New pet hate - AWAY player no check down on DYMs

dakotaskye

It sucks to lose in situations with an away player on the bubble because a player doesn't understand implicit collusion, or chooses not to blind out the away player for some reason: "I just want to play Poker", or to spite a particular player are both all too common.

I do get the tilt. However, it's their buy-in, they can do what they want, deal with it.

Tbh if they don't understand implicit collusion, which in away player spots is common sense rather than anything particularly complicated to get your head around, they probably have far bigger leaks too, from which you'll make far more money than you'll lose in the long run, so whatever.

dakotaskye

I usually play low stakes dyms £1/2/3/5 maybe a £10 when i've got the roll, but recently i've been playing at tables when a situ comes up when two players are out, there are four left and someone's away at the table and the simplest thing is to rs the bb of the 'Away' player or ss on an elimination in the final hand, do it fast and check it down but there are players who are still raising it up and then turn over nothing and dble up the ss or the Away player and give them the chance to get back in the game forcing a better hand to fold or a hand that would have won the hand there an then.

These uberDONK players are unforgivable, usually 'low roll reload rookies' at the game who think they have a unique angle, so bad they make me want to bang my head against the wall.

I suppose you should be grateful for them as they usually turn out to be Fish who only have a few games under their belt and give their money to you free on occasions, they can't get their minds around the concept of cooperation play, referred to by Harrington as implicit collusion. (Courtesy of the JohnConner thread).
 Surprsingly, there are many players who cannot figure this simple winning strategy out.

Maybe one day I will move up the stakes and leave them behind but I suspect their will be some more special surprises in store at the higher levels as human nature and the psychology of the poker player stays unremarkably and predictably consistent.

dakotaskye

In the words of Howard Beale in Network 1976

"I'm as mad as hell and i'm not going to take this anymore. Things have got to change."

Tikay10

In Response to Re: New pet hate - AWAY player no check down on DYMs:

It sucks to lose in situations with an away player on the bubble because a player doesn't understand implicit collusion, or chooses not to blind out the away player for some reason: "I just want to play Poker", or to spite a particular player are both all too common. I do get the tilt. However, it's their buy-in, they can do what they want, deal with it. Tbh if they don't understand implicit collusion, which in away player spots is common sense rather than anything particularly complicated to get your head around, they probably have far bigger leaks too, from which you'll make far more money than you'll lose in the long run, so whatever.
Posted by EvilPingu

+1 to all that.

It's a pretty bad leak to allow such a trivial matter to tilt you, too. Long term we should be loving a player who is so bad. OK, we have a little short term irritation, but we are still going to win more games when this fella is at the table than when he is not. 

if I may say so, being so rude about inferior players went out of fashion many years ago, thank goodness. If we were to think about it, we should behave exactly the opposite towards bad players. These guys are our profit & personally, I prefer to show them a bit of love.
 
Turn it upside down - would we really prefer a top rate player to our man who does not even understand "implicit collusion" 4 handed? I know which of the 2 I'd rather face. 

Good luck at the tables bud.      

dakotaskye

In Response to Re: New pet hate - AWAY player no check down on DYMs:

In Response to Re: New pet hate - AWAY player no check down on DYMs : +1 to all that. It's a pretty bad leak to allow such a trivial matter to tilt you, too. Long term we should be loving a player who is so bad. OK, we have a little short term irritation, but we are still going to win more games when this fella is at the table than when he is not.  if I may say so, being so rude about inferior players went out of fashion many years ago, thank goodness. If we were to think about it, we should behave exactly the opposite towards bad players. These guys are our profit & personally, I prefer to show them a bit of love.   Turn it upside down - would we really prefer a top rate player to our man who does not even understand "implicit collusion" 4 handed? I know which of the 2 I'd rather face.  Good luck at the tables bud.       
Posted by Tikay10

I got donked off by one so it did tilt me, you're right so I was really venting. I love them really. If it wasn't for them where would we be. Everyone has to learn the game somehow, it does reveal the standard of the player so it is always good to note it. cheers and gl.

PkDevil

Same for when short-stack has shoved and two match to improve chance of elimination then third raises or shoves big stack resulting in other two folding and then they give the short a much needed boost.

I have so far managed to not throw a virtual chair at these people but there is still time yet!

dakotaskye

In Response to Re: New pet hate - AWAY player no check down on DYMs:

Same for when short-stack has shoved and two match to improve chance of elimination then third raises or shoves big stack resulting in other two folding and then they give the short a much needed boost. I have so far managed to not throw a virtual chair at these people but there is still time yet!
Posted by PkDevil

lol. The ability to throw 'a virtual chair' would be a great much needed addition to the poker app.

*As a foot note to the op, i found that the only feasible time that it is worth betting on a dym elimination is when there is a possibilty of a split pot or creating a side pot incase the short stack or away player wins the hand. ie. you have a full house or made a flush, as i found myself breaking the rule of 'implicite collusion' in these circumstances and getting a few comments and raised eyebrow wtf??s to myself when i bet my K hi fd, but i felt it justified under these circumstances and this puts the other players under more pressure if the ss happens to win the hand.

I've also found some 'Zombie' players (The Away Player) sometimes come back from the dead at the last minute only to regain their stack, so betting there is not always a bad thing, only when it is obviously a bad play is it worthy of justifiable denigration and 'virtual chair' hurling.

dragon1964

You hit your K high flush, you win anyway usually.

You miss and you have described yourself in the first post.

HENDRIK62

In Response to Re: New pet hate - AWAY player no check down on DYMs:

You hit your K high flush, you win anyway usually. You miss and you have described yourself in the first post.
Posted by dragon1964

:-)

LexLuthor

Whenever I see somedody who doesn't understand how to navigate a bubble when a short stacked player is all in or when I see one of those players who runs up a stack early and then decides to sit out the rest of the game I just simply tag both as fish (sorry I meant to say 'recreational players') and move on.

Only a good thing my friend and both are always welcome to sit at my tables.

...and they say poker is dead :-)