Home / Community / Forum / Poker Education / Poker Education & Beginners Questions /

Poker Etiquette or not

Old
Default
Poker Etiquette or not - Mon Oct 10, 2011, 09:54 PM
(#1)
Grade b's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,604
Hi All,

Had a spirted discussion on the table today about the following poker etiquette.

we were near the bubble of a sit and go with the short stack all in and 2 others in the pot.

one player bet and picked up the side pot on what was a bluff the short stack won the main pot.

The other player went off on one about it not being proper Poker Etiuette and at one point sugessed that we gang up on the other player (obviously a big No - No).

I was confused as the player made a fair play and won a fair few chips. I was told to look it up on google (which i did try) but cannot find this bit of Etiquette anywhere.

So is it or isn't it?

here is hand




Grade B

Last edited by Grade b; Mon Oct 10, 2011 at 10:03 PM.. Reason: Added hand from replayer
 
Old
Default
Mon Oct 10, 2011, 10:42 PM
(#2)
joy7108's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,284
This is a form of collusion, but one which is unstated, and therefore not enforceable. The basic idea is that you just check down to try to knock out the short stack. Since that didn't happen here, I'm not sure what they were talking about.
 
Old
Default
Mon Oct 10, 2011, 11:15 PM
(#3)
Grade b's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,604
One of the payers was complaining that we should have checked it down, as tha was the "correct" poker Etiquette. (in his eyes)
 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 11, 2011, 09:56 AM
(#4)
!!!111Dan's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,290
Normally it's a good idea to check down an all in. You do have a side pot here though, so it's not the worst bluff in the world. Couple that with the fact that the all in player is still going to have only 1 BB if they win the hand, and it's a relatively small pot, I wouldn't get to bent out of shape over the bet. It happens. Players have their reasons. And, there sure is no rule saying you have to check down, it just makes sense in tournament play to get rid of a player, especially if you're close to the bubble.
I used to get bent on this issue too, but not so much any more. But if it were late in a tourney and it was a huge pot with no side pot...yeah, i might have to vent a line or 2.
 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 11, 2011, 10:58 AM
(#5)
Lop The Flop's Avatar
Since: Oct 2011
Posts: 13
BronzeStar
There is definately no etiquette being breached in this instance. As long as you are paying money to enter a tournament, you can make whatever betting decision you choose, that is your right. However common sense suggests that you would like to go as far as possible in a tournament, ultimately ending up in 1st position. If this is your intention, then no matter what hand the all-in player has, he has less chance of beating multiple opponents, than playing the hand heads up. This being the case, most players would check the hand down.
 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 11, 2011, 01:50 PM
(#6)
mtnestegg's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,336
it makes sense SOMETIMES, if multiple players are in the hand, to check down a shorties all in. HOWEVER the side pot was actually bigger than the main pot here. if I hit that flop i'd bet too. as checking down IS a form of collusion, I find it absolutely hysterical if someone gets upset over that not happening. especially here where his triple up got him all the way to 1 big blind. BIG threat lol to sum up, sometimes I do it and sometimes I don't. but either way, I'm acting in my own best interest. and in no way is not checking down a breach of any etiquette. sometimes it just makes sense to do it.
 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 11, 2011, 08:52 PM
(#7)
hamburglarid's Avatar
Since: Oct 2010
Posts: 131
SilverStar
I think that it is reasonable to bluff because the side pot is bigger than the main pot.
 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 11, 2011, 11:46 PM
(#8)
JWK24's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 24,788
(Super-Moderator)
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by hamburglarid View Post
I think that it is reasonable to bluff because the side pot is bigger than the main pot.
+1

telling someone to check it down... IS collusion!
 
Old
Default
Sat Oct 15, 2011, 01:08 AM
(#9)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
A "dry pot" is a special circumstance where 1 player is all in, and 2 (or more) players call the all in.

By checking the pot down, the 2 players with live stacks enter into an implicit (un-spoken) agreement to NOT bet weakly at the pot, in order to increase the chance the all in player is busted. The closer you are to a bubble situation, the more benefit there usually is in increasing the chance of the knock out.

There is, however, no rule which states you "must" check down in a dry pot situation.

As poker is an individual game, you are perfectly "ok" betting into a dry pot situation whenever you feel you have a hand likely to beat the ALL IN player. Any bets by you made BEFORE you hold a hand which you think will be better than the one held by the all in hold little positive expectation for you: you cannot get the all in to fold, so you MUST hold a better hand by the river to win, even if you knock the other live stack out of the pot.

This hand however, was NEVER a "dry pot".

There was a substantial side pot created before the flop. In cases such as this, if one live stack can bet out the other live stack, he wins that side pot. Regardless of the value of the hand used to bet out the other stack, and regardless of the effect on the all in player's survival, it is in the best interests of that betting player to win the side pot if he can.

He bluffed at the pot with "air", and the other live stack folded. That means the guy who bluffed picked up a side pot which was LARGER than the main pot, and still had a very marginal chance to out draw the all in player. Since he acted in his own interests, his act was perfectly acceptable...

...and quite smart too.

The other guy who was whining about being bluffed off the side pot just doesn't get it: poker is NOT a team game.
 
Old
Default
Sat Oct 15, 2011, 10:44 AM
(#10)
Bill Curran's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDean View Post
A "dry pot" is a special circumstance where 1 player is all in, and 2 (or more) players call the all in.

By checking the pot down, the 2 players with live stacks enter into an implicit (un-spoken) agreement to NOT bet weakly at the pot, in order to increase the chance the all in player is busted. The closer you are to a bubble situation, the more benefit there usually is in increasing the chance of the knock out.

There is, however, no rule which states you "must" check down in a dry pot situation.

As poker is an individual game, you are perfectly "ok" betting into a dry pot situation whenever you feel you have a hand likely to beat the ALL IN player. Any bets by you made BEFORE you hold a hand which you think will be better than the one held by the all in hold little positive expectation for you: you cannot get the all in to fold, so you MUST hold a better hand by the river to win, even if you knock the other live stack out of the pot.

This hand however, was NEVER a "dry pot".

There was a substantial side pot created before the flop. In cases such as this, if one live stack can bet out the other live stack, he wins that side pot. Regardless of the value of the hand used to bet out the other stack, and regardless of the effect on the all in player's survival, it is in the best interests of that betting player to win the side pot if he can.

He bluffed at the pot with "air", and the other live stack folded. That means the guy who bluffed picked up a side pot which was LARGER than the main pot, and still had a very marginal chance to out draw the all in player. Since he acted in his own interests, his act was perfectly acceptable...

...and quite smart too.

The other guy who was whining about being bluffed off the side pot just doesn't get it: poker is NOT a team game.
It wasn't grade b whining about being bluffed off the side pot, JD it was another player at the table saying it was not ethically correct or words to that effect.
 
Old
Default
Sat Oct 15, 2011, 04:20 PM
(#11)
Grade b's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Curran View Post
It wasn't grade b whining about being bluffed off the side pot, JD it was another player at the table saying it was not ethically correct or words to that effect.
This is correct. I have no problems with his play, which is why we had the spirted debate.
 
Old
Default
Sat Oct 15, 2011, 05:11 PM
(#12)
Deleted user
If I am involved in a pot on the bubble I check it down almost always.
The times I dont is when I think the allin stack has me beat and the other player is short as well.
I force them into the pot to force the bubble. I only do that if the player is a prick.

If a player bets it often puts me in a bad spot later in the orbit,so it tends to piss me off when a player
does bet in those spots.

I put it on par with the idiot that shoves every hand and the table folds because that player
has decided to play sherriff. They then fold to the short stack or call them with 27os and it messes up the whole table. I find new players that love to play this role,do not know when to reign it in and when to go nuts.
 
Old
Default
Sat Oct 15, 2011, 07:12 PM
(#13)
!!!111Dan's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,290
deleted
 
Old
Default
Thu Oct 20, 2011, 09:01 PM
(#14)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Curran View Post
It wasn't grade b whining about being bluffed off the side pot, JD it was another player at the table saying it was not ethically correct or words to that effect.
Yup, I saw that bill. That's why I said "the other guy who was whining"

Might have been more clearer if I had put it: "The other guy, who was whining"



Thanks.
 
Old
Default
Thu Oct 20, 2011, 09:06 PM
(#15)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grade b View Post
This is correct. I have no problems with his play, which is why we had the spirted debate.
see above, I never thought it was you doing the whining, but I can see how one dropped comma could lead to that assumption.

sorry.

 
Old
Default
Fri Nov 04, 2011, 10:18 AM
(#16)
adsthepro777's Avatar
Since: Oct 2011
Posts: 630
I completely disagree the player bluffing has the right to bet into that pot, if you have a good hand in that situation you would bet out to try and get value out of the other player still in the hand. So doing this with a junk hand means nothing, i've done that exact same thing before and nobody said a word about it.
Just Poker.
 
Old
Default
Mon Nov 14, 2011, 10:04 PM
(#17)
2edgar's Avatar
Since: Jun 2011
Posts: 34
(Moderator)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDean View Post
By checking the pot down, the 2 players with live stacks enter into an implicit (un-spoken) agreement to NOT bet weakly at the pot, in order to increase the chance the all in player is busted. The closer you are to a bubble situation, the more benefit there usually is in increasing the chance of the knock out.

As poker is an individual game, you are perfectly "ok" betting into a dry pot situation whenever you feel you have a hand likely to beat the ALL IN player. Any bets by you made BEFORE you hold a hand which you think will be better than the one held by the all in hold little positive expectation for you: you cannot get the all in to fold, so you MUST hold a better hand by the river to win, even if you knock the other live stack out of the pot.

He bluffed at the pot with "air", and the other live stack folded. That means the guy who bluffed picked up a side pot which was LARGER than the main pot, and still had a very marginal chance to out draw the all in player. Since he acted in his own interests, his act was perfectly acceptable...

...and quite smart too.

The other guy who was whining about being bluffed off the side pot just doesn't get it: poker is NOT a team game.
sometimes I notice people who cbet alot or multitable just seems to go on auto pilot and this happens also maybe mental fatigue setting in (if he did call it down instead of betting there was a chance he could have been out) and he would have placed higher in the money. Ive done this on occasion when i knew I should call it down specially towards the end, but at the end of the day its his money he can do whatever he wants with it.

Last edited by 2edgar; Mon Nov 14, 2011 at 10:10 PM..
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com