I understand what you're saying, but I don't play 1/3 very much at all which is where most of the fish play who could potentially go broke.

When I say "feed" I mean the games would not run.

For example, a fish texts me and asks if I want to play 5/5-10/20. I say yes, and then ask some other people if they want to play. Players don't usually like to play short so I fill seats with people I stake. The players who play in this game don't have a problem with it.

Or, 1/3/6 would break much sooner if I wasn't putting a few guys in the game because people don't like playing short handed.


If one guy put 8 people in a game, and I was the only one playing on my own money, I would not care at all as long as they weren't colluding. It makes no difference. The game isn't changed. There is nothing unethical about it, and I would still win money if I was +EV in the game.

The problem is people are -EV in games, and I'm only making the games tougher. They just want something to complain about to justify their losses.

If you really think you prop up the games that much, boycott (along with your horses) the room for a couple of weeks and see if management changes their tune.

Plus you're missing the basic concept of table image, which is that it doesn't matter what you're actually doing but rather how people are perceiving you.

You need to change people's perception of what's going on, not to try to explain to them what actually is going on.

Bold is untrue as I stated before.

What about all the fish that I lend money to? I hang out with them too outside the poker room. They buy me dinner, drinks, massages, all kinds of stuff, right in front of people and I lend them money. We play together all the time, but we don't cheat the game or soft play each other. No one seems to care about this and it's pretty much the exact same thing.

I have something similar but better in mind. I just posted here to get a feel for how justified or unjustified me feeling slighted/mistreated by this is.

This is sadly true. Like I said before, I just don't like doing shady things. I don't want to have to be secretive about things, it just makes me feel like I'm doing something wrong. But clearly being honest and forthright did nothing good.

How is it untrue? Who loses money when you are in a hand with your horse?

Management also doesn't care to distinguish yours horses from those that are borrowing money from you.

This is a pretty ridiculous statement because your biased.

You can't understand why someone would feel uncomfortable being the only one not playing from the same bankroll against 8 people? Just because you think its fine and wouldn't care doesn't mean fish XYZ or whiny reg XYZ thinks the same.

It's really tough to prove your not colluding and recreational players especially are well within the confines of sanity to feel uncomfortable in that spot.

While you may be right that part of the reason is them justifying losses, it doesn't change anything.

Perception is just as important as reality in this situation.

If it's perceived that something shady, or something that makes people uncomfortable is going on, management will take the measures to justify the problem.

The fact that you actually aren't colluding is really tough to prove.

I still feel that doing business like that out in the open in a gigantic mistake, your current problem is one of the many shining examples of how that can end poorly.

I explain this in post 22.

Management does care to distinguish the two and they have. I'm not banned from playing with all the people I have given money to. Just some.

I lose money when kyddbeats me. I dont get how I wouldnt. If my makeup was zero before the session and only played hands vs kydd and ended down 100bbs then it would take another 100bb wining session jus to break even. How is that not losing?

If doing something questionable it is ethically superior to be transparent than to not

Ask yourself: do you want to play in a room where the winners in that room stake each other and sit at the same tables so they can make sure they don't tilt and play better against fish?

Or would you decide to play somewhere that is more touristy and casual?

The floor doesn't need to tell you if that's the real reason, but basically what you're doing OP is VERY VERY BAD for their business if even just a few people find out... and you don't need to be actively colluding for this to be the case.

What i want and what the rules are = two differen things

That's not the point of his question.

Answer it honestly. If you don't want to play in a room with bunch of big winners that stake each other, then you go elsewhere to play. Who loses in that scenario? The management.

Valid points. I pretty much came to the conclusion that if I'm going to get anything changed, it will be by going to non poker room employees. So I guess in hindsight I was looking more for validation that I should be upset and try to change things or if I was in the wrong.

What's the next step if we continue to beat the games? Get 86'd for winning?

Change your antics. Stay off the lime light.

Happened to a friend of mine

I like you kydd so I'm not here to bash you, just shed some light. You can't be open about stuff like this. "Nobody wants to play short so I fill the seats with my horses". How can the "fish" ever win? Then you guys smile in everyones face. While sharing information. Be discreet to the casino and your fish. Who cares if its shady, life is shady. Only the strong survive. What they don't know won't hurt them. Its not a crime to be friends.

Limon once said, If 2 guys are doing it, the game is barely beatable, if its 3 or more players on the same bankroll the game is unbeatable.

So I'm basically saying you and a horse is cool. You and 2 horses is not cool at all. Your basically robbing the fish. But who cares, its done all across the country.

At commerce they have a few crews who share the same bankroll. They do the same **** you guys do. Quite frankly if I had the means and trust worthy friends I would be doing the same thing. But would never be honest with it at the table.

I care about not doing shady things as does kydd obv

I 100% support this ruling, If I knew multiple people at My table were playing from the same pocket then I would feel scammed regardless of whether I was winning or losing. You are basically freerolling anyone else at the table by having the luxury of getting a return on any money dumped to your horses.

How is it freerolling? There is no freeroll. Me winning or losing money to my horse doesn't effect the game. What about people who softplay? Should they not be allowed to play?

Also, to RobFarha when you said I was biased when I set up the scenario of 8 people playing with one persons money and me being at the table - I do play in a game where one guy stakes many people. It's a huge underground 5/10/20 with often straddles and double straddles with a $4k min buy in. One guy plays and stakes three others. Every player at the table knows it.

Why doesn't this bother me or anyone else? Because they don't cheat. It's obvious. I still have to play the game whether they're playing on their own money or his. They still have to play the game. Just because they are playing on his money doesn't mean he gets to give them advice during a hand.

Lets say I have a set on A268. There are two of a suit out there. I shove, a guys horse calls, and then the guy who stakes him is also in the hand. He has a FD, but the odds aren't right to call. However, he calls anyways because he doesn't want me to win the hand - this would be IF they cheated, and they don't.

Now we have two out comes
1. I win and get all the money. I had a good player make a bad call and get outplayed because of his own staking deal.
2. I lose and the other two player split the money however they want.

Isn't it obvious who gets the better of this situation? It's clearly me. This is basically what people are saying I could do, but it isn't an advantage. People splitting money doesn't effect my EV in a hand. I'm still getting it in vs a FD and a worse hand. I get all of the money when I win and none of the money when I lose.

This. Whether or not you admit it, you like playing with your horses because its basically impossible for you to lose. By playing with all your horses you're guaranteed money with little variance.

How can you stake someone and not collude? How can you stake someone and not softplay? It's impossible.

Poker isn't a team sport, bud. I don't mean to be an ass, but wtf do you think was going to happen? idk if you're a professional or not, but if you are, shame on you, show a little class.

And you have a pretty unanimous response. It's just not the response you were hoping for.

A poker room has to have the option to keep out certain players, or they won't be able to keep the room open. Is there a Gaming-approved rule that you can't smell like sewage? Is there a Gaming-approved rule that you can't be a generally obnoxious jerk? Dunno how it works in your state, but in NV they can ban you for almost any reason (including for winning, though I know of no poker players banned for winning too much).

Trying to play the Gaming card is a bad approach and may get "don't play with your horses" changed to "go away, don't come back". That's what happens when a casino decides a player is far more trouble than they are worth. They've already decided you are troublesome, but have tried to just fix the problem while letting you continue to play. You really want to ratchet things up?

This is just plain ignorance. If it's impossible to lose, then go grab some horses and print money. It isn't impossible. I play more big posts against one of my horses than anyone else at the table just because that's how our styles are. I have a lot of people that are my friends at the table, but this is work for me and I treat it like such.

If a lawyer has a vested interest one of his clients does that automatically mean he would break the law and risk his license just to help them out a little more? I don't know anyone who would do that, and this is basically the same thing.

Also, the only person who gets hurt from me adjusting my play are my horses, and they don't even get hurt, they just have to readjust their play.

I don't mean to be an ass either, but instead of spewing ignorant garbage why don't you paint a scenario where any other player is put at a disadvantage?

If you can't instantly understand how multiple players at the same table playing from the same bankroll undermines the integrity of the game, nobody can explain it to you. What room was this? Sounds like a well managed room that I'd like to check out.

emphasis added

If you don't see the problem, I don't think you ever will.

Also, why are they referred to as "my horses"? A horse is a beast of burden that does compelled work for its owner. Your language implies a master-servant relationship and raises legitimate questions as to whether "my horses" are bona fide independent competitors in a game.

Have you openly called these players "my horses" at the casino? If so, you may be your own biggest problem.