Oh that’s right! If I know that he has an Ace then I could exploit him.
That’s actually an interesting question - would I rather have an exposed ace every hand or two unexposed cards every hand?If my read was wrong and he actually is cheating with exactly Ax every hand, playing against an exposed ace is an edge![]()
Only if he regularly will have an ace, what if he’ll rotate between ace, king and queen?That’s actually an interesting question - would I rather have an exposed ace every hand or two unexposed cards every hand?
My initial guess is that I’d lean toward the ace if we’re playing shorthanded.
I think if he could do this he would be good enough not to get caught in the first place.Only if he regularly will have an ace, what if he’ll rotate between ace, king and queen?
And exposed ace doesn’t know it’s exposed? You want two unexposed cards.That’s actually an interesting question - would I rather have an exposed ace every hand or two unexposed cards every hand?
My initial guess is that I’d lean toward the ace if we’re playing shorthanded.
I agree that it’s irrational. But it seems pretty clear that these two guys don’t like each other, so it doesn’t shock me that this guy doesn’t want the OP to deal. Maybe it’s a stupid personality thing, maybe this guy doesn’t trust the OP, maybe this guy thinks the OP is bad luck.I just can’t imagine a situation in a friendly game where someone would refuse to use a neutral dealer who speeds up the game...
I can’t single him out and make any decisions on the gameplay unless everyone agrees. One person says nah and it’s thrown out. I am the guy as far as the VFW goes and it’s my game.In fact, there are a huge number of card control techniques. If he is still practicing, you won't be able to see it... If you recorded a video, it would make things easier, and I could explain how it's possible in this particular case. Just don’t let him hold the deck of cards. That’s the best solution.
I am going to voice my concerns to the game runner as I am not the OFFICIAL game runner. I just brought all my cool shit to update their game. It's at my club/post and I also clean the shitters, kitchen and back hall. So I'm an employee of the clubroom as well. I have pull and can ban anyone or kill the game if need be. I'd rather not though obviously.Just my two cents, and it sounds like this sorted itself, but:
- It sounds like there are grounds to ban him for just being a dick, regardless of potential cheating
- You're the game-runner. Why not mandate two decks, shuffle behind? Who GAF what this guy thinks.
- You're the game-runner. Why not deal full-time, whether you're playing or not, to speed the game along? Shuffle can still move with the button, or rotate among 2-3 regulars.
- Both of the above are pretty standard home-game procedures anyway to avoid potential issues like you raised in the first place.
All possibilities and I agree. That is where I was at in the first place. Just thought that he like to give it has lucky bridge shuffle or he likes to "shuffle the tits off the queens". That's why it wasn't a biggie.I agree that it’s irrational. But it seems pretty clear that these two guys don’t like each other, so it doesn’t shock me that this guy doesn’t want the OP to deal. Maybe it’s a stupid personality thing, maybe this guy doesn’t trust the OP, maybe this guy thinks the OP is bad luck.
As whole they wanted one deck. Nobody has had the chance to die on the hill yet. That'll come out when I get the game runner to ok the switch.And that’s exactly why your X (or someone else) insists on using only one deck
I’ll continue playing devil’s advocate. Poker players are weird. I once started a thread here wondering if I should ban a player because I didn’t like the way he took an extra second, slow-rolling a big river that he was dealing. That’s not rational but it bothered me.Like someone else here stated it is very strange to refuse a dealer. No card player I know would prefer to pass the deal. Except maybe dudes that haven't ever played cards with a dealer. All these players frequent card rooms and I would consider them good ol regs. It was very odd and then he WAY over reacted to my sweat when I put out the flop. The only reason we ever had words with each other was when he told me I couldn't deal anymore.
That is basically what happened and I speak my mind/ have a big mouth, so he very well could not like me and the slow, sweat of the river REALLY burned his ass. I understand people are quirky, myself included and I was/am fine with passing the deal.I’ll continue playing devil’s advocate. Poker players are weird. I once started a thread here wondering if I should ban a player because I didn’t like the way he took an extra second, slow-rolling a big river that he was dealing. That’s not rational but it bothered me.
And i actually like dealing once per orbit - I greatly prefer pass the deal over dedicated player-dealer. I’ll agree that at the end of a tournament, it would be irrational to refuse a competent non-player dealer, unless or course he was a guy who I didn’t like or trust.
You're the game-runner. Why not mandate two decks, shuffle behind? Who GAF what this guy thinks.
Not just this guy. Entire group “has always done it this way…Blablabla…we tried it once and it messed everything up…Blablabla…”^^^ This
Not just this guy. Entire group “has always done it this way…Blablabla…we tried it once and it messed everything up…Blablabla…”
Seriously every excuse I have heard about why they hate the two deck system. Im at the point now where I want to add all the dealing time up and be like “look assholes, we are doing wrong.”
I swear some folks just cheat because they can. Probably get off on getting away with it, or they just have no sense of ethics and consider any advantage fair game—and the rest of us suckers for playing fair.It blows my mind that people would cheat at a tiny VFW game. Sorry to hear that.
This is insane to me. I play much bigger and in home games and haven't felt cheated since pass the deal in college for much less money. I know this is not the take of many but I'd rather go to a paid dealer home game than a non. I know it's impossible to do for low stakes to make it make sense but it just makes the game way more trustworthy in my opinion. I know others feel the opposite as this means those games are taking money out of the pool but it's not free to run a game.I swear some folks just cheat because they can. Probably get off on getting away with it, or they just have no sense of ethics and consider any advantage fair game—and the rest of us suckers for playing fair.
The one cheat I've caught was cheating his group of long-time work friends at a $20 buy-in weekly cash game that was about as friendly as a poker game gets. Almost the same crew every week, people making food at home to serve at the game, etc. He'd peep upcoming cards when he was dealing and was probably also rearranging the upcoming cards. Not even a talented cheat, just an opportunist.
From what I could tell, he was cheating this group for as long as 15 years. (The host had been alerted to suspicions that long ago, but couldn't confirm anything.) This is a guy who works in finance. He's not rich but does well for himself. He gambled over a dozen long-term friendships and possible career prospects just to cheat people out of cheeseburger money once a week. What was he getting out of it, $10 or $20 here and there? Really not much. Certainly not worth the risk.
Yeah, once the stakes pass a certain point, the cost of a dealer becomes a viable expense compared to the potential cost of being cheated and the effects it can have on the game. I've played home games that were comparable to casino $2/5 and self-dealt, with a lot of players getting drunk/high and generally easy pickings for a cheat or thief (not to mention dealing errors).This is insane to me. I play much bigger and in home games and haven't felt cheated since pass the deal in college for much less money. I know this is not the take of many but I'd rather go to a paid dealer home game than a non. I know it's impossible to do for low stakes to make it make sense but it just makes the game way more trustworthy in my opinion. I know others feel the opposite as this means those games are taking money out of the pool but it's not free to run a game.
100% oh the home game you go to hosted by your softball picture is canceled cause his house was raided by the FBI for child pornagraphy he was sharing in the internet through his neighbors wifi. You never truly know people.Yeah, once the stakes pass a certain point, the cost of a dealer becomes a viable expense compared to the potential cost of being cheated and the effects it can have on the game. I've played home games that were comparable to casino $2/5 and self-dealt, with a lot of players getting drunk/high and generally easy pickings for a cheat or thief (not to mention dealing errors).
We did catch one cheat in a pretty ridiculous way (literally got him on video swapping cards in SOHE), but there could have been more cheats—swiping chips from pots, stacking the deck, messing with discards—and we might have never known. Ask around, and just about everyone in the group would say they trusted the people they played with, but the same could be said about the cheeseburger cheat I mentioned above. You never know until you know.