WWYD, Hosts? Player A refuses to play with Player B (1 Viewer)

[MrCatPants]

So this is the second time over the near decade of my game that I've had the below situation come up. First time was able to resolve it through some conversation. This time, different players on both sides of it, probably not.

Late in the tournament season I always ping the players that need one or both remaining events to qualify for our championship. Player A writes me back a positive and appreciative note, but also tells me that Player B is a frequent attendee and A refuses to play with a certain player (new info to me) - he didn't specify who, but I know who based on inference from one of his comments. He said he may come on the occasions where B isn't attending, but given that's not too often he probably won't be at the game much going forward.

A didnt give a specific reason, but B has some traits that can be, let's say, not everyone's favorite - but not openly problematic either. This is the first time I've had a formal issue.

So...tell A I'm sad but I get it?
Tell B in a soft way to hopefully not have this spread?
Tell B in a hard way?
Call A and see if we can come to resolution?

Keeping a game growing is challenge enough without this kind of stuff.

 

[Tonysquander]

Hard to say without knowing what the annoying “traits“ are. If it’s affecting more than one person, then sounds like B is the bigger problem than A and B needs to be the one who gets the hard talk.

 

[upNdown]

Hard to say without knowing what the annoying “traits“ are. If it’s affecting more than one person, then sounds like B is the bigger problem than A and B needs to be the one who gets the hard talk.

exactly. Like if it’s a poker thing, it’s probably a lot easier to deal with. But if B is smelly or something, that makes it tougher.

 

[Tonysquander]

If B is the card licker or the toilet water table wiper though, F that guy/girl. Also, A did not mention B until specifically prodded, just b/c others have not voiced their issues yet does not mean they don’t have any they would express if asked about B so the fact it hasn’t been problematic yet does not mean a problem doesn’t exist.

 

[MrCatPants]

It's personality. I don't want to call it out specifically as there's some PCFers in my game. But in the category similar to someone who is loud and obnoxious, or someone who does a ton of table talk when in a hand, etc.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Sorry, not looking to out the person but agreed with above, really depends on the trait. If he has an annoying laugh he's staying and I say sorry to A but if B's consistently shouting slurs at people he gets the boot. I don't know the distinction for "openly problematic"; I'd speak to B about whatever action it is then tell A to meet them in the middle. Has A been an adult and spoken to B about this previously?

 

[MrCatPants]

Has A been an adult and spoken to B about this previously?

I dont believe so, no. B has been in the game several years. I've played with A in another game longer, but he's attended my game like half a dozen times.

 

[Highli99]

Tough one. Sometimes leaning in to persons reasons can help them think through the situation more rationally.

I had a player once who told me they wouldn’t play if so and so was in attendance. So and so was a friendly player so I asked why. Convo went like this:

Person A: I don’t want to play with x
Me: Why not?
A: x is targeting me
Me: what does that mean?
A: they play a ton of hands when I’m in the pot to try and stack me
Me: so they play a wider range against you compared to others?
A: yes, and then they get lucky and stack me every time
Me: how do you react when he stacks you
A: …..
Me: ……
A: Okay, I probably overreact a bit
Me: and how does that affect x?
A: he relishes it. He knows it drives me crazy
Me: what would happen if you didn’t react?
A: shut up you’re not my mom
Me: knowing how they play, can you think of any adjustments that might be advantageous to exploit their tendency against you?
A: Fine I’ll play with so and so
Me: that’s great! Good talk!

 

[Chawks45]

I've had a similar situation at my place a couple of years ago, albeit for cash games.

Both players worked together at the same company for years, and then had a falling out, personally and professionally. Player A in my situation said he would play whenever invited and didn't mind if Player B was present. Player B, however, wanted nothing to do with Player A outside of work.

They're both good players, so I did my best to find a solution by alternating the invite so they wouldn't be at the table at the same time. I had a chat with both players about going that route, and they didn't seem to initiually mind. But then behind-the-scenes drama grew whenever Player B heard he missed out on a juicy game or if he received a late invite because Player A was unavailable. Player B eventually started bad mouthing the game and it got back to me.

The drama became too much with Player B, so he no longer plays.

Keeping a game growing is challenge enough without this kind of stuff.

Agreed.

Unfortunately, we as hosts can't control the personality dynamics between players. We can do our best to keep the peace for the good of the game and overall table atmosphere, but it won't always work.

 

[upNdown]

But in the category similar to someone who is loud and obnoxious, or someone who does a ton of table talk when in a hand, etc.

Yeah that’s a tough one for sure.
Anybody who’s spent any amount of time in cardrooms and casinos knows that you’ll encounter all types at the poker table, and on the negative end that ranges from annoying to criminal. It’s something you have to be able to accept and tolerate and ignore if you want to play poker in those places.
The tricky thing here is that a lot of people turn to home games so that they don’t have to deal with casino whackos. So while my poker response would be suck it up buttercup, my home game response isn’t that simple.
I’m pretty sure I don’t want to play arbitrator or therapist. So I guess my response is likely “I’m sorry you feel that way A; we miss you when you’re not here”

If I see B’s behavior affecting other guests, then I guess it’s time to start thinking about B. But as long as it’s just A who’s staying away, what can you do? I think nothing.

 

[TheWhat]

Always tricky, particularly if you, and other Players have no problem with anyone else. But I don't think it's wise to toss one player for another, you could quickly find yourself making accommodations for everyone.

Recently had "A" say they weren't coming when both "B" and "C" would be there at the same time. All I could say was sorry to hear that, hope you'll reconsider; and we can work on what bugs you with "B" and "C" which was effectively just game speed.

Mine was a bit easier as 2 players are more important than 1 when filling a table, but grown folks gotta figure their own thing out.

 

[MrCatPants]

Yeah that’s a tough one for sure.
Anybody who’s spent any amount of time in cardrooms and casinos knows that you’ll encounter all types at the poker table, and on the negative end that ranges from annoying to criminal. It’s something you have to be able to accept and tolerate and ignore if you want to play poker in those places.
The tricky thing here is that a lot of people turn to home games so that they don’t have to deal with casino whackos. So while my poker response would be suck it up buttercup, my home game response isn’t that simple.
I’m pretty sure I don’t want to play arbitrator or therapist. So I guess my response is likely “I’m sorry you feel that way A; we miss you when you’re not here”

If I see B’s behavior affecting other guests, then I guess it’s time to start thinking about B. But as long as it’s just A who’s staying away, what can you do? I think nothing.

Yeah I was kinda thinking this is like a two strikes thing. One sensitive person? Can't control it. Multiple people, then it's an issue.

 

[Darson]

More than anything, it’s your house and your game and you’re not running a public card house. So who do you like playing with more?

 

[JustinInMN]

It's personality. I don't want to call it out specifically as there's some PCFers in my game. But in the category similar to someone who is loud and obnoxious, or someone who does a ton of table talk when in a hand, etc.

Yeah, I am a little pre-emptive when it comes to table talk. I usually just blurt out the reminder that "the hand is live" to send the message that discussion is crossing the line at that puts an end to it. So if this is the category, put the question to A about if there are specific things being said that he is concerned are damaging the game and judge from there what to do next.

 

[ekricket]

Invite them both every game and let them figure it out.

Alternatively pick a side. Art of War - to paraphrase pretty loosely - the side you pick will be loyal forever. The other will hate you forever and go do something else.

He actually says if you have two problematic provinces, just pick a province and give all their shit to the other. The one you gift will be loyal forever, the other with no resources will wither and die and not be a problem anymore. A little extreme for your situation, but kinda the same principle.

But don’t make it Your Problem

 

[Frogzilla]

How about some good use of STFU chips

 

[philhut]

Best solution would be to to gift both adult players who are unable to get over themselves enough to be able to play poker. I suggest keeping a pair of baby soothers to gift these players as card covers for current and future games.

 

[Franzister]

If B isn't a problem for you or other players, then sorry A. You could also implement a house rule about table talk.

 

[moose]

Heads up match. They either work it out during the match or the winner gets first pick of all games.

 

[Darson]

Just to be clear here, it sounds like A has a problem with B but hasn’t told B so B is unaware that he’s a problem for A.

 

[MrCatPants]

Just to be clear here, it sounds like A has a problem with B but hasn’t told B so B is unaware that he’s a problem for A.

UP UP DOWN DOWN LEFT RIGHT LEFT RIGHT B A SELECT START

 

[Seeking Alpha Social Club]

So this is the second time over the near decade of my game that I've had the below situation come up. First time was able to resolve it through some conversation. This time, different players on both sides of it, probably not.

Late in the tournament season I always ping the players that need one or both remaining events to qualify for our championship. Player A writes me back a positive and appreciative note, but also tells me that Player B is a frequent attendee and A refuses to play with a certain player (new info to me) - he didn't specify who, but I know who based on inference from one of his comments. He said he may come on the occasions where B isn't attending, but given that's not too often he probably won't be at the game much going forward.

A didnt give a specific reason, but B has some traits that can be, let's say, not everyone's favorite - but not openly problematic either. This is the first time I've had a formal issue.

So...tell A I'm sad but I get it?
Tell B in a soft way to hopefully not have this spread?
Tell B in a hard way?
Call A and see if we can come to resolution?

Keeping a game growing is challenge enough without this kind of stuff.

I fixed the proper response for you.

"So...tell A I'm sad but I get it?"

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

If ever a home games to be broadcast live it has to be yours. Card lickers, dirty hand rail wipers, stack droppers, personal drama.

Real Homepoker Players of Mr. CatPants. Somebody call Bravo.

 

[MrCatPants]

If ever a home games to be broadcast live it has to be yours. Card lickers, dirty hand rail wipers, stack droppers, personal drama.

Real Homepoker Players of Mr. CatPants. Somebody call Bravo.

It's much much weirder than that.

 

[ekricket]

Is your game in a sanitarium or a kindergarten?

 

[ekricket]

It's much much weirder than that.

We need a Kickstarter for streaming this live

 

[MrCatPants]

Is your game in a sanitarium or a kindergarten?

A sanitarium for kindergarteners?

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

We need a Kickstarter for streaming this live

I’m in.