Quads in Dramaha (2 Viewers)

[Jimulacrum]

This is completely different.

In a regular home game I play in with one particular maniac and a few other gambly players, we often play hands where one or more are calling blind or raising. Usually just pre-flop. It's one thing to not be totally honest when asked about the contents of your hand. But it's totally inappropriate (in our game) to lie about whether or not you've looked at your hand. We may be playing poker, but even poker players have to have some integrity.

Lying about whether you've looked is fair game IMO too.

Lying about any information your opponents could use to make educated decisions about the action is fair game.

It's a game of information. No player has any obligation to be honest about anything, unless it's written into the game (like number of cards in hand in Scarney).

 

[TheOffalo]

Drawing 1 could mean he has a playable mitt hand already. If he had an OESD or 4-to-a-flush, he draws 2, usually. If that made mitt hand included a T, OP gets scooped.

What does “mitt” mean? Hadn’t heard that poker slang before. From context I assume it’s just a player’s 5 hole cards, or the poker hand that makes up all 5 of the player’s hole cards?

Does it only apply when there are exactly 5 hole cards so it can form a legal 5-card poker hand? In other words, would regular 4-card Omaha or 6-card Omaha not be considered a mitt hand?

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

Lying about whether you've looked is fair game IMO too.

Lying about any information your opponents could use to make educated decisions about the action is fair game.

It's a game of information. No player has any obligation to be honest about anything, unless it's written into the game (like number of cards in hand in Scarney).

Maybe it's just the way we do it, but from my experience, I disagree emphatically.

Here's the way it usually goes down. Player A announces "I'm calling, or raising blind." Note that no one asked them for this information. They volunteered it in an attempt to generate action.

Pretty sure if after the fact, our host discovered that the person who announced playing blind, had in fact looked, that there would be repercussions. Am I correct @MrCatPants ?

 

[Natskule]

Lying it a situation like that is pretty shitty.

It's worth $30 to see if Villain is a shithead.

I think it's pretty shitty to ask someone what's in their hand.

 

[TheOffalo]

Maybe it's just the way we do it, but from my experience, I disagree emphatically.

Here's the way it usually goes down. Player A announces "I'm calling, or raising blind." Note that no one asked them for this information. They volunteered it in an attempt to generate action.

Pretty sure if after the fact, our host discovered that the person who announced playing blind, had in fact looked, that there would be repercussions. Am I correct @MrCatPants ?

Would repercussions be some sort of in-session penalty, or shaming by other players, or not being invited to future games, or a mix?

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

What does “mitt” mean? Hadn’t heard that poker slang before. From context I assume it’s just a player’s 5 hole cards, or the poker hand that makes up all 5 of the player’s hole cards?

Does it only apply when there are exactly 5 hole cards so it can form a legal 5-card poker hand? In other words, would regular 4-card Omaha or 6-card Omaha not be considered a mitt hand?

I hadn't heard it before, but it kinda makes sense in the case of Dramaha, where you have a hand made up of some board cards as well as a draw hand that is completely "in your mitt." Mitt meaning your hand, like a baseball mitt.

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

Would repercussions be some sort of in-session penalty, or shaming by other players, or not being invited to future games, or a mix?

That's why I tagged our host. I would also be interested to know how he would handle it. Every player who has done this in our games is adamant about the fact that they would never lie about this particular action.

 

[Jimulacrum]

Maybe it's just the way we do it, but from my experience, I disagree emphatically.

Here's the way it usually goes down. Player A announces "I'm calling, or raising blind." Note that no one asked them for this information. They volunteered it in an attempt to generate action.

Pretty sure if after the fact, our host discovered that the person who announced playing blind, had in fact looked, that there would be repercussions. Am I correct @MrCatPants ?

My take on it is that announcing that you're acting blind is not a binding action. It's not a piece of information anyone is obligated to share. It's just an optional statement, like saying that you're on tilt or that you're in a rush to go to the bathroom. No one has any obligation to be truthful about whether he's looked at his cards, nor when he looked, nor how many times he looked. Not even when volunteering the information.

If it's a lie, now you know this player lies about playing blind. Do with that information what you will. That's the name of the game. Same as catching someone bluffing.

If other players start lying about what a player has done (e.g., Player B saw Player A look but chooses to lie to everyone else and say he didn't), that could be a problem, but mainly because it's collusion-y.

 

[Jimulacrum]

I think it's pretty shitty to ask someone what's in their hand.

I ask this kind of thing all the time when I'm put to a decision heads-up on the end, especially if it's a clear binary situation—like in this case, whether he has the 10 or not, or in a spot where someone's polarized to either value-betting a monster or bluffing.

The way people respond to being put on the spot can tell you a lot. Some people squirm, laugh nervously, or talk too much. Some people go totally stoic.

Getting these kinds of reads on players has been part of poker from time immemorial. Not sure what's so shitty about soliciting them.

 

[MrCatPants]

Would repercussions be some sort of in-session penalty, or shaming by other players, or not being invited to future games, or a mix?

Heavy heavy shame and ribbing. We've made it a "path or honor" in our game on playing blind.

 

[Highli99]

This is completely different.

In a regular home game I play in with one particular maniac and a few other gambly players, we often play hands where one or more are calling blind or raising. Usually just pre-flop. It's one thing to not be totally honest when asked about the contents of your hand. But it's totally inappropriate (in our game) to lie about whether or not you've looked at your hand. We may be playing poker, but even poker players have to have some integrity.

I don't engage in a lot of speech play, but it's clearly a part of the game. I've won a lot of money from peoe who think they are being clever.

My default response to specific questions like "Do you have the 10?" is "Probably."

If the person asks what I have, I remind him that there is a price on that information and point to my bet.

I love this approach. I do something something similar wheb asked my stack. I say “probably have you covered” even when that is clearly not the case. If they ask for an exact count, I make up a stupid number. [look down at 3 purples and barrel of 100s] “I probably got $300k” .

Lying about whether you've looked is fair game IMO too.

Lying about any information your opponents could use to make educated decisions about the action is fair game.

It's a game of information. No player has any obligation to be honest about anything, unless it's written into the game (like number of cards in hand in Scarney).

Exactly this. Like I said, I don't initiate a lot of speech play but if others do I reserve the right to play the game.

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

My take on it is that announcing that you're acting blind is not a binding action. It's not a piece of information anyone is obligated to share. It's just an optional statement, like saying that you're on tilt or that you're in a rush to go to the bathroom. No one has any obligation to be truthful about whether he's looked at his cards, nor when he looked, nor how many times he looked. Not even when volunteering the information.

If it's a lie, now you know this player lies about playing blind. Do with that information what you will. That's the name of the game. Same as catching someone bluffing.

If other players start lying about what a player has done (e.g., Player B saw Player A look but chooses to lie to everyone else and say he didn't), that could be a problem, but mainly because it's collusion-y.

Well, I guess, thank you for opening my eyes. I'll now be more careful regarding this situation outside of games played with trusted friends. Maybe I'm just too naive, but I definitely put this in the same category with angle shooting, which is effectively what it is. I guess you think other forms of angle shooting are okay too?

I for one, have no interest in playing poker with liars and cheats. If I'm hosting and a player lied about going in blind, they might get one warning, and after that, they would not be invited back to my game. I suspect that someone who would lie about going in blind is probably also capable of palming chips out of a pot, colluding with a friend, marking cards, and who know what other nefarious acts. Again, not someone I would ever want to play with in a poker game.

 

[DrStrange]

Perhaps this is an overreaction? Not seeing the causality between lying about a poker hand and outright theft / cheating.

 

[Jimulacrum]

Well, I guess, thank you for opening my eyes. I'll now be more careful regarding this situation outside of games played with trusted friends. Maybe I'm just too naive, but I definitely put this in the same category with angle shooting, which is effectively what it is. I guess you think other forms of angle shooting are okay too?

It's not angle-shooting to give other players incorrect information about something about which they are not entitled to correct information.

There is no rule, explicit or implicit, that a player is violating the spirit of by doing so. (This is what angle-shooting is.)

I for one, have no interest in playing poker with liars and cheats.

Lying isn't cheating. Outside of a few narrow cases (e.g., announcing your hand at showdown, telling the number of cards you have in Scarney), no one has any obligation to be honest with verbal statements about the contents of their hands, in particular, nor about what information they have (e.g., whether they've looked at their cards).

See also: bluffing, semi-bluffing, snowing, image plays, etc. Deception is a critical part of the game of poker.

If I'm hosting and a player lied about going in blind, they might get one warning, and after that, they would not be invited back to my game. I suspect that someone who would lie about going in blind is probably also capable of palming chips out of a pot

This is explicitly cheating/theft.

colluding with a friend

This is explicitly cheating.

marking cards

This is explicitly cheating.

and who know what other nefarious acts. Again, not someone I would ever want to play with in a poker game.

I understand your preferences, and there's nothing wrong with you having a house rule that prohibits lying about whether you've looked at your cards, though it would be tough to enforce. But this is not a common rule in any card game I've ever attended or even read about. The norm in poker is that players are allowed to lie to each other about these kinds of things. Lying about playing blind isn't even remotely close to marking cards or collusion.

(I think a rule prohibiting lying about the contents of your hand with action pending, as Villain did, would be wildly out of line, but that falls on another plane of judgment.)

Extension activity: Is it wrong to pretend to look at your cards in order to conceal that you're playing a hand blind?

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

It's not angle-shooting to give other players incorrect information about something about which they are not entitled to correct information.

There is no rule, explicit or implicit, that a player is violating the spirit of by doing so. (This is what angle-shooting is.)


Lying isn't cheating. Outside of a few narrow cases (e.g., announcing your hand at showdown, telling the number of cards you have in Scarney), no one has any obligation to be honest with verbal statements about the contents of their hands, in particular, nor about what information they have (e.g., whether they've looked at their cards).

See also: bluffing, semi-bluffing, snowing, image plays, etc. Deception is a critical part of the game of poker.


This is explicitly cheating/theft.


This is explicitly cheating.


This is explicitly cheating.


I understand your preferences, and there's nothing wrong with you having a house rule that prohibits lying about whether you've looked at your cards, though it would be tough to enforce. But this is not a common rule in any card game I've ever attended or even read about. The norm in poker is that players are allowed to lie to each other about these kinds of things. Lying about playing blind isn't even remotely close to marking cards or collusion.

(I think a rule prohibiting lying about the contents of your hand with action pending, as Villain did, would be wildly out of line, but that falls on another plane of judgment.)

Extension activity: Is it wrong to pretend to look at your cards in order to conceal that you're playing a hand blind?

As I stated, this is an eye-opening conversation for me. I have only been an active poker player for about three years, and my personal experience has been that the people I play with are adamant about this issue. It's a matter of personal integrity that you don't announce that you are playing blind unless you are actually playing blind. At no time have I ever gotten the impression that these people think it's okay, even outside of our own private game. To me, lying about playing blind falls well outside of the many other factors that are implicit in playing poker, where deception is the norm.

Up until today, I would have never suspected that another PCF member who I might be playing poker with at either a local home game, or at a PCF meetup, would engage in this activity. If you tell me at a PCF meetup that you are playing blind, I would have trusted that you were being honest about this particular issue. So apparently, now I know better... Sorry, but it's rather a sad moment for me.

I pulled this from an online site. Seems like a reasonable definition: Angle Shooting usually refers to using underhanded or unethical tactics in an attempt to gain an edge against opponents.

To me, announcing to the table that you are playing blind, when in fact you are not, falls very clearly within the definition of an underhanded tactic to gain an advantage over your opponent. It is very different from being dishonest about the cards you hold when asked by an opponent, who obviously has no right to know what you have prior to showdown.

And my reasoning for mentioning those other acts which are clearly cheating is to make the point that I personally would question the integrity of anyone who would lie about announcing that they were playing blind. If they would do that, then I would also be suspicious that they might be capable of engaging in other forms of angle shooting, or downright cheating.

 

[MrCatPants]

As I stated, this is an eye-opening conversation for me. I have only been an active poker player for about three years, and my personal experience has been that the people I play with are adamant about this issue. It's a matter of personal integrity that you don't announce that you are playing blind unless you are actually playing blind. At no time have I ever gotten the impression that these people think it's okay, even outside of our own private game. To me, lying about playing blind falls well outside of the many other factors that are implicit in playing poker, where deception is the norm.

Up until today, I would have never suspected that another PCF member who I might be playing poker with at either a local home game, or at a PCF meetup, would engage in this activity. If you tell me at a PCF meetup that you are playing blind, I would have trusted that you were being honest about this particular issue. So apparently, now I know better... Sorry, but it's rather a sad moment for me.

I pulled this from an online site. Seems like a reasonable definition: Angle Shooting usually refers to using underhanded or unethical tactics in an attempt to gain an edge against opponents.

To me, announcing to the table that you are playing blind, when in fact you are not, falls very clearly within the definition of an underhanded tactic to gain an advantage over your opponent. It is very different from being dishonest about the cards you hold when asked by an opponent, who obviously has no right to know what you have prior to showdown.

And my reasoning for mentioning those other acts which are clearly cheating is to make the point that I personally would question the integrity of anyone who would lie about announcing that they were playing blind. If they would do that, then I would also be suspicious that they might be capable of engaging in other forms of angle shooting, or downright cheating.

This is a gray area to me. I personally feel strongly about it as it pushes action (a good thing) and so it indeed an honor thing at my home game.

I would not expect this to be the case in any other game nor would I expect it to be. More of a house rule.

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

Since we have totally hijacked the original subject of this thread, I've created a new one to discuss the issue of announcing that you are playing blind.

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/your-take-on-calling-and-raising-blind.116889/

 

[Jimulacrum]

As I stated, this is an eye-opening conversation for me. I have only been an active poker player for about three years, and my personal experience has been that the people I play with are adamant about this issue. It's a matter of personal integrity that you don't announce that you are playing blind unless you are actually playing blind. At no time have I ever gotten the impression that these people think it's okay, even outside of our own private game. To me, lying about playing blind falls well outside of the many other factors that are implicit in playing poker, where deception is the norm.

Up until today, I would have never suspected that another PCF member who I might be playing poker with at either a local home game, or at a PCF meetup, would engage in this activity. If you tell me at a PCF meetup that you are playing blind, I would have trusted that you were being honest about this particular issue. So apparently, now I know better... Sorry, but it's rather a sad moment for me.

I pulled this from an online site. Seems like a reasonable definition: Angle Shooting usually refers to using underhanded or unethical tactics in an attempt to gain an edge against opponents.

To me, announcing to the table that you are playing blind, when in fact you are not, falls very clearly within the definition of an underhanded tactic to gain an advantage over your opponent. It is very different from being dishonest about the cards you hold when asked by an opponent, who obviously has no right to know what you have prior to showdown.

And my reasoning for mentioning those other acts which are clearly cheating is to make the point that I personally would question the integrity of anyone who would lie about announcing that they were playing blind. If they would do that, then I would also be suspicious that they might be capable of engaging in other forms of angle shooting, or downright cheating.

To be clear, I have never personally done this. Just not my style. I'm more the type to pretend to look but secretly play the hand blind.

I don't disagree with you objecting to it either. Totally understandable. I just don't think it's against any rules nor does it qualify as angle-shooting, any more than lying about how many beers you've had or when you're planning to leave. It's extraneous information that players should take or leave according to their judgment.

 

[Natskule]

I ask this kind of thing all the time when I'm put to a decision heads-up on the end, especially if it's a clear binary situation—like in this case, whether he has the 10 or not, or in a spot where someone's polarized to either value-betting a monster or bluffing.

The way people respond to being put on the spot can tell you a lot. Some people squirm, laugh nervously, or talk too much. Some people go totally stoic.

Getting these kinds of reads on players has been part of poker from time immemorial. Not sure what's so shitty about soliciting them.

You are correct, my response wasn't communicated well.

I've got no problem with some one asking me what I have in my hand and I've got no problem with some one lying when asked that question.

I do think a person is being hypocritical if they think asking the question is fine but lying about the answer isn't. To me they are one and the same, trying to get information or misdirect verbally. If it's fair to ask and gauge the reaction, then it's fair to lie and misdirect.

 

[Natskule]

Maybe it's just the way we do it, but from my experience, I disagree emphatically.

Here's the way it usually goes down. Player A announces "I'm calling, or raising blind." Note that no one asked them for this information. They volunteered it in an attempt to generate action.

Pretty sure if after the fact, our host discovered that the person who announced playing blind, had in fact looked, that there would be repercussions. Am I correct @MrCatPants ?

Why would you play blind? Sounds like the stakes are to low for some folks.

Not saying I haven't seen it before, but rarely. Guess I never thought about someone lying about it as trying to get an advantage. Just not a normal thing in the games I've played.

 

[TX_Golf_N_Poker]

Why would you play blind? Sounds like the stakes are to low for some folks.

Not saying I haven't seen it before, but rarely. Guess I never thought about someone lying about it as trying to get an advantage. Just not a normal thing in the games I've played.

redirecting you to my answer to this in the other thread.

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/your-take-on-calling-and-raising-blind.116889/post-2404052

 

[WedgeRock]

What does “mitt” mean?

Correct, just the player's hand.

 

[WedgeRock]

Poker players have no obligation to truthfully answer such questions.

Agreed, but

It's actually better policy to always give ambiguous statements, or to reply with a mix of true and false statements, but that's a whole other discussion.

This.