QueYo
Pair
If I had to choose to play against The Accused or The Mean Girls Squad, I think I’d be facing The Accused.
-
This site contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, Poker Chip Forum may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!
Home Game Cheating (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter doublebooyah85
- Start date
BryantRC
3 of a Kind
In for $100. Out for $275. Dang it feels good to play again!
BryantRC
3 of a Kind
This is actually hilarious. I'm impressed with the amount of effort you put in to this lol!
Oooh, a sandwich!
RocAFella1
Royal Flush
BigJackJones
Straight
wickedwonka121
Flush
Gotta stay up with the latest if you don't want to get cheated. The problem is, if anyone is this good, there's no catching them in the act.
New here and super late to this party. I don't even remember how I came across this thread after all that reading, but dammit this has to win best comment! LMAO.. big Hans Niemann vibes going on here.
Samuel
Straight
Preditor
Pair
A general thought. But my two cents is that the best way to prevent cheating in home games is to keep the stakes at cheeseburger level. The equivalent of dinner and a movie. Somewhere between $20 and $100 a night, whether you're playing tournament or cash.
Keep stakes high enough people take it seriously. But not so high that people are tempted to cheat because there is a lot of cash to be won.
Plus I really don't want to be responsible for thousands of dollars of other people's money. $1000 is about my maximum comfort. Maybe $2000 for special occasions.
For anything beyond that, go to a casino, or lodge, or someone else's home game where they have to bear the brunt of cheaters.
Keep stakes high enough people take it seriously. But not so high that people are tempted to cheat because there is a lot of cash to be won.
Plus I really don't want to be responsible for thousands of dollars of other people's money. $1000 is about my maximum comfort. Maybe $2000 for special occasions.
For anything beyond that, go to a casino, or lodge, or someone else's home game where they have to bear the brunt of cheaters.
Jimulacrum
Full House
In theory, this sounds logical.
In reality, cheats will cheat whatever game they can.
Not going to link it again in this thread, but I have my own thread on PCF about catching a cheat at about the cheeseburgerest stakes you can imagine: a 20 max, 0.25/0.50 cash game among friends and colleagues of many years. The kind of game where people brought homemade food and built close friendships.
The short version is that the cheat was a pretty well-off guy for whom the stakes were meaningless. He even worked (let's hope it's past tense) in finance and investing. He attended the game on and off for 15+ years and was suspected of cheating a couple times over the years, but I was the first to catch him and convince the host to kick him out. He was probably cheating the whole time and was just clever enough to avoid detection.
Something tells me he'd have cheated even if it was 0.05/0.10 with a max of 5. It didn't seem like it was about the money, as much as it was about ripping people off and getting away with it.
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
That's naive. Sure, you trust everyone in your home game, but you always cut the cards.
Put yourself in the position of a cheat. You learn how to manipulate a deck after hours of practice and YouTube videos. You got good, and now you want to give it a go. Do you go to some high-stakes underground game for your first run through? If you get caught, you will get beaten within inches of your life (you remember the public workers game on Rounders). No, you try if out on Carl's $20 game where you can work out any flaws. If you don't get caught with those drunks, you can go to Arnold's $100 game. They don't drink as much, but if you get caught, you can simply deny it - they don't have cameras. If you really foul up, you may get banned, but you're friends. It will blow over.
If you are successful, then you move onto higher stakes. Or not. $100 tournament pays $700 for 1st. $700 a week is $25,000 (you gotta lose a few to make it look good).
I agree that you have to play for stakes high enough that people take it seriously. But you play for stakes low enough that you even a perpetually losing player finds value in attending (poker is inherently more fun than a movie at the theatre). But never think that low stakes keep the cheats away.
Trust everyone, but always cut the deck ...and do all the other things to prevent cheating.
Last edited:
Jimulacrum
Full House
It drives me nuts that so many people turn their noses up at an offer to cut cards.
I can do a one-handed cut. I can shuffle cards up from the bottom to the top of the deck and make small stacked packets in a deck too, all while you watch me and suspect nothing. I would never cheat, but I picked up random tidbits like this as part of parlor tricks I've learned over the years.
Manipulating cards is not difficult with a bit of practice.
Always cut. It's not even a perfect solution, but it's a big step in the right direction.
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
If ever I see a "tap" or a cut of a single card, I treat it as a minor rules violation.
"You must cut with one hand, at least 1/4 the deck, but not more than 3/4 of the deck. This way if two players were in cahoots, it would be that much tougher to manipulate the deck."
You don't have to be mean or threaten a penalty, you just explain why it is. If you see someone tapping, the game becomes suspect. Not crooked, but it's one bit of circumstantial evidence which is enough of a reason to look for other anomalies/angles.
Preditor
Pair
I'm not really sure how from in my original comment you interpreted "Do this instead of cutting the cards."
It's all about risk avoidance. Risk avoidance can come from multiple avenues. Just like driving a car. You use your turn signal, keep the oil changes, AND wear your seatbelt.
Me advocating one doesn't mean I'm not advocating the other.
But…. “I don’t want to cut away my luck”
Preditor
Pair
Absolutely. Nothing is 100% full proof. Some people are just seeing what they can get away with.
Me advocating for cheeseburger stakes doesn't mean not taking other measures to prevent cheating. It is just one possible mitigating factor out of many. But nothing is full-proof.
Plus, imagine a scenario where this guy had cheated at a home game for years but the stakes were much higher. Then is becomes a scenario where - instead of the players going "Really, bro?", shaking their heads in the stupidity of it, and then not inviting him back - it becomes "REALLY, BRO? I'M GONNA KILL YOU", and even more dissension in the overall group.
As @Jimulacrum said so well, people try to cheat at all stakes. It’s as much about getting one over on people as it is about money.
Last edited:
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
I interpreted it that way because of this line...
Cheeseburger level will not "prevent cheating". It will simply mitigate the damage. And as per the above math, those cheeseburgers can add up.
Cheats occur at every level, and without any sort of data to pull upon, I would guess there is more frequent (though less meaningful) cheating at cheeseburger stakes than at high-stakes, as the low levels will get poor cheats caught and they may reform, or simply not enjoy it.
Here's an example: In Blackjack, I can count cards (it's not really cheating, but you know the house does not approve, so it is cheating of sorts). I'm not good, but I can turn a profit at a $5 table, and give enough back at intervals to avoid getting caught. However, after having done it a few times, I found that I do not enjoy counting cards. I'm not a math-centric individual, so it was a lot like work, so I don't do it anymore (I'll gain my +EV in free drinks).
The "best way" to prevent cheating is to follow common, well established anti-cheating procedures.
Jimulacrum
Full House
As it played out, he lost his invite to the game he was cheating and lost a few friendships. But that's all, really. He surely made thousands of dollars, if not tens of thousands, and probably didn't really value the friendships in the first place (or he wouldn't have lied and stolen from them).
So what punishment did he face? Nothing. He made off effectively without consequences.
It would have been good if someone had gotten mad enough to bounce his head off the wall or vandalize his car. Report him to the SEC and destroy his career. Something, anything. Catching him red-handed at the end of a 15-year reign of cheating and watching him walk away with all his fingers was disappointing.
I think the hardest type of cheating to police is the softest kind, because it’s hardest to prove, and easiest to turn accusations back on the accuser.
If someone is blatantly cheating (stacking decks, peeking at cards, bottom-dealing, marking cards, signaling, etc.) it may take a long time to spot it. But once you catch them in the act it’s unmistakeable.
Mushier stuff like couples/teams soft-playing each other, ganging up to squeeze another player in a hand, protecting each others’ blinds/bets, putting on an occasional show of battling each other while splitting profits in private… Even when the pattern is obvious, it’s hard to definitively prove it if the cheats/anglers know how to avoid being too blatant about it. And understanding game dynamics to make it look like normal poker tactics.
Maybe a situation arises (you demand to see their hands after a tag-team squeeze) where you can make them look really sketchy. But it’s seldom going to be as clear cut as Worm getting busted in Rounders.
I struggle to deal with this at times in some of the games I play or host.
If someone is blatantly cheating (stacking decks, peeking at cards, bottom-dealing, marking cards, signaling, etc.) it may take a long time to spot it. But once you catch them in the act it’s unmistakeable.
Mushier stuff like couples/teams soft-playing each other, ganging up to squeeze another player in a hand, protecting each others’ blinds/bets, putting on an occasional show of battling each other while splitting profits in private… Even when the pattern is obvious, it’s hard to definitively prove it if the cheats/anglers know how to avoid being too blatant about it. And understanding game dynamics to make it look like normal poker tactics.
Maybe a situation arises (you demand to see their hands after a tag-team squeeze) where you can make them look really sketchy. But it’s seldom going to be as clear cut as Worm getting busted in Rounders.
I struggle to deal with this at times in some of the games I play or host.
… And, erp, I just clicked back a few pages and realized that this was THAT thread …
JustinInMN
4 of a Kind
I think you answered your own question by mentioning he's a finance guy. A lot of these finance houses have this culture.
Collusion is the worst , sleazy soft play between buddies and the squeeze also mentioned. Plus it means losing two players instead of one. But…two assholes. A lot easier than learning to stack the deck.
Sorry for reviving it... LMAO
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.
