailed the site to question the guys competency? refused to take his money? seriously leave it out!!!

as for the business with his bird whats that got to do with anyone else? just because theyre having a ruck in public doesn't mean you have to look, its nothing to do with you.

you're a hard man, Bolt.

Hard but fair......

[EvilPie]

Sounds to me like the guy was just a gambler. He's not playing poker, he's just gambling. He's not out of his depth because he isn't trying to compete at any kind of intelligent level anyway.

He's probably lost a load at roulette and thought he'd try a spin at poker.

3 spins later and he's done his money.

I'd much rather take his money quick than have him suck out on me later when he's built up a bit of a roll by winning a few lucky hands.

I can guarantee 100% that this idiot would feel no sympathy whatsoever for you if he'd happened to hit with his 7 9 off against your aces all in.

In fact he'd probably have slow rolled it to try to impress his girlfriend and make himself look clever.

If you really feel bad then get up and leave or sit out until he's finished. Forget moral dilemmas when you're playing poker. They won't have the same feelings towards you.

Like a couple of others have said if you feel that money won off him is in some way tainted then just donate it to a good cause. There's plenty worse off than him.

[bolt pp]

For those who play to win at all costs...if your'e that desperate for £100 or so you should find another way to make money gambling.

so in effect anyone that would take this guys money without saying anything is "desperate" and wants to "win at all costs"? this of course is not true, it is so far from the idea of "winning at all costs" it's not at all applicable in this situation.

winning at all costs would be cheating, in whatever form that was, marked cards, collusion, etc. winning at all costs would be for me to wait for the guy outside the casino and take all my money back along with his money and his phone and i-pod.

there are so many more examples of a "desperate' person who wants to "win at all costs" and the example you have given simply isnt one of them(isnt even close to be one of them)

I make a living playing poker, playing people who are worse, less experienced than me, the recreational gambler, the uninformed etc, this guy is one of them, he's a grown man capable of making his own decisions and is quite arrogant to intercede on his behalf as it supposes he isnt.

the internet analogy was pertinent as im wondering where the people who thought the way in which you behaved was correct chose to draw the line.

[MANTIS01]

The problem with having any sympathy for this guy is that it's not genuine. You may think it is but it's not.

Say you do go and put your arm around his shoulder and pass on a few pearls of wisdom. He will react negatively for sure. He's just done his dough in seconds, his missus is crying and now he's got someone he doesn't know from Adam sticking his nose in. Advice is rarely welcomed if it isn't asked for.

So say the guy gets in your face and tells you to go fuck yourself. All of a sudden you lose your compassion for him. Now you think he's an arrogant prick. Now you want to bust him real bad. So where's all this concern gone?? It's the same guy in the same situation but now you couldn't care less because he said three simple words to you.

10 years of Labour government have damaged this country. The nanny state has really infiltrated our thought process. Look, you must appreciate that you are responsible for you. And that's the way it should be. If you are fat it is because you have eaten too many cakes and it's nobodys fault but your own. We all have choices and we all learn our lessons.

Who hasn't overspent at the casino?

If you feel obliged to say anything to this kid then you should approach every smoker in the street and encourage them to stop. They're killing themselves you know.

[Compo]

...if your'e that desperate for £100 or so you should find another way to make money gambling.

Why?

Because some things are above pure profit. If you cannot see or accept that then I feel sorry for you.

Sounds to me like the guy was just a gambler. He's not playing poker, he's just gambling. He's not out of his depth because he isn't trying to compete at any kind of intelligent level anyway.

He's probably lost a load at roulette and thought he'd try a spin at poker.

3 spins later and he's done his money.

I'd much rather take his money quick than have him suck out on me later when he's built up a bit of a roll by winning a few lucky hands.

I can guarantee 100% that this idiot would feel no sympathy whatsoever for you if he'd happened to hit with his 7 9 off against your aces all in.

In fact he'd probably have slow rolled it to try to impress his girlfriend and make himself look clever.

If you really feel bad then get up and leave or sit out until he's finished. Forget moral dilemmas when you're playing poker. They won't have the same feelings towards you.

Like a couple of others have said if you feel that money won off him is in some way tainted then just donate it to a good cause. There's plenty worse off than him.

I did

[doubleup]

10 years of Labour government have damaged this country. The nanny state has really infiltrated our thought process.

This is totally irrelevant of course.  The issue that Compo raises has been around as long as poker has been.  There are two ways to view poker, either as entertainment or a source of money.  If you fall in to the first category you can of course choose whether a game is entertaining or not and if you don't like playing against idiots then you can leave the game (imo you have no right to have the idiot removed from the game).  If poker is a source of money to you, then it is clearly absurd to do anything that makes winning less likely.

[boldie]

10 years of Labour government have damaged this country. The nanny state has really infiltrated our thought process.

This is totally irrelevant of course.  The issue that Compo raises has been around as long as poker has been.  There are two ways to view poker, either as entertainment or a source of money.  If you fall in to the first category you can of course choose whether a game is entertaining or not and if you don't like playing against idiots then you can leave the game (imo you have no right to have the idiot removed from the game).  If poker is a source of money to you, then it is clearly absurd to do anything that makes winning less likely.

Nonononononono..Mantis is right, as always, Tony Blair is to blame for this.

[MANTIS01]

Posted by: doubleup

This is totally irrelevant of course.

Well it's totally relevant of course my friend. It's not about the money. It's about someone deciding what someone else should or shouldn't be doing.

Compo says...

I expressed the opinion to one of the supersivors that he shouldn't be allowed to play as he was obviously incapable.

And that is not a judgement for Compo to make. The guy can decide for himself how capable he is of spending his own money in any way he sees fit. To try and stop him playing for his own good is nanny state plain and simple.

[MANTIS01]

Posted by: boldie

Mantis is right, as always

FYP Boldie

[doubleup]

...if your'e that desperate for £100 or so you should find another way to make money gambling.

Why?

Because some things are above pure profit. If you cannot see or accept that then I feel sorry for you

Yes some things are - like selling arms to oppressive regimes - and indeed gambling as a whole is probably quite marginal (are losers sufficiently entertained?), but when the rules of the game are accepted by all participants, there is nothing to do but play and if you don't like the opponents then you are free to leave.  It really isn't your place to select who can and can't play in a public casino.

[bolt pp]

  mantis taking it to a different level

[doubleup]

Posted by: doubleup

This is totally irrelevant of course.

Well it's totally relevant of course my friend. It's not about the money. It's about someone deciding what someone else should or shouldn't be doing.

Please don't quote me selectively - you blamed the Labour Government for causing Compo's qualms.  I said more or less that Compo's dilemma has been around as long as poker has been played which ldo predates Labour.
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty certain that if Margaret Thatcher was in No10, Compo would have the same issue.