Cash Game Partial Cash-Out (a.k.a. Rebuying from the Deep Stack Player) (1 Viewer)

[BirdCage]

Greetings to all home cash game players! I've been playing a .25/.50 NLHE game with regulars for about two years with only minor rules controversies. Last night we had our largest single hand in memory, a $200 pot (we were just into the evening with 9 players & $50 cash buy-ins around the table). Shortly after the pot was awarded, two to three of the short-stacked and/or busted-out players re-bought chips from the deep stack player with cash. The $100 to $150 quickly went from the table into the deep-stack player's pocket and never returned. As cries from this player rang with his stack shrinking - he was "losing" and others were "winning", it became clear that the money removed from the table would not be put back into play. He banked his winnings for the evening. He played with his "short stack" until it ran dry. That is in fact how it turned out.

I think it's obvious but:

1) Did we make a mistake by not making all rebuys go through the bank for chips?
2) In the past, we've let cash for chips purchases between players ride with the cash remaining in play, but is this a bad idea, for obvious reasons again? Just convert all cash to chips?

Thanks!

P.S. I was in for $50 and out for $99!

 

[RocAFella1]

1. Yes or can buy from big stack as long as the amount whether chips or cash stays on the table.
2. Convert cash to chips is the way to go OR cash has to stay on the table and be in play. But much easier to convert to chips if you have enough chips.

 

[grebe]

I would have immediately rejected this. It's called "ratholing" for a reason. WTF? If the host would have been ok with this money leaving the table, I would have cashed out on the spot.

Once the cash leaves the table, game over.

1. no, it's fine to buy from big stack if money stays.
2. same question. If house rules say cash plays, no big deal. I would prefer chips, but if the money stays, I don't see the issue normally. Now you have a precedence though, where you let someone pocket cash.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

I would have immediately rejected this. It's called "ratholing" for a reason. WTF? If the host would have been ok with this money leaving the table, I would have cashed out on the spot.

Once the cash leaves the table, game over.

1. no, it's fine to buy from big stack if money stays.
2. same question. If house rules say cash plays, no big deal. I would prefer chips, but if the money stays, I don't see the issue normally. Now you have a precedence though, where you let someone pocket cash.

Both commenters correct. I want to build off that last sentence about precedence: make sure people know this was a mistake and won't happen again. Your players were right to be frustrated, and host should be speaking to it. Not accusing him or saying he tried to hurt the game but its bad etiquette at best and illegal at worst.

 

[Frogzilla]

I know it’s not allowed but I’m surprised people care enough to leave game. You were willing to play 100 bb effective just a hand ago. Now you’re playing still 100bb effective (but it should be 150bb) and no thanks? If he’s the big stack it may not even change the effective stack

Poker players get weird sometimes. FWIW I like deep so I never do it but I can’t imagine myself getting annoyed at this.

 

[grebe]

I know it’s not allowed but I’m surprised people care enough to leave game. You were willing to play 100 bb effective just a hand ago. Now you’re playing still 100bb effective and no thanks? If he’s the big stack it may not even change the effective stack

Poker players get weird sometimes. FWIW I like deep so I never do it but I can’t imagine myself getting annoyed at this.

It has nothing to do with the next hand...it's what happens in the next four hours. I am blown away that this would be considered weird.

 

[BirdCage]

It's called "ratholing" for a reason.

Thank you. Had no idea it had a name. In fact, a name reflective of the dishonorable deed!

Ratholing, ha. We will implement an anti-ratholing policy going forward. Thanks all for the quick replies.

Found a good read on ratholing.

 

[doublebooyah85]

I know it’s not allowed but I’m surprised people care enough to leave game. You were willing to play 100 bb effective just a hand ago. Now you’re playing still 100bb effective (but it should be 150bb) and no thanks? If he’s the big stack it may not even change the effective stack

Poker players get weird sometimes. FWIW I like deep so I never do it but I can’t imagine myself getting annoyed at this.

I’m flabbergasted by all these little things that would make people leave a game lol. It’s hard enough to find a game.

Yeah totally bad etiquette and this should be corrected. Buy from the bank not players chips.

Never heard it called ratholing. Hope it happens at a game so I can just use the term.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

I’m flabbergasted by all these little things that would make people leave a game lol. It’s hard enough to find a game.

Yeah totally bad etiquette and this should be corrected. Buy from the bank not players chips.

Never heard it called ratholing. Hope it happens at a game so I can just use the term.

Its like asking for relationship advice on the internet; most of the answers are OMG RED FLAG LEAVE THATS ABUSE when the original question was about leaving the toilet seat up.

 

[RocAFella1]

Also called going south.

 

[Frogzilla]

It has nothing to do with the next hand...it's what happens in the next four hours. I am blown away that this would be considered weird.

I think your response is pretty common for poker players; I think the poker communities aversion for people cashing to effective stack they are comfortable with is weird.

I’m certainly open to your opinion though, what exactly about the next four hours is so offputting?

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

I think your response is pretty common for poker players; I think the poker communities aversion for people cashing to effective stack they are comfortable with is weird.

I’m certainly open to your opinion though, what exactly about the next four hours is so offputting?

I think its the feeling that we all put money on the table to gamble for it; thats the lynchpin for our interactions. When you win and take it right off the table its out of the game, we cant win it back. Its one thing to have a big stack to chip away at, its another with someone having already taken our money.

You keep coming back to effective stacks, that's a 1 hand discussion, after a few hands those stacks may change, but now theres a much lower ceiling to that change due to ratholing. Am I off? Just my opinion and how I feel at my game.

 

[BirdCage]

Just designed a new favorite cap…it just sounds so dirty!!!

To wear or to gift or both?!?!

 

[doublebooyah85]

Just designed a new favorite cap…it just sounds so dirty!!!

To wear or to gift?!?!

View attachment 1038437

Great PCF handle!

 

[grebe]

I think your response is pretty common for poker players; I think the poker communities aversion for people cashing to effective stack they are comfortable with is weird.

I’m certainly open to your opinion though, what exactly about the next four hours is so offputting?

You said you like to play deep, correct? In order to get a game with a buy-in cap to play deep, money needs to flow on to the table without leaving. If you take 200 big's off the table from a player who obviously does not want those put back in to play, you take away the opportunity to get the game playing deep, as well as giving those players that just lost 1 hand at the beginning of the night to get that money back over the course of the evening.

The offending player has in effect locked up his win for the night. He is able to play risk free for the rest of the night, thus making it unfair to the rest of the table.

Frogzilla, you are an experienced player....have you ever seen a losing player that is up on the night stack his chips so that you can easily tell the difference between his winnings and his buy in? He is wanting that win so bad, it makes him very bluffable, for the player that is willing to put in that big bet that surpasses the white meat into the dark. This player now has that money....and then some in his pocket. Read the original post....that money did NOT come back to the table, even after the offending player went on to lose what was on the table.

Also worth pointing out, although I know it doesnt apply here: in a raked game, if everyone played this way, the game would be unsustainable. Money leaving the table constantly, the losers would not be able to keep up with the rake plus winners pocketing anything over 100 big's.

 

[umbkcshah]

Also known as 'going south' - slightly more polite term.

It sort of goes both ways. Once up, the winner (if not comfortable/having dug out of a massive hole) can still just lock up his win. My feelings are mixed, as it can make an action player at 100BB become a passive nit, just hanging out to be polite. I played in games where it was semi-permitted, but you had to have ~100BB on the table (so essentially a capped game). Can't say if it was a positive or negative for that overall game based on the players.

 

[loosechange]

Yea chips stay in play. Money only ever goes through the bank. The action may or may not have been intentional but money/chips don’t leave my table until the game is over or a player is cashing out.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Also known as 'going south' - slightly more polite term.

It sort of goes both ways. Once up, the winner (if not comfortable/having dug out of a massive hole) can still just lock up his win. My feelings are mixed, as it can make an action player at 100BB become a passive nit, just hanging out to be polite. I played in games where it was semi-permitted, but you had to have ~100BB on the table (so essentially a capped game). Can't say if it was a positive or negative for that overall game based on the players.

Definitely know a few players in my game once they get up big they go into nit, tight, lock it down mode lol. And oddly enough one of them is super loose and action whenever he is down or just treading water.

The other one is a solid player. I’d rather just have him cash out once he’s up! Those chips ain’t going nowhere lol. But still no excuse to allow going south imho.

 

[Frogzilla]

I think its the feeling that we all put money on the table to gamble for it; thats the lynchpin for our interactions. When you win and take it right off the table its out of the game, we cant win it back. Its one thing to have a big stack to chip away at, its another with someone having already taken our money.

You keep coming back to effective stacks, that's a 1 hand discussion, after a few hands those stacks may change, but now theres a much lower ceiling to that change due to ratholing. Am I off? Just my opinion and how I feel at my game.

But if they rathole back to starting stack and keep playing, you can win “your money” back, right? He stacked you, you stacked him back, now you’re even. Seems fair.

And yes, it certainly limit the swings, which I personally see as a benefit in a friendly home game.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

But if they rathole back to starting stack and keep playing, you can win “your money” back, right? He stacked you, you stacked him back, now you’re even. Seems fair.

And yes, it certainly limit the swings, which I personally see as a benefit in a friendly home game.

I can see where you're coming from but it is not and will not be the way I approach games/my games. When I gamble and put money on that table it stays on that table until I or someone else leaves with it. Would be very boring if everytime I won a hand I put whatever winnings or my buyin right into my pocket, or my original buyin. It feels less like playing a game together and more like just taking from them.

I put it as worse etiquette as purposefully buying in short stacked as a good aggressive player; it limits your losses and risk, sure, but it also limits other's winnings, something I'd rather not do. Edit: shouldnt have brought this into it lol but oh well, wont delete.

This isnt sour grapes either, I do fairly well but Id feel dirty taking money off the table and away from my players when they brought it to play with.

 

[kmccormick100]

I think the bigger elephant in the room is that a 400bb pot is the largest in memory

Seriously though, $ disappearing off the table is never ok (short of tips etc). If a player is trying to lock up a win I’d rather have them cash out and leave than take their chips off the table. I love when nitty players clearly sort their stacks into buy in/profit, it’s like putting a big old target on their head that says “pick on me, all your bluffs will work”.

 

[Frogzilla]

The offending player has in effect locked up his win for the night. He is able to play risk free for the rest of the night, thus making it unfair to the rest of the table.

see…this rationale is pretty weird, right? It’s by no means in any sense risk free. Each hand he’s risking the exact same you are.

I like deep poker but I don’t think I should get a rebate when I lose a pot to force you to play deeper than you are comfortable where I might have a huge edge plus I might have some reads. If you win a pot early on, that’s your money, in every sense. Not my money at all. That’s how I see it.

No ratholing is a boon to winning players. Is this boon good for the home game? Maybe not

 

[Frogzilla]

Also this is why I like limit for home games. No one cares in limit

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

see…this rationale is pretty weird, right? It’s by no means in any sense risk free. Each hand he’s risking the exact same you are.

This is a good discussion and I appreciate you making me question these beliefs.

I think thinking of it hand by hand is a logical fallacy and the reason we think differently. When we talk about risk and reward, taking money off the table dampens both for the session (for myself or others), and as someone playing a gambling game I don't like that. Youve made me think about that dislike, I now see what you're getting at.

 

[HughDrackman]

I guess I never thought about this issue before. I’ve cashed out players at the table using my chip stack for years and never questioned the repercussions. My home cash games Have almost always been limit, though, so the effect is diminished.

Still, there are some good points made here, and I’ll adjust the way people rebuy from now on.

 

[TheOffalo]

Why did the short-stack players rebuy from the big-stack winner of this hand? Was there a shortage of chips available to buy-in with? If so, doesn’t that revoke @BirdCage’s PCF membership to allow a game he’s involved in not to be properly supplied in chips?

How common is this practice in the game (edit: I mean over the two years it’s been running, not just this one session) or was this the first time?

When the big-stack was complaining about “losing” was that genuine or putting on a show? As presented it almost seems like he didn’t want to do it at first but went with it reluctantly and then potentially realized it was to his great benefit and allowed it to happen.

What happened later in the night when people wanted to rebuy?

 

[BirdCage]

Details, details... (but very good questions)....

Why did the short-stack players rebuy from the big-stack winner of this hand? Short answer: it was the quickest way to re-chip plus we've done this to lesser degree in the past (while keeping the cash in play). Longer answer: short answer plus this is the first time the bank player was the bank as I just sold him one of my chip sets a week ago - so he was very slow at counting out chips plus he had closed the chip case and put it on a side table. Basically, expediency prevailed.

Was there a shortage of chips available to buy-in with? If so, doesn’t that revoke @BirdCage’s PCF membership to allow a game he’s involved in not to be properly supplied in chips? Answer: C'mon, I'm about five sets deep at this point and wouldn't sell anyone a short set! He had a barrel of untouched hundos among other chips in the bank.

How common is this practice in the game or was this the first time? Answer: Occasionally, letting people buy $10 - $20 from another player and keeping the cash in play has occurred but multiple full re-buys from one player at one time after a big hand then seeing the cash disappear, has never happened.

When the big-stack was complaining about “losing” was that genuine or putting on a show? As presented it almost seems like he didn’t want to do it at first but went with it reluctantly and then potentially realized it was to his great benefit and allowed it to happen. Answer: Well, feigning losing is what made the player next to me turn to me with raised eyebrow, we quietly chatted about requiring bank re-buys at future games. He couldn't possibly think anyone believed him but he did repeat it several times. It was a bit grating to me and at least the guy next to me. I also agree that he may not have had that intent and he never did this in the past, but once $150 made it into his pocket...

What happened later in the night when people wanted to rebuy? I spoke up and had the banker provide chips from the bank. All the re-buys were one-off for $40 or $50 at a time.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Personally, if someone stacks up then plays like a nit, I don't mind. They limit their losses but also limit their potential gains and still have to suffer through hours of not fully enjoying the evening. Even a nit will get some chips in with a strong hand - and they may not win every time! Chips on the table are potential chips in play.

 

[upNdown]

It baffles me that people playing in a no-limit game don’t understand whose wrong ratholing is. I can easily blame the host for allowing it to happen, and the ratholer for doing it. But the fact that he did it openly and notoriously, like he thought it was fine, that’s just crazy to me.
It’s wrong wrong wrong and I hope you make a big deal about it next time.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

Buy from the bank not players chips.

Money only ever goes through the bank.

This. I never allow players to exchange cash for chips with each other - only through the bank. Cash does not play in my game either, and these two rules make it much harder to go south.

 

[louBdub]

Yea chips stay in play. Money only ever goes through the bank. The action may or may not have been intentional but money/chips don’t leave my table until the game is over or a player is cashing out.

This. 1000%