General Discussion Poker Forums

Basically the question boils down to "how much responsibility should i take when playing someone heads up to look out for their best interests?"

here's the gist of the situation. I'm currently destroying this person at 5/10 hu... i'm up like 4+ buyins. i've been running well and playing well, he's been running bad and playing bad. I know people will say anything in the chat... so there's a fairly solid chance that what he's saying isn't true, but does that even matter? I have no way of knowing if what he says is true, so is the moral thing to do error on the side of caution for his well being?

I'm sure there will be plenty that say that it's his choice to sit with me and gamble his money and that is true, but when it comes to potentially affecting lives other than his own, that's where I feel like there's a moral obligation on my part to "be my brother's keeper" so to speak.

Yes it's a cruel game we play, and another good argument is that there are plenty of lives being hurt that we dont know about... but when we do "know" about it, should we act?

Here's the chat:


Dealer: lifechanger shows [8c Qc]
Dealer: WiltOnTilt shows [Ac Ad]
Dealer: lifechanger shows Queen Jack high
Dealer: WiltOnTilt shows a pair of Aces
Dealer: WiltOnTilt wins the pot ($608) with a pair of Aces

WiltOnTilt: you run really bad man :-/
WiltOnTilt: been very unlucky tonight
lifechanger: excuss me while I go kill myself,, after spending
all my childs tuition tonight
WiltOnTilt: sorry you got really unlucky
WiltOnTilt: i hope you dont kill yourself
lifechanger: ill put 1 more 1000 on my CC
WiltOnTilt: dude honestly
WiltOnTilt: you really shouldnt
WiltOnTilt: you should quit now

Dealer: Hand #7763636077

WiltOnTilt: seriously i dont think you should play

Dealer: WiltOnTilt has 15 seconds left to act
Dealer: lifechanger wins the pot ($10)

WiltOnTilt: i will play you if you really want but
WiltOnTilt: if this $ means something to you
WiltOnTilt: you should not play
lifechanger: lets play
WiltOnTilt: i do not mean to be rude but you are outmatched
here

Dealer: Hand #7763641473
Dealer: WiltOnTilt has 15 seconds left to act

WiltOnTilt: and you are running really bad :-(
Dealer: WiltOnTilt shows two pair, Queens and Twos

so then a few minutes later my conscience starts getting to me

WiltOnTilt: dude
WiltOnTilt: i dont feel right playing you
lifechanger: come on.
WiltOnTilt: i cant play you if you're maxing out credit cards
WiltOnTilt: and ruining your child's education
lifechanger: im ready to play
WiltOnTilt: i cant in good faith play someone who is ruining
their child's life
WiltOnTilt: i mean i have morals
mauidavid1212 (Observer): play her
lifechanger: its already in the game.
lifechanger: lets play
WiltOnTilt: ok

Dealer: Hand #7763668437
Dealer: WiltOnTilt wins the pot ($10)
Dealer: Hand #7763669161

WiltOnTilt: i do not play this game to ruin lives..


so what say you DC ? Do I have a moral obligation to quit him? Does it matter if what he says is likely untrue? Usually after I bust someone and they give me the suicide speech i say whatever, but this seemed more real to me and my conscience is acting up...

what do you guys think?

results: about 5 minutes after this post i decided to quit him. I felt like if I'm bothered enough by the situation that I need to post a thread on DC to ease my conscience then probably not playing is the best move.

I'm still interested in what you guys think though.

Aaron

A number of valid arguments can be made IMO.

1) If you don't bust him/her someboby else will.
2) If you feel that you have moral obligations you will not play your A-game.
3) If A busts B... and you then crush B. Where is the money then comming from?
4) What about the times where you didn't know?

The Casino has some obligations - you as a player has in general few obligations. That said I would sitout and ask him for a 1 hour break or something. Ah snap..

I think it's the right and proper decision for you to simply quit playing him. Especially if you were completely dominating as it appeared.

Take some solace in doing the proper thing yourself and what you know is correct. There are some would just punish him mercilessly and not give a crap. You're just being human. Glad to meet a fellow member of the human race.

I don't see how you have a moral obligation to quit him. That said if playing him is going to make you miserable/guilty, why bother?

either he is really good at metagame or he has a real problem. best move is probably to quit if you're troubled.
And improva is right, if you don't play him, someone else will, you did all you could to help him by telling him not to play. If he doesn't listen there is not much you can do about it.
It's sad but this is it imo.

The sad thing is that it is pointless to try to protect someone with a gambling problem by not playing him HU. If he really has an addiction and he is a huge fish the probability that he is not going too lose the money is (almost) ZERO. When you play poker you know that some % of your money is coming from people like this and although this is morally a bit questionable, you (and all other poker players) don’t seem to have a problem with this. Not playing him HU is hypocrite.

That said: you probably made the right decision, if you feel the need to post a thread like this quiting is probably the best thing for your conscience. It wouldn't be my decision though.

If you think that the person is going to quit you and go donk it off elsewhere, then I don't see why you should quit him. By all means tell him what an idiot he is for ruining his childs life though (may just be a ploy by him ofc). Things would be different of course if I knew the person IRL.

Destroying lives is your job. Be it on a small scale or a bigger one. Call me a cruel bastard but I don't care once the people sit with their money it's ok for me to take it.
If they have a gambling problem, well that's kinda tough but it also means that there's no way he'll not play someone else.

I mean if it was live there was at least a chance that you could convince him to stop playing and seek counceling or something but online I simply think your decision doesn't make a big enough difference to change anything.

Okay, as a LHE player I've never gotten the 'I'm going to go kill myself,' speech, so I could be wrong about this, but it reeks of bs. That said, WoT, you're a poker player - if you say you hear it from time to time and it's crap but this one struck you as different, then I say go with your read.

It obviously bothered you enough to consider quitting and making this thread, so I think that quitting was absolutely the right decision. Everyone who's talking about money and forgoing a soft spot is neglecting to take into account that there's more to life - like feeling okay about yourself as a person.

My initial reaction was that you should email the site's customer service and ask them to investigate. They will be able to look at his deposit and playing record and may be able to surmise if he potentially has a gambling problem. I don't think you personally have much responsibility here (I wouldn't fault you for not writing the email), but it may be a nice thing to do.

Lots of good thoughts and posts in here. Thanks to everyone for taking the time to weigh in. In situations like this I don't necessarily think there's any one right answer so it's cool to see everyone's take.

Hielko posted this:

The sad thing is that it is pointless to try to protect someone with a gambling problem by not playing him HU. If he really has an addiction and he is a huge fish the probability that he is not going too lose the money is (almost) ZERO. When you play poker you know that some % of your money is coming from people like this and although this is morally a bit questionable, you (and all other poker players) don’t seem to have a problem with this. Not playing him HU is hypocrite.

I think he makes a good/interesting point here, and it's a point some of the rest of you also made by simply saying "if you dont bust him someone else will"

I think this sort of gets right to the crux of the problem. Is there a difference between earning money from someone who cannot afford to lose it, in the moment, when you directly "know" they are self destructing vs hindsight in surmising that x% of profits came from people who could not afford to lose it (w/o any specific info on who could(not) afford it) ?

Another thing to consider/discuss. Let's say I decide it's morally wrong for me to play this guy now that I "know" it's potentially ruining his/his family's life. Does that moral obligation only apply to future money to be won or does it retroactively apply to the 4 buyins that I've already won? In other words, if I'm going to go so far as to stop playing him because I want to be "part of the solution, not part of the problem" then am i a hypocrit for not sending the $ I've already won back to him?

What do you guys think?

Well I come from a country where gambling is not only legal, some would claim it is encouraged. If someone has a gambling problem then no end of closed doors and refusals will stop that person gambling away all their money.

Against these types of people, in many ways, we act like the banker. They are trying to beat the banker, the banker uses more skill and a better set of instructions so the game is weighted in the bankers favour. They use luck and the gift of the gods to try to beat the banker.

Come on Wilt, do you not wish that you had the resources that this person has when you were as bad as him/her? I can remember the time when trying to buy a book on poker meant selecting from one or three titles on the shelf. Usually the choice you made was based on the fact that you had either read the others or the others seemed to be nothing but a bunch of charts and maths. Now you can get an endless supply of books or training videos and free information on the web (and lets face it, the free info on the web is a gold mine). Back then, you were very restricted as to what level you could buy in for. Now you can play for any amount, and if your good enough you can make a pretty good showing without ever investing a penny of your hard earned cash into the game.

The thing is, you know what makes you better than him/her. It is not your natural poker ability, it is not your ability to suck out on him/her. It is just the fact you work a damn sight harder at the game and have worked a damn sight harder at the game for some time. If this person thinks they can cheat by jumping up too quickly with the credit card run to the max then, it is your job to show them that this is not the way.

Anyway, my basic point is, this person has more resources than you did when you started. This person probably has more money than when you started. If they are too bone idle to actually read the stuff about bankrolls ect then its their problem. Not yours.

Next time, when they start with this line of chat, the ignore button will be a +EV move imo.

PS, genetics are much more important than education (think about it).

PPS, as I am typing this, I am listening to "from the ground up". Exactly how much more have you got to do before you feel ok? Your showing us how to play! If your planning on actually cutting the game out and turning into some sort of santa throwing cash around I am right behind you.

Another thing to consider/discuss. Let's say I decide it's morally wrong for me to play this guy now that I "know" it's potentially ruining his/his family's life. Does that moral obligation only apply to future money to be won or does it retroactively apply to the 4 buyins that I've already won? In other words, if I'm going to go so far as to stop playing him because I want to be "part of the solution, not part of the problem" then am i a hypocrit for not sending the $ I've already won back to him?

What do you guys think?

Sending the money back to him is the same as burning it. Make a donation to a charity that can help people like him instead.

There are a number of possible views to take here and I don't believe that any of them are "wrong". In my personal view, I don't think it wrong to continue to play the person in question until they've gone broke. The reasons for this are fairly clear, most obvious is that the person in question is clearly going to gamble away all their funds no matter what. If it does not end up in your pocket it will end up in the pocket of another poker player or that of a bookmaker. Secondly, people go broke playing poker every day, but I suspect the majority don't broadcast this fact over chat no matter how severe the consequences. I don't view it as my job as a player to pick and choose who to "spare" in this regard.

Sounds like this guy is on some MAJOR life tilt. You should really consider sending him the 4+ BI's back and then msg'ing me when you do. lol, I'll play him in a heartbeat.

Or, drain him and then do something 'good' with the money. Like take it out of the poker economy and dump it into your favorite charity or something.

But under no circumstance should you quit him because you feel bad about what you think his life would be like if he lost even more to you. There's just no way to know for sure what the money really means to him and his family.