---

Poker Video: Misc/Other by Joe Tall (Micro/Small Stakes)

Haha I didn't say I followed through all of the time. Just that it was right

Haha I didn't say I followed through all of the time. Just that it was right

So you establish that there's a right thing to do, you write a dissertation what Joe did was wrong, yet you sometimes also do wrong things?
Come on, nobody would speak up if our worst enemy was getting half the pot. It IS relevant information, because it sways our opinion, regardless whether selfish or not. Life is not black and white, we don't deal in absolutes and thank God - I kinda like moral ambiguity

So you establish that there's a right thing to do, you write a dissertation what Joe did was wrong, yet you sometimes also do wrong things?
Come on, nobody would speak up if our worst enemy was getting half the pot. It IS relevant information, because it sways our opinion, regardless whether selfish or not. Life is not black and white, we don't deal in absolutes and thank God - I kinda like moral ambiguity

Doesn't everyone sometimes do wrong things? I never claimed to be perfect. Only that speaking up was right. Just because something sways our opinion doesn't change whether it is right. It only makes us less comfortable doing what is right.

I should also note that the golden rule is obv personal. The way I want to be treated is not the way everyone wants to be treated so that is where the gray areas come in. For me, I would want someone to speak up because I would want someone else to speak up if I was being screwed in some way. That is why speaking up is right for me. If you wouldn't want others to keep things fair for you, then your equation changes.

I'm with Tecmo on this one.
I know where I play I tend to speak up if I see something wrong for a number of reasons:
1. The game I generally play in live is one of the smaller games at the casino, so there are often inexperienced players in the game.
2. The dealers are often new and/or inexperienced (this particularly applies to things like non-holdem tournaments - yes, Australia is pretty much 98% Holdem in casinos).
3. The rule is 'cards speak' ... as long as they have been tabled face up, then they have a 'voice', even if not physical, so when the 'voice' is misheard by the dealer, I correct it. This is very different to the situation where a player mucked their hand when it would have been a split pot. The player (whether they are experienced or not) has made a decision, and chosen NOT to let their cards speak. If they got it wrong, it is their fault. I've seen other players at the table say something (this is one situation where I tend not to say anything), but the dealer will often tell the player (as they tend to do the look at their hand, look at the board, look at their hand first before mucking) that if in doubt they should turn their cards over. Also you get the people who have the 'well that's the price of the lesson' attitude to it - if they muck when it would have been a split, then the half of the pot they would have got is the cost of the lesson to make sure they don't do it again in the future.
4. One thing I see dealers get wrong far more often than they should is the rake (here it is 10% with a cap, unlike California where it is a fixed rake/drop), so I will speak up if the dealer takes too much (and yes, even if it is as little as $1, as the house aren't going to suffer anything by missing out on a few dollars of rake they weren't entitled to, but it might make a difference to the players). This often goes back to the new/inexperienced dealer problem. Conversely, if a dealer takes too little or no rake, I don't say anything as there is no-one that is being harmed by the mistake or oversight.
5. Even if you do make a mistake (in Joe's example, lets say the guy with the AT46 hand didn't have a straight), then it doesn't take too long to figure the proper course of action out ... 'sorry guys, my bad' & most people will overlook the fact that you slowed the game down by 5-10 seconds, because you were trying to do the right thing by the game.

The gray area for me in Joe's example is the fact that he has just sat down. Is he actually part of the game at this point? If he's played a hand, then I think the above applies, but if he's just an observer, then I don't think the lines are so clear.

Does this go against Tommy's general ethos of not saying anything poker-related at the poker table??

Generally, loved the episode & will add some questions to the other thread!

I will speak up if the dealer takes too much (and yes, even if it is as little as $1, as the house aren't going to suffer anything by missing out on a few dollars of rake they weren't entitled to, but it might make a difference to the players). [...] Conversely, if a dealer takes too little or no rake, I don't say anything as there is no-one that is being harmed by the mistake or oversight.

Ah, but here you are making a judgement call, which is basically what you are arguing against.

So if the person being "cheated out of the pot" is a billionaire we don't speak up, because it doesn't harm anybody and the other person might use the money more productively?
Similarly, if the person was very good player, you'd rather have the money go to the fish and wouldn't speak up, hey, no harm done, the good player wins anyways...

Ah, but here you are making a judgement call, which is basically what you are arguing against.

So if the person being "cheated out of the pot" is a billionaire we don't speak up, because it doesn't harm anybody and the other person might use the money more productively?
Similarly, if the person was very good player, you'd rather have the money go to the fish and wouldn't speak up, hey, no harm done, the good player wins anyways...

No, I was talking specifically about dealers taking too much rake. I'll make a point of it if I see them taking more than the 10% that is taken in the live games I play. It is totally separate to the issue of 'being cheated out of the pot'.
When I mentioned harm in that sense, I was referring to the house/casino, who make money from the game anyway & are not involved in playing the game.
Like I said, if a player turns over their cards & the dealer makes an error, I will point it out as long as I notice it, regardless of who the player in the game is.

I agree with bellatrix here. If you are speaking up in all other instances because it is right, then you should speak up when the dealer forgets to take rake as well. I understand the "big casino doesn't need it" mentality, but that is just a different version of "big high stakes player doesn't need it" or "big jerk doesn't need it." Each are just excuses to not speak up, when speaking up is the right thing to do (again, based on the fact that I prefer fairness on all fronts).

@bellatrix, Did you have any response to my previous comments? I think this is a good debate and was hoping to hear more from you Do you still think that your opinion should factor into determining what is right? I'm more than happy to change my mind on this issue if someone can refute my points or help me see the other side of it better.

But then aren't you effectively acting as a pseudo-dealer?
If I wanted to worry about making sure the correct rake was taken every time, etc, then I'd get a job as a dealer.
The issue about the rake is much more noticeable when the dealer takes too much rake anyway - if a player is pushed a small pot & there are multiple red chips ($5) and/or white chips ($1) being dropped, then you notice & you can do a quick mental calculation of pot size to get an idea of whether the rake is right or not. If its a small pot & there's a few white chips being dropped, I'm not going to go to the trouble of trying to figure out if its a $39 or $40 pot if I see $3 being dropped.
Like I said, even if you've got it wrong, it normally only takes a few seconds to sort out anyway & most players will appreciate that you are 'looking out for them'.

I don't think its the same as comparing it to a 'big high stakes player' or 'big jerk' in this instance as the casino stands to lose $0 in the game, unlike the people who are sitting at the table playing, and they all deserve to have the game run fairly & correctly.

Yes, I believe our opinion weighs on all sorts of things. Even in the law, which is supposed to be blind there are leniency provisions based on the circumstances on the situation at hand. I don't deal well in absolutes - weird, because I'm a scientist, that has a lot of her life founded in math and logic. So, mainly I didn't respond, because I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I probably have a strong opinion against strong opinions . I don't think there is a right or wrong answer here, which is fine, not every problem needs an answer formulated as a computer program.
IF condition A holds: THEN DO this
ELSE: DO that

Does.....not......compute...ERROR!

I agree that our opinion factors into many facets of life, including the law. My contention is that it should not when determining right and wrong.

Fair enough though. I do find it weird that the science part of your brain isn't yelling at you for not wanting an absolute I'm going to compose a proof that is undeniable for this situation and then you simply won't have a choice but to agree!

If A, where A is a person losing $ he should not lose, and B, we recognize it, then C, we should speak up. The reason is D, we would want the same done for us and it is in the interest of fairness. If A & B, then C because of D. It's got letters in it! You can't deny it!

But then aren't you effectively acting as a pseudo-dealer?
If I wanted to worry about making sure the correct rake was taken every time, etc, then I'd get a job as a dealer.

I'm not saying you should calculate rake each hand. You said, "if a dealer takes too little or no rake, I don't say anything." That implies that you have calculated it yourself, not out of obligation, just because you happened to notice it. In THAT instance, you have noticed an error and have chosen to not speak up because the casino is not risking any money in the game. However, it is an agreed upon part of the experience that the casino will be paid $X for providing the service of dealing. Just because they likely have more money than any individual at the table doesn't mean they are not entitled to the $ they have earned. A dollar taken from the casino is the same as a dollar taken from you or me.

I don't think its the same as comparing it to a 'big high stakes player' or 'big jerk' in this instance as the casino stands to lose $0 in the game, unlike the people who are sitting at the table playing, and they all deserve to have the game run fairly & correctly.

I kind of addressed this above, but the casino's risk being zero doesn't mean they shouldn't be paid for their services. The players deserve to have a game run fairly & correctly and that's exactly what the casino offers in exchange for rake.

You obviously haven't seen the rake structures they use in Australia Tecmo

You obviously haven't seen the rake structures they use in Australia Tecmo

Haha I wish! That means I'd have visited Australia!

Haha I wish! That means I'd have visited Australia!

Australia will accept you ... at least in the short term ... if you ever venture down to this part of the world. *

To give you some idea, the rake on the $1/2NL game ($40-120 buy-in) is 10% with a $15, yes you heard right, $15 cap, while the $2/3NL game ($50-200 buy-in) has a $5 per hour time charge PLUS a 10% rake with an $8 cap, yes you heard right, time charge AND rake!
Yes, this means that the casino would hardly miss an extra few dollars if the dealer forgets, or under-rakes the pot!
Of course the players are generally so bad that the game is still beatable if you are decent!

* This in no way guarantees that you will get a visa & pass the various customs checks, but simply states that once in the country we will not treat you any differently from other American tourists!