drunk at the poker table

bops

something that has really been bothering the last few days:

playin live omaha game - all hunkey dory until 3am when drunk joins the table.

he is sh*tfaced and hasn't got a single clue what is going on - 100% cert to loose all of what's in his wallet.

buys in for 300
hand 1 - doubles up someone with 0 hand and 0 draw - down to 150ish
hand 2 - looses other 150 declaring that he has a straight on a K77 board
hand 3 - rebuys for 300 and looses it all with complete muck
hand 4 - same as above...etc etc

now the dealer had to put out his blinds etc and kept asking him are you going to call...

now i gotta few questions:
should a player (lol) in such a state be permitted in to a card club??

nobody at the table uttered one word of disaproval (including me) - they just happily waited their turn for an easy €300 - do you think this is acceptable??

I personally don't and left after hand 4 - i wasn't waiting 5 mins each time for him to donk away his money.

He was a complete di*khead - the type of guy you that if you had to rob someone you'd choose him.

I do believe that it's his own stupid fault for loosing all his money - it's sorta the same thing as him staggering down dark alleyways with the cash waving around in his hand - isn't it????

ethics in poker?? lol

interested in opinions
thanks
bops

Ollieboy

someone ask this question before last year and I felt it was ok as its the players responsiblity and not the other players at the table, if someone is a poor player, do you tell them to move down the levels, or just take there money? You just take there money.

Its very simple, as a poker player you cannot have any ethics when it comes to taken someones money. Its the reason you sit at the table.

But, the pokerroom should remove this player for his own safety, its there decision and not the player. Of course the player thinks he's able to play etc, but drink and poker dont mixed.

One thing I like about poker rooms in Ireland, is the no drink policy, in the states its ok also, as they remove you if your drunk and only serve you a certain amount of drink etc. I dont like to mix poker, drink and drunks.

One reason been the next morning they could accuse you of all sorts, ie taken advantage of them and start threaten you, over just 300 quid, not worth it really.

Ste05

You left the table!!! :eek:

phantom_lord

Ste05 wrote:

You left the table!!! :eek:

someone's gonna take his money, might as well be you bops.

DeVore

I think the player should have been denied entry into the club for a variety of reasons (some covered above).

I dont think the dealer should put out his blinds, in a cash game I think he should just skip him. If he's too plastered to put out blinds then he wont notice he doesnt have cards.
The dealer wouldnt go into the player's wallet and reload with his money so why should he put out his blinds?

Hopefully the guy will wake up the next day with a splitting headache and an empty wallet and realise that poker and drink don't mix. He might stop killing himself with drink.

DeV.
ps: funny isnt it how we concern ourselves over a few hundred quid when the vintners association wouldnt think twice about how much damage they do his liver, or his home life (wife kids etc).

shoutman

Sorry to point it out but loses not looses (that is definitely my biggest pet peeve when someone mixes up those two words, does my absolute nut in)

insafehands

shoutman wrote:

Sorry to point it out but loses not looses (that is definately my biggest pet peeve when someone mixes up those two words, does my absolute nut in)

With respect, it's definitely, and not, as you have it, definately.

Oh the humanity!

newbie2

shoutman wrote:

Sorry to point it out but loses not looses (that is definately my biggest pet peeve when someone mixes up those two words, does my absolute nut in)

Definitely

one of my pet peeves !!!

shoutman

Lol, above post edited, oh the shame..........

Lafortezza

Less grammor more alcohol.

spectre

maybe I'm a horrible **** but I lick my lips when I see players like this.

Question Bops: were you up money for the night when you got up and left?

insafehands

Taken from the Counter-Strike forum:

pwn3d

phantom_lord

spectre wrote:

maybe I'm a horrible **** but I lick my lips when I see players like this.

.

bops

spectre wrote:

Question Bops: were you up money for the night when you got up and left?

nah, i was going nowhere - just tired, with no patience & told the missus i'd be home before the morning for a change

kakak1

Can't agree with most of the above. Firstly the club should refuse him entry or certainly not let him play.

I would stand up from a table if a drunk is playing and have done so. I have also asked the club owner not to allow a person in this condition play.

A drunk does not know what they are doing, he may have a wife & family to keep. IMO it is morally wrong to take advantage of someone in this condition.

It's not sufficient to say "someone is going to take his money it may as well be me", sorry I can't agree.

If a drunk lay on the foothpath would you rob his pockets, what's the difference in taking his money at a card table.

Having said all that, it is the club who should take the first action.

fixer

ethics state you would not steal or cheat to get his money. Morals decide if you want to take him up on his offer of giving it away.

phantom_lord

kakak1 wrote:

If a drunk lay on the foothpath would you rob his pockets, what's the difference in taking his money at a card table.

the two are not even close to each other.

myflipflops

You have no responsibility towards him so take his money.

bops wrote:

he is sh*tfaced and hasn't got a single clue what is going on

now the dealer had to put out his blinds etc and kept asking him are you going to call...

He was a complete di*khead - the type of guy you that if you had to rob someone you'd choose him.

What i would like to know is why the above guy can get in to a cardroom but i wont be allowed in to certain establishments with trackies or a hoodie even though i will be polite, courtious etc etc.

Mr.Plough

bops wrote:

He was a complete di*khead - the type of guy you that if you had to rob someone you'd choose him.

theres your chance.


personally, id have no problem taking his money.

i dont think poker is about ethics, its about money.

SIDESHOW BOBs

i was at the table and he donked off 2k in total. My only problem is that i lost a monkey chasing him and folded a flush which would have won a huge pot.

The guy was an arsehole but his money is as good as anybodys and there were exceptional circumstances for his being locked,the majority of punters were twisted.

In general drunks are good for games but you have to live with the downside : more money less hands.

I once donked off 7k twisted and i wont be doing it again until the next time.

No one objected to my donations that night.

Bastards

Bandana boy

DeVore wrote:

I think the player should have been denied entry into the club for a variety of reasons .

I agree

DeVore wrote:

I dont think the dealer should put out his blinds, in a cash game I think he should just skip him..

I agree

DeVore wrote:

He might stop killing himself with drink...

Thats a bit over the top I hardly think 1 instance of being drunk equates to killing yourself with drink

Overall i would like to see them refuse entry to such people
not because they are incapable of looking after there money
(There is plenty of sober players playing live in Dublin with this problem)
But rather as they slow the game down to a snails pace and suck the atomsphere out of the game
I am not a pro player while I am trying to win money this is not a job I want to have some fun as well and i dont enjoy playing with people like this

Marq

SIDESHOW BOBs wrote:

i wont be doing it again until the next time.

My ability to play is inversely proportional to the amount of alcohol in my system.
My desire to play increases in line with the amount of alcohol in my system.
thankfully, the ability to play is not required to win.
I often spin the wheel while drunk, it's a big leak in my game.

strewelpeter

100% agree that the clubs shouldn't allow someone who is not in control of themselves, and it shouldn't be up to the customers to have to point it out.

Last week I had a drunk guy beside me and it was ridiculous...I check called down a hand I would normally have bet ...I'm still not sure why but it kinda felt like stealing Really the whole thing was very uncomfortable and I didn't want to spend $8 an hour to sit with him. I was getting up to leave when I got moved to a different table.

A couple of weeks ago I was at a cash table with a guy who was pretty obviously coked off his head, now he wasn't as clueless as the drunk but he was splashing cash around like a complete idiot. Unlike the drunk I wanted to play with this lad and later had only very slight qualms about winning from him.
That probably makes me very shallow and morally relativistic...but hey the drunk was rather pathetic and the cokehead was an asshole of goatse proportions :cool:

Dev's point about the lack of concern shown by the Vitners for the success of their marketing campaigns is a very good one, and one that I would like to be hear of more in the various debates on the impact of Alcohol in society.

Ste05

kakak1 wrote:

Firstly the club should refuse him entry or certainly not let him play.

I also agree with this. But that's irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion because he's in now and sitting down.

kakak1 wrote:

I would stand up from a table if a drunk is playing and have done so. I have also asked the club owner not to allow a person in this condition play.

Well I'd say you're Mr Popular with everyone, especially the other Poker players at the table. Although if he was genuinely interfering with the flow of the game then obviously it's in everyone's interest that he be removed.

kakak1 wrote:

A drunk does not know what they are doing, he may have a wife & family to keep. IMO it is morally wrong to take advantage of someone in this condition.

Who do you think you are to tell this person how he should be treating his wife and kids. It's not your responsibility to make sure that this person treats his family in a way that is acceptable to you. For all you know he could be a mulit-millionaire/ work-aholic who hasn't had a day off in over a year and who's express instructions from his wife was to go out and let loose (once he doesn't go near another woman) and what better way to do that than to get hammered and then donk off some money gambling. (I love making up far flung examples to make a point.. :rolleyes: )

Butt out is what I say, the man wanted to play cards, so let him. He chose to get drunk, then chose to play Poker. They may not have been the best decisions with hindsight, but everyone makes bad decisions and we each have to deal with the consequences of them. It's one of the many delights about living in a free soceity. The ability to make foolish choices.

kakak1 wrote:

It's not sufficient to say "someone is going to take his money it may as well be me", sorry I can't agree.

Unfortunately it's not something you can agree with or disagree with, it's a fact. Unless the club do anything about it, someone IS going to get his money, if you would feel tainted or bad to take some of it, then sit out and let someone else take your spot. (I'll give you my phone number if you like, so that if you find yourself in this terrible situation, you can call me and I'll take your spot).

kakak1 wrote:

If a drunk lay on the foothpath would you rob his pockets, what's the difference in taking his money at a card table.

The difference is pretty huge. One is illegal and is punishable by incarceration, the other is fine once carried out in a "Private Members Club" :rolleyes:

kakak1 wrote:

Having said all that, it is the club who should take the first action.

.

ianmc38

I got smashed on the 1st night in vegas. The guys I played with were trying to get me drunk every other time i sat at a table with them. Drunk poker= -EV

El Stuntman

ianmc38 wrote:

I got smashed on the 1st night in vegas. The guys I played with were trying to get me drunk every other time i sat at a table with them. Drunk poker= -EV

I was told it's illegal to play sober in Vegas...

jbravado

I often spin the wheel while drunk, it's a big leak in my game.[/QUOTE]

Ah yes..........

kakak1

Can't believe this reply but please let yourself be known if we ever meet at a card table because if given a choice of seats I'll choose one with my back to a wall

Ste05 wrote:

I also agree with this. But that's irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion because he's in now and sitting down.

It's not irrelevant as this was a question asked by the original poster

Well I'd say you're Mr Popular with everyone,

Not running for the elections, don't need to be Mr Popular I just expressed my thoughts on the subject. Surely expressing an opinion is one of the many delights in living in a free society as you quoted later in your post.

Although if he was genuinely interfering with the flow of the game then obviously it's in everyone's interest that he be removed.

So you feel the only reason he should be removed is because he interferes with the flow of the game.

Who do you think you are to tell this person how he should be treating his wife and kids.

I'm not going to lecture anyone, I merely stated I would not play with him & try to take advantage of his situation.

It's not your responsibility to make sure that this person treats his family in a way that is acceptable to you.

I totally agree. But I feel I have a responsibility in not taking an unfair advantage of a situation that could harm other innocent members of society.

(I love making up far flung examples to make a point.. :rolleyes: )

You do

Butt out is what I say, the man wanted to play cards, so let him.

You have totally missed my point. I'm not stopping him playing, I'm just not going to play at the same table & I really believe others shouldn't either. If that is going to break up the game well then thats where the Management should step in and do what is right & proper for the majority. Ask him to leave. It's quite simple and I believe it is everyones responsibility to ensure that this is what happens.

He chose to get drunk, then chose to play Poker.

"First you take a drink, then the drink takes a drink, then the drink takes you."

They may not have been the best decisions with hindsight, but everyone makes bad decisions

"Drunkenness, in its most common usage, is the state of being intoxicated by consumption of ethyl alcohol to a degree that mental and physical facilities are noticeably impaired."

Unfortunately it's not something you can agree with or disagree with, it's a fact.

Again you miss my point. I don't agree that someone else or anyone should take his money.

The difference is pretty huge. One is illegal and is punishable by incarceration, the other is fine once carried out in a "Private Members Club"

So I take it that in your opinion it is all right to rob someone once you have the protection of a private members club. Because no matter how you put it that is exactly what you are doing.

It also appears OK to you because if you don't rob from him someone else will, does that make it right ?

Don't forget what was said in the original post

he is sh*tfaced and hasn't got a single clue what is going on - 100% cert to loose all of what's in his wallet.

Ste05

OK, I'm enjoying this thread, but I won't respond to each individual point, but for the sake of argument, if there's an important one, I miss just quote it and I'll respond to it.

kakak1 wrote:

Can't believe this reply but please let yourself be known if we ever meet at a card table because if given a choice of seats I'll choose one with my back to a wall

Well I'll probably be the drunk player, so hopefully if I introduce myself, you might let me play.

kakak1 wrote:

It's not irrelevant as this was a question asked by the original poster

Well then there's nothing to discuss. Yes the club should have done something about it. Can we agree for now and for the purpose of this discussion it is irrelevant?

kakak1 wrote:

So you feel the only reason he should be removed is because he interferes with the flow of the game.

Yes, or if he smells really bad, or is being abusive etc. certainly he shouldn't be removed just because he's going to lose money. I'd say when I play in town 80% of the players I sit down with are guaranteed to lose money, what's the difference, is it just the fact that he is intoxicated and he will lose the money quicker?

kakak1 wrote:

I'm not going to lecture anyone, I merely stated I would not play with him & try to take advantage of his situation.

And if that makes you feel better then that's good, if you believe in Karma then I presume this will lead to good Karma in the future?? You can also have a clean conscience.

kakak1 wrote:

"First you take a drink, then the drink takes a drink, then the drink takes you."

Whoa, maybe for an Alcoholic. :eek: :eek: Maybe this is the root of the problem here, a prejudice against Alcohol as opposed to Poker??

kakak1 wrote:

"Drunkenness, in its most common usage, is the state of being intoxicated by consumption of ethyl alcohol to a degree that mental and physical facilities are noticeably impaired."

I'm confused what this has to do with people making bad decisions and having to deal with the consequences of same? I've actually been drunk in my life so I understand the concept and the effects it can have on someones cognitive abilities.

kakak1 wrote:

Again you miss my point. I don't agree that someone else or anyone should take his money.

I got your point, and it's a nice perch to be sitting on. However, you seem to have missed mine. In the real world this will not happen unless the management steps in (as they should have before he even walked in) and we've already decided (well I did) that that is irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion. Once he isn't being abusive, smelly, etc. etc. etc. he should be allowed to play. The fact of the matter is the guy will play on and has a good chance of losing. Therefore it's a fact that someone is going to win the money. Just like what would happen if an uber fish sat down.

kakak1 wrote:

So I take it that in your opinion it is all right to rob someone once you have the protection of a private members club. Because no matter how you put it that is exactly what you are doing.

OK, maybe I should really spell out what I meant. In your example of taking money out of someone's pocket. That is known as Larceny/Theft (can't remember exactly what crime it'd fall into) and is illegal. If you are convicted of this offence, you are liable to be placed in Jail. Playing Poker with someone is not illegal once it is carried out in a Private members club. (grey area but for this discussion let's just say it's legal). Everything going on is within the Laws of the state. (Once the drunk person isn't a danger to himself or others (Drunk and Disorderly).

kakak1 wrote:

It also appears OK to you because if you don't rob from him someone else will, does that make it right ?

Absolutely not!!! I live my life within the confines of the laws of the state as set down by the constitution, legislation, and the court. However playing Poker with someone who is intoxicated is NOT theft.

Killme00

I have had a drunk guy at the table on several ocassion as im sure most of you have, i dont have a problem with them being drunk only slow and incoherent. I hate it when the game slows down to a snails pace because this costs me money in rake.

DeVore

The legality of it is irrelevant because we're discussing the morality/ethics of it.

I know lots of people who play poker terribly. I know many many players who seek out such games and if you have ever practised any form of "game selection" then in a sense its only a matter of degree where you draw the line.

If the player was only mildly intoxicated would it be an issue?

Personally there is a line where by I no longer feel like I'm competing with someone on anything resembling a level playing field and I will excuse myself from the table or else simply avoid playing hands against them. More likely the former, but they would need to be in a fairly bad state before I will do that. Sufficent that I feel their judgement is highly impaired and that they probably wont recall the events the next day. Thats my line, other people draw theirs in other places. "legality" is simply the last place the society allows you to draw your line.

DeV.

El Stuntman

Ste05 wrote:

Once he isn't being abusive, smelly, etc. etc. etc. he should be allowed to play.

I think this is the real issue here, nothing worse than the stink of a room full of unwashed drunks permeating your delicate nostrils when trying to decide what to do in the face of a re-raise....

mewso

I got up and left a table once because of a drunk. He had decided to call it a night.

Should we be leaving tables with donkeys too? I'll aplaud a club that doesn't let a drunk play but if they do then fair enough.

careca

El Stuntman wrote:

I think this is the real issue here, nothing worse than the stink of a room full of unwashed drunks permeating your delicate nostrils when trying to decide what to do in the face of a re-raise....

The smell of fresh drink is ok though. mmmmmmmmm, fresh drink.

Ste05

El Stuntman wrote:

I think this is the real issue here, nothing worse than the stink of a room full of unwashed drunks permeating your delicate nostrils when trying to decide what to do in the face of a re-raise....

I didn't want to bring it up directly, but that's why I mentioned it, I was looking out for you El Stuntman. I know how that refined nostrel of yours needs to be protected.

El Stuntman

Ste05 wrote:

I didn't want to bring it up directly, but that's why I mentioned it, I was looking out for you El Stuntman. I know how that refined nostrel of yours needs to be protected.

you jest young Ste but there is truth there...

I've spent hours of tournament time in the past playing my hands from six feet back from the table due to an excessively smelly neighbour!

no names mentioned

Ste05

I agree, that's why I mentioned it along with the abusive and slowing the game down as reasons to eject such a person. Obviously the smell would have to be pretty attrocious, but still, it could be a problem.

Tar.Aldarion

I don't think they should be allowed in after having a certain amount.
I like how it said on the wall in the casino I was in last night; if somebody is very drunk and disorderly, they have two warnings.
That was it, I think they may get another warning after that.

kweeveen

Horst: Do we have any alcoholics among us?
[hands slowly go up]
Man 1: Uh, me?
Man 2: Right here.
Man 3: I'm drunk right now!


Horst: You will be given a six-week treatment at our drying-out facility
in Hawaii, after which you will return at full pay.
Len: Oh, great!
Man 1: Hey, maybe I'll marry Elizabeth Taylor!


Homer grumbles, ``Lucky drunks!''

kincsem

shoutman wrote:

Sorry to point it out but loses not looses (that is definitely my biggest pet peeve when someone mixes up those two words, does my absolute nut in)

From the Betfair soccer forum "Top Ten fred"

Top 10 Speeling/grammma misteaks

1. should of
2. could of
3. would of
4. your/you’re
5. no/know
6. his/he’s
7. where/were
8. to/too.
9. there/their
10. stake/steak

Top Ten forum spelling howlers

1.' Loose' (opposite of win: lose)
2. 'Won', 'everywon' etc (The number is spelt 'one')
3. 'Shoe-in' (Nothing to do with shoes: 'shoo-in')
4. 'Definately' (and other variants). Correct: definitely
5. Seperate (Only two E's: separate)
6. 'Flack' (No C: flak)
7. 'Priviledge' (and other variants). Correct: privilege.
8. 'Comming' (Only one M: coming)
9. Grammer' (No E: grammar)
10. 'Takeing' (No E: taking)

Nice to know we are not alone in our search for excellence.