High hand grumbles at private game (2 Viewers)

[Taghkanic]

Scene: Private game, 1/3 NLHE, lightly raked, dealers, food/drink provided.

Players: Almost everyone is a reg, but occasionally regs bring a friend or the host tries a new face out.

High Hand: The host sets aside $5 from pots of $100+ toward the high hand jackpot. Requires quads+ using both hold cards. It hasn’t been hit in a while so it’s now $1,000.

Situation: A guy in his early 20s who is a guest of a reg hits the $1K high hand in the first 20 minutes of the game.

He doesn’t tip the dealer; regs would normally tip 5-10% on a promo like this.

Then nits it up for another 90 minutes or so, basically only playing a couple hands where it limped to his big blind, and leaves.

Background: This guest has been to the game twice before in the past year. Once he bought in for the minimum, busted and left without rebuying. Another time he got up maybe two buyins early, nitted it up again and left quickly.

The Grumbling: After he left, several regs (not me!) complained about the guy:

(A) Failing to tip;

(B) Nitting it up after his windfall;

(C) Being eligible for the high hand though he only plays once every 3-4 months.

I only agreed with the tipping grumble, though that could be attributed to his youth and unfamiliarity with the game.

I have more thoughts but was curious if anyone plays in home/private games with an attendance requirement to be eligible for promos like this, as some were suggesting should be instituted.

 

[Taghkanic]

For me, the issue was not that a new or occasional player can win a jackpot to which they did not contribute.

The issue was nitting it up so blatantly to protect the windfall.

I suggested to the host that rather than changing the high hand eligibility, that he instead speak to the reg who brings this guy occasionally as a guest, letting him know that the guest is not gonna be terribly welcome in the future if he keeps doing that (whether it’s related to a high hand or just rungood).

 

[dinosaur]

Sounds like the kid needs/wants the money more than anything else, given the background. I wouldn’t invite him back. It’s fine for him to behave that way, but I think it’s reasonable to not have him back to the game too. Looks like he’s looking for a casino type environment, somewhere he can maximize his profits.

 

[SwissChip]

Poor behavior…
This is not the guy who brings the fun to the game!
You give one finger - they take the whole hand.

 

[chippitydoodah]

Personally, I'd be more upset that he was qualified for the jackpot, especially if I were a steady reg who (hopefully) was a continuous donor to the pot. Nit play is as nit play does and tipping the dealer should have been brought up by everyone at the table as soon as it happened (or rather didn't in this case).

 

[allforcharity]

The high hand pays out according to the rules, without prejudice. How long a player has been there is not relevant.

As far as play, he has not done anything illegal. But it's your game and you have the right to invite (or not invite) anybody you want. If you're group is only after his money, and he's a regular donator, then by all means invite him back. He's got money to play with now.

 

[ekricket]

lol “we are mad because a greedy kid took our money and didn’t feed our greed back”. Greedy bastards dinging another greedy bastard, what you gonna do?

I’m not talking about tipping, I’m talking about the greedy attitude that the players exhibited when they whined they didn’t get a chance to win back money that someone else already won.

 

[Taghkanic]

But it's your game and you have the right to invite (or not invite) anybody you want. If you're group is only after his money, and he's a regular donator, then by all means invite him back. He's got money to play with now.

Per the OP: It’s not my game.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Just lost his invite to play again. Try not to invite nits anyway lol. If you need a player he can get a call again, just let him know it’s common practice to tip out.

 

[allforcharity]

Per the OP: It’s not my game.

Ok then it's his game to do what he wants. But grumbling at someone winning a HHJ is just sour grapes.

 

[chicubs1988]

HHJ Player did nothing wrong. He's entitled play however he wants, and it sounds like he played within the parameters of the game.

Is the host/game justified in not inviting him back because he isn't splashy and they'd rather that seat go to someone who contributes more action? Absolutely.

In regards to players being upset that he was "eligible" for the HHJ - did any of them speak up in the past to not collect the jackpot money from pots involving non-regs? If not, it seems like a bit of a double-standard: the regs have no problem taking newbie/non-reg money to inflate the jackpot....but don't want those same players to be able to win...

 

[doublebooyah85]

For me, the issue was not that a new or occasional player can win a jackpot to which they did not contribute.

The issue was nitting it up so blatantly to protect the windfall.

I suggested to the host that rather than changing the high hand eligibility, that he instead speak to the reg who brings this guy occasionally as a guest, letting him know that the guest is not gonna be terribly welcome in the future if he keeps doing that (whether it’s related to a high hand or just rungood).

If it was my house, my game, I’d pay the bonus in cash and have the chips off the table tbh. Ur trying to reward anyone. Let this person book a win. It’s good for the game.

 

[JustinInMN]

This is the risk of doing these promotions. Yes I think players that come to such a game SHOULD understand tipping the dealer is expected.

But anyone invited is eligible for the promotion, the other players have no right to complain that he won.

 

[MrBoosh]

In our game, we have a royal flush jackpot. Our league members pay 5 bucks each poker night to be eligible to win it. Non members of the league pay 10 bucks. Our league members probably make up 95% of the pot. So we would prefer that the money eventually goes to a league member who has been contributing to the pool. League members can win the whole pot if they get a royal flush and non league members will win 50% with a cap at 500 bucks. This way it helps prevent that a newer player that hasn't help build up the pot doesn't come in and win everything. So far no one has won our RF pot yet but we have had a K high straight flush that caused alot of excitement. In the history of our game we have seen one royal flush. It was before we started our league. Some of our member's children are hoping they can win it when they become old enough to play in the league. Lol.

 

[Taghkanic]

If it was my house, my game, I’d pay the bonus in cash and have the chips off the table tbh. Ur trying to reward anyone. Let this person book a win. It’s good for the game.

In this game the host requires anyone winning a jackpot to keep a certain amount of it on the table (I believe it’s 200BB total but that includes any other chips they already had). They can pocket the rest.

In my own game it all stays on the table until they cash out. I think it is better for the game and makes the promotion more enticing if other players have a shot at winning some of it back.

 

[Taghkanic]

P.S. IMHO the regs have a much better chance of winning more total $$$ from these rolling high hands than guests and occasional players, for the simple reason that regs play far more often. The regs get far more shots at the lottery.

Hitting a high hand doesn’t involve much if any skill. So if you have 9 players, one of whom is a guest, that person has a roughly 1/9 chance at the jackpot that one night.

If the guest misses, he has donated to the pool and won’t be back to take another shot at it. The regs now have an equal chance at winning his share.

So the rare case of a guest hitting (and running) when the high hand is big is really just a temporary setback for the regs. It’s frustrating, but longterm the visitors and occasional are donating to the group via the high hands, not “stealing” money which isn’t theirs.

 

[Taghkanic]

lol “we are mad because a greedy kid took our money and didn’t feed our greed back”. Greedy bastards dinging another greedy bastard, what you gonna do?

I’m not talking about tipping, I’m talking about the greedy attitude that the players exhibited when they whined they didn’t get a chance to win back money that someone else already won.

Agreed, though it is also bad poker etiquette to hit and run. Nitting it up for 60-90 minutes before running is effectively the same thing.

I think the players would have complained a lot less to the host if the jackpot winner had continued to play in the same fashion as he was before the high hand windfall.

And I expect the regs would have complained less if they expected this player to become more regular, effectively using the jackpot to buy in to future games. The awareness that he would not be back for 3-6 months if at all probably fueled the frustration. It’s $1K leaving that game’s ecosystem.

(In my own game, I had a guy who only plays maybe 25% of the time—a known fish—have a big night for a change. I expect that will lead to better attendance from him in the near term, at least until he spews his profits back. So as host I was glad to see him book a win, though I myself donated some of his winnings.)

 

[upNdown]

For me, the issue was not that a new or occasional player can win a jackpot to which they did not contribute.

Right. I guess that’s a problem with home game progressive jackpots - the regs feel like they have equity in it.
But as for the new guy winning, I don’t see how it could be run any differently. If I was invited to a game and they were raking pots for bonuses, but I wasn’t eligible for them? I wouldn’t like that.

Anyway, it sounds like the guy is a dummy and needs somebody to explain to him how not be a dummy. New guys and occasional players often simply have no idea that there’s anything wrong with that behavior.

 

[inca911]

Not building a min dealer tip into the HHJ is a miss (i.e., as a separate award pool). $0.02

 

[btbmason]

Agreed, though it is also bad poker etiquette to hit and run. Nitting it up for 60-90 minutes before running is effectively the same thing.

I don’t agree here. Just because you’ve won some money doesn’t mean you should be forced into playing a different style because other people think that gives them a better chance to win that money. Will it change a future invite? Sure that’s a possibility, but they’re still currently at the game they were invited into and playing by all of the rules.

Being present at the table still involves risk. If someone raises pre-flop and that person has AA, are they folding away their equity? If so, then they’re giving money back in a much different way. If not, that money is still up for grabs.

If this person is staying and playing in any capacity it’s vastly different than taking all of the money off the table because they’re still getting hands and paying blinds.

 

[Rieguy]

He doesn’t tip the dealer; regs would normally tip 5-10% on a promo like this.

(A) Failing to tip;

I only agreed with the tipping grumble, though that could be attributed to his youth and unfamiliarity with the game.

Host should just institute a mandatory minimum 5% tip on this promo. Ensures a fresh member doesn’t break etiquette, shows more can be given (and may be expected), and stops potential complaining about it.

Everything else just sounds like regular nit stuff.

 

[Taghkanic]

I don’t agree here. Just because you’ve won some money doesn’t mean you should be forced into playing a different style because other people think that gives them a better chance to win that money. Will it change a future invite? Sure that’s a possibility, but they’re still currently at the game they were invited into and playing by all of the rules.

Being present at the table still involves risk. If someone raises pre-flop and that person has AA, are they folding away their equity? If so, then they’re giving money back in a much different way. If not, that money is still up for grabs.

If this person is staying and playing in any capacity it’s vastly different than taking all of the money off the table because they’re still getting hands and paying blinds.

The guest-occasional was choosing to play a different style *after* he won—a super tight one which was different than he’d played earlier.

That seemed the same as just picking up his stack and leaving immediately after hitting the HH. Maybe forfeited $20-$30 in blinds vs. the $1K windfall.

All I know is if I did that in a game where I rarely showed up, I would expect to be dropped from the invite list. It’s within the rules, but doesn’t make you someone hosts want back.

 

[btbmason]

That seemed the same as just picking up his stack and leaving immediately after hitting the HH. Maybe forfeited $20-$30 in blinds vs. the $1K windfall.

It’s not the same. It’s $20-$30 they gave away completely for free, which they could have just stood up and taken with them immediately.

I don’t doubt they won’t get invited back but I have no issue with that because hosts at private games can invite or refuse anyone they want. But they stayed, and their money was still in play, and at-risk.

If they’re not getting invited back anyway then a hit and run makes way more sense. That’s not what they chose to do. You also have no idea what types of hands they were dealt before leaving, and it’s unreasonable to think people would never hit a 60-90 minute cold patch. Convenient timing? Sure. But it’s not the same thing as leaving, that’s all I’m saying.

 

[Taghkanic]

It’s not the same. It’s $20-$30 they gave away completely for free, which they could have just stood up and taken with them immediately.

I don’t doubt they won’t get invited back but I have no issue with that because hosts at private games can invite or refuse anyone they want. But they stayed, and their money was still in play, and at-risk.

If they’re not getting invited back anyway then a hit and run makes way more sense. That’s not what they chose to do. You also have no idea what types of hands they were dealt before leaving, and it’s unreasonable to think people would never hit a 60-90 minute cold patch. Convenient timing? Sure. But it’s not the same thing as leaving, that’s all I’m saying.

Can’t agree that it’s not effectively the same, and not incredibly lame.

$20-30 is 2-3% of $1,000.

Most pots are $20-$30 minimum *preflop* in this game.

 

[Taghkanic]

Put it this way… The reg who has brought this guest also plays in my game.

If he ever says to me, “Hey, mind if I bring High Hand Guy to your next game?” Answer would be yes I do mind. Not because he broke any rules. But because he didn’t gave the sense to handle things smarter.

When I first joined that game, I actually hit the high hand on the very first orbit I played. It was something like $600. I immediately gave the dealer $100 and flipped the other seven players $25 each.

I’ve been invited back ever since.

 

[btbmason]

Everyone has opinions and that’s absolutely great.

People handle things differently, and that’s the reason people make threads for input.

You have no idea what his actual intent was, or if he even wants to come back to this game, or any other game. You have no idea what he’s doing with that money. You have no idea what types of games he’s played in the past, what jackpots and windfalls he’s paid into. I don’t know any of this either, that’s the point of playing devil’s advocate to represent alternative angles.

Some people make threads and don’t accept absolutely any outcome other than the one that they think is correct. That’s fine too, have at it, just doesn’t make much sense to me to reach out for other viewpoints then shoot them all down.

I wish I had $20-$30 for every game I didn’t play in though, or for every game I left when I was having a crappy run of cards. I’d buy 10 nice chip sets with all that money.

 

[ekricket]

Did the same dealer deal all of the hands in the time leading up to bonus being paid? If he was a one off, why should he get tipped for work others did? If he was tipped would he split it with everyone who ever dealt in this bonus timeframe?

 

[DrStrange]

I would be curious about what "lightly raked" means. My comments would be even harsher if this is a clearly for-profit game vs a small rake to cover food and other costs sort of game.

If the host wanted a mandatory tip on the HHJ - it is all up to him. Would be easy to institute. Let's be clear - the dealers have already been tipped on the money in the HHJ from each of those $100+ pots. This ugly situation is on the host more than anyone else. Now someone thinks even more tip money should be "unofficially required"? Makes me wonder. Mandatory tips aren't tips, they are fees

( I also wonder what happens to the HHJ money if the game breaks up for good. Quads over quads is a pretty steep threshold. It is a rare enough event in a casino running a HHJ with multiple tables full time. Seems plausible that no one might win the jackpot for years and years in a single table game running weekly or monthly.)

Let me share my disgust with the whole whine about the lucky winner didn't give back a big chunk his windfall. What a crock of shit. You have a losing to breakeven player who appears to be playing out of his comfort zone. The regulars have every reason to expect to eventually shear this sheep. So sad that this one night the sheep got away unshorn. He even was polite enough to stick around for quite a while and bleed back a bit.

I think the winning irregular player was doing exactly what he should do. The money involved looks way too big, a thousand bucks is often a big deal to a player in their early 20's. Deep stacked isn't a comfortable place for him. So yes, he should be taking precautions.

Back to the host. If he/she wants to limit the jack pot to regulars, fine. If so, then the casual players aren't raked for the HHJ when they win a big pot, and they can't win the jack pot. But if you take money from my pots to fund the big prize, I should be able to win it. Again, this is all on the host. If they want special rules for the benefit of the regulars, then spell them out.

I can't tell if this is the typical underground raked game always hungry for new suckers or a standing game where there is an occasional empty seat. If this is the latter - then sure, don't invite the guy back. The table doesn't like him. He doesn't come often. The regulars probably already plan to treat him like shit for the rest of time. Don't invite him to other similar games with most of the same regulars hosted elsewhere either. Save everyone some grief. In truth the irregular probably shouldn't be in games at these stakes anyway.

I know, the suckers are expected to go home broke, it just didn't happen this way tonight. Too bad -=- DrStrange

 

[doublebooyah85]

I would be curious about what "lightly raked" means. My comments would be even harsher if this is a clearly for-profit game vs a small rake to cover food and other costs sort of game.

If the host wanted a mandatory tip on the HHJ - it is all up to him. Would be easy to institute. Let's be clear - the dealers have already been tipped on the money in the HHJ from each of those $100+ pots. This ugly situation is on the host more than anyone else. Now someone thinks even more tip money should be "unofficially required"? Makes me wonder. Mandatory tips aren't tips, they are fees

( I also wonder what happens to the HHJ money if the game breaks up for good. Quads over quads is a pretty steep threshold. It is a rare enough event in a casino running a HHJ with multiple tables full time. Seems plausible that no one might win the jackpot for years and years in a single table game running weekly or monthly.)

Let me share my disgust with the whole whine about the lucky winner didn't give back a big chunk his windfall. What a crock of shit. You have a losing to breakeven player who appears to be playing out of his comfort zone. The regulars have every reason to expect to eventually shear this sheep. So sad that this one night the sheep got away unshorn. He even was polite enough to stick around for quite a while and bleed back a bit.

I think the winning irregular player was doing exactly what he should do. The money involved looks way too big, a thousand bucks is often a big deal to a player in their early 20's. Deep stacked isn't a comfortable place for him. So yes, he should be taking precautions.

Back to the host. If he/she wants to limit the jack pot to regulars, fine. If so, then the casual players aren't raked for the HHJ when they win a big pot, and they can't win the jack pot. But if you take money from my pots to fund the big prize, I should be able to win it. Again, this is all on the host. If they want special rules for the benefit of the regulars, then spell them out.

I can't tell if this is the typical underground raked game always hungry for new suckers or a standing game where there is an occasional empty seat. If this is the latter - then sure, don't invite the guy back. The table doesn't like him. He doesn't come often. The regulars probably already plan to treat him like shit for the rest of time. Don't invite him to other similar games with most of the same regulars hosted elsewhere either. Save everyone some grief. In truth the irregular probably shouldn't be in games at these stakes anyway.

I know, the suckers are expected to go home broke, it just didn't happen this way tonight. Too bad -=- DrStrange

Booyah!!!

 

[BGinGA]

Perhaps change the required jackpot payout to:

3% to each body at the table (including dealer) and the winning high hand qualifier gets the rest.... to do with as he/she wishes (including pocketing it, or adding to stack). It's a jackpot, not game chips.