My pet peeve is when I somehow mess up my chip stacks and end up with stacks of 19 chips instead of 20. Turns a $500 cash-out into $475. I hate it when I do that!

Those should be lined up and shot.

There might actually be a reason for this. I've seen more than one author write that some players are more intimidated by a big stack/castle/whatever of chips than they are by fewer chips of larger denominations. Personally, I don't get it, because to me 200k is 200k, regardless of how big the pile of chips is.

Just throwing that out there for what it's worth.

I agree with that completely. Very rarely should players "help" the dealer.

I met a young lady just before the start of a tournament and it turns out that she was going to be dealing for the first time. My advice to her was to be very careful about letting people help her lest she lose control of the table.

honestly I think there is some merit to this (as far as players thinking this way). I found at my room, betting $13 with two reds and 3 whites gets more folds than just betting with 3 reds. it's the same thing but for whatever reason it seems to get me heads up more often than not and I think it has to do with 'more chips to call'.. weird and makes zero sense but seems to be the best route to go when I'm trying to get folds.

Yep, because those green chips aren't there to be used, they're just for show. They absolutely refuse to put them into the pot unless they have no other chips remaining.

I've seen guys that cut out chips in stacks of two or three paying off $150-$200 all-ins with reds and insisting to count out the chips themselves instead of letting the dealer do it, all the while they have a stack of greens sitting in front of them. Drives me crazy. I know this is just a piece of unwritten etiquette, but when I first started playing live I was always taught thst you pay off with the highest denomination chips that you have unless requested to do otherwise.

I hate it when I have like 200 red chips (in stacks of 20s) and nobody will trade me some green or black chips. There's always a guy sitting there with 4 green chips and 1 red chip but he'd rather keep the green chips to make his stack look super short.

I mean I get a chiprunner to change them but that sometimes takes like 10 minutes. Don't know why everybody wants to hang on to their big chips. I actually prefer smaller denomination chips unless I've got so many it's taking up too much room.

A long-time pet peeve of mine is when someone raises to say $6 or $8 in LP or the blinds after multiple limps. Such a waste of everyone's time and they don't even make it an even $5 bet to eliminate the need to make change.

However, last night someone really upped the ante - there was a guy who was raising to $4, even from the blinds, for every hand he played (a lot), no matter how many people were already in the pot. Tilted the hell out of me!! I haven't seen the old min-raise juice-the-pot bet since my old low-stakes play money days in the early 2000's.

How could you hate this? I love it! Typically these raises get multiple callers, when the action gets to me I'll bomb a 4/5x raise and more times than not win $20+ without even seeing a flop.

Does Borgata still have the rule that a hand must be shown to win the pot after betting is complete?

I.e. you call, bettor mucks without showing, yet you still have to show what you called with.

That's a pet peeve and a half right there.

To my knowledge they do not any more, but several PA rooms (including Parx) still do, because their gaming law was based on the same poorly worded NJ law that made that rule necessary.

It's far worse in tournament play, especially when antes are involved. Seemingly every table has those 1-2 guys who never have change. They would rather throw out 1975 in all 100s and 25s than just use 2 1ks and accomplish the same thing. Even more tilting when they stack the bet up then throw them out so the dealer has to reorganize the chips just to count them. You also have those guys who will even stare at their chip stack the entire time a hand is in progress that they aren't in and not once ask their neighbor for change when they only have 500s and above and they are going to need to post a 25 ante next hand. I guess people love wasting everyone else's time.

I've played in rooms with that rule and I don't see a problem with it.

Why should the aggressor get to muck his bluffing hand and you be forced to show everyone that you called with third pair? It makes no sense.

Your hand is the only live one left at this point, there is no one else to plausibly award to the pot to. Everyone else has mucked. There is zero reason for you to have to show.

I've never done it, but I'd love to see what would happen if someone would still refuse to show in this spot, without relinquishing their hand. They're going to what, split the pot between your live hand and one or more dead (explicitly mucked) hands? Keep the pot for the house?

The rule is not just unfair but completely braindead, IMO.

That question has been asked and answered many many times.

Sometimes you'll get the pot. Sometimes you'll get the pot and a rack and be asked to leave, depending on how much of a putz you are and what kind of mood the floor is in. If you're really unlucky, they will take a third route where you don't get the pot either.

The reason you have to show is not because the room is stupid. It's because the state gaming law was written poorly by bureaucrats who don't know poker, and requires that "the winning hand be displayed" for any hand that makes it to showdown, without any exception for if opponents muck their hand and only one remains. The room understands that there's no logical reason to have to show at that point, but their gaming license doesn't care about logic, it cares about following the gaming law.

I used to play at Borgata, and I liked the rule. Don't see why anyone has a problem with it.

It's just grossly unfair that the aggressor gets to hide what hand he decided to bluff the river with, while the caller is forced to reveal that he called with third pair or A-high. Bureaucrats aside, there is no justification for it either. It's the only live hand left, award it the pot and move on.

If the bettor were forced to table his hand as well, i.e. mucking after being called not allowed, then I wouldn't have a problem with it.

It's not really unfair since anyone can muck and still take advantage of seeing the winning hand. i.e. you can take advantage of the rule yourself and use the information you get.

But better players get more out of hiding information. It's unfair in the sense it doesn't really hurt recreational players as much as grinders, who are forced to show part of their range every time they bluff catch.

Sure, I'd like to see what other players have, but if I'm any good at hand reading I usually have a decent idea. I'm much more concerned with other players not knowing what I have.

Like poker pet peeves thread pet peeves - people who quote a 5 year old post without quoting the actual amusing part

are you playing on a Keebler Elf table?

LOL. I actually hold my cards between my thumb and finger every hand before the flop so there is no mistake that I have cards. Kind of good to know I might be peeving someone

While I always oblige and make change and never would say a word...

This is def one of my biggest pet peeves. People always wanting or needing to trade chips. Or the guy that buys in and when the dealer does the wrong color he insists on "i asked for all red"...

I want to be like stfu dude it all plays the same... I also am thinking you'll be only playing small denominations today don't worry... LOL

It's a poor workman who blames his tools

It just bothers me when I have so many reds I have little room on the table. I play left-handed but the dealers always deal as if you're right handed so my cards usually end up to the right of my stack (which I keep to the right), so I have to drag the cards back to the other side of the stack, which is much more annoying when I have nine stacks of 20 reds, especially if I end up knocking the chips over.

What's that supposed to mean?