Here's my draft. I feel a little weird sharing this since this is the start of private conversation. I shall not be revealing anything that he says (unless he goes off the rails), but I will provide a general update once the dust settles.

This is not sent yet. Feedback welcome. It's already WAY edited down (every line used to be a paragraph):

Put away your defense mechanisms and understand what I'm expressing to you.

Your behavior in my home is unacceptable.

You are no longer welcome in any cash game.

You are welcome to continue with the league. However, if I don't see marked improvement at the next game, these next six will be your last.

These are my requirements:

1) Do not complain.
2) Pay attention to the action.
3) Act promptly.
4) Do not argue.

I am willing to help you, if you are willing to accept it. This is your choice.

Too cold?

On a scale of one to ten, how much do you want to keep him in the league?

As-is? 0.

Improved? Eh. His departure would lead to at least one or two other people returning.

But I want it to be as diplomatic and drama-free as possible. That's why I suspect this is too cold. I stripped away a lot of the "look, I know it's hard, I have similar problems, let's work together" stuff.

Oh my, I realize I left out the biggest incident of the night, the one that almost got me to lose my ****.

After ALL NIGHT of everybody trying to encourage him to act more quickly on his hands, and stop telling stories when it's his turn to act, he LEANED OVER TO TALK TO SOMEONE ON THE OTHER TABLE when it was his turn to act! When I told him not to do that, he got very angry and started arguing.

He folded, there was a raise after, and I looked down at AA. As I'm thinking about what to do, he's STILL ARGUING, despite my putting up a hand and generally ignoring him. Really screwed up my play, that's for sure.

After the hand he wanted to keep going, and I did a bit of "you're being ridiculous to tell me that's not out of line," at which point he copped to it being bad, but then GOT ON MY CASE FOR BEING ANNOYED BY IT. Absolutely ridiculous.

I did get grumpy for about 30 seconds, and the table got quiet, but that was cured a couple minutes later by a round of shots and some lighthearted shifts in conversation. Then he started pouting and saying comments like, "I can't talk or pfap will get mad."

When we combined tables about 45 minutes later, he tried to bring it up again. That's when I gave my bemused, "Really?" and completely brushed him off.

...

If I were a guest in my own game, I would ask the host to intervene.

My version. But I'm pretty cold.

Once again, I think you've answered your own question. It seems he's a major distraction. If you really are deep down looking to get rid of him, then don't worry about being too diplomatic. So what if you piss him off? I piss of customers all the time. It's just reality. You can't worh with everyone.

It's a valid point.

On some level he has to be aware that there's tension, and accept that he may be contributing.

I'd like to think that if I found myself always struggling with the host at a game, that if I received an email like this, my reaction would be, "Holy crap, I didn't mean to be like that, what can I do for you?" But I can't really say. I know in the past I've resisted such things quite a bit, but I had quite a different mindset a decade ago.

It's the same as the times I've told people they might be the ones accidentally denting cards. The guys I didn't think we're doing it reacted, "Holy crap, I hope it's not me, let me know what I can do!" The guys I suspected all along reacted, "Shut up, it's not me, screw you." It's worth noting both of those guys are long gone.

Okay, I think I got it:

I can't leave it totally cold. But laying out the law before dropping the punishment is a better order. These are fairly basic and simple human interaction requirements.

I'm eager to get this done and settled, so I'll probably send it off tomorrow. I didn't want to do it tonight; it's not fair to sabotage someone right before bed.

Thanks for all your help and support. Maybe I'm too emotional, but I take all of this very seriously. I'm not sending yet, so keep the feedback coming!

...

EDIT: Oh, we can bet on there being a complaint of persecution or targeting, so good comebacks for that are appreciated. Remember, I'm not trying to beat him down and stand victorious. I'm trying to be a mirror. If he sees cooperation, then I return cooperation. But I need to bounce the ******** right back.

Me!! Me!! I did!!!

Just be careful of this guy. The ones with the major "life stressors" are the ones who always ending up snapping and becoming unsubs on Criminal Minds. Just sayin.

Actually, I think there really was an episode that started over a poker game gone wrong. Or maybe it was CSI. Either way, it didn't end well.

Wow, I really need to get out of the house more.

How can it not be "personal"?

Great post otherwise. Pfap, you might have to add the nuke penalty of "kicked out of the league, lose your chips/standings".... and decide how that's going to play out with the other members.

I've got 5 on stars that says he challenges this relentlessly, threatens to quit, then finally capitulates because he doesn't want to lose his standing, but continues to act reasonably poorly.

Anyone?

I don't like this line. You are not involved. This is the way the world is. Do X, else Y. Your choice. Period.


$0.02

This

It sounds like you're trying to avoid upsetting him because you don't want to make yourself look like the bad guy. You're trying to run a smooth, enjoyable game while being everyone's friend. While I can appreciate that, it sounds like in this instant you just need to tell him like it is and let him deal with it. Shape up or ship out. Sometimes it's worth it to come off as a d**k to one person if it's going to benefit the game as a whole.

Personal is telling somebody you don't like them, or that their bad or mean or ugly. Asking a player to not bend the cards a certain way because it damages them has nothing to do with them as a person, it is their action.

They may still take it personally, but thats not my problem.

Pfap,

If you want the guy to flip out and quit them email is good. If not then I would never do this via email. I avoid confrontation as much as the next guy but this is something that should be handled face to face. An email could be used to set the stage for the meeting.

I also wouldn't resort to retorts or comebacks. You want to maintain control. If you start withthe bantering you've lost control and are now playing his game.

I don't mind the list but I don't think it's specific enough.... do not argue or complain....promptly? What exactly does that mean? You see a complaint where another just sees some dry humor or a one off that everyone does. Doesn't really mean anything. One persons argueing is another persons questioning or debating. Is promptly 5 seconds, 2 seconds. Maybe he has a real decision and promptly is one minute. Will he need to explain his entire thought process for you to make the call of whether or not the time he took met your definition of promptly? (THis is why I suggested a clock. totally objective. No confusion)

It gives him way too much wiggle room. Which, if you plan to enforce punishment for lack of adherence makes it difficult for you as their will be a difference of opinion as to whether or not he met expectations.


I mentioned earlier about addressing him before deadline. Based on prior post about him not letting an issue go I think this is a perfect place for a time out. If he wants to act like a child...... he can go sit in the corner. He needs to understand immediately that a specific bahavior has violated one of your expectations and the punishment is immediate. Repeat actions results in increasing punishment. Do not allow him to drag you down to his level. (Think of yourself as the referee or umpire. They call it as they see it and they're done. They're moving on. Somebody wants to argue, the ref doesn't argue with them. He gives them a penatly or ejects them. Case closed. problem solved)

Treat it just like an other poker infraction. Warn first. If possible, when he misbehaves, try to get him away from the table and tell him quickly that what he did was wrong. If he does it again he will sit out for XXX. Punish in private, praise in public. It's hard to give him a time out privately as everyone will know he's not getting hands but you don't need to specifically call him out in front of everyone on the initial offense.

It appears his behavior is not a secret so it may also be possible to get others to support you in this endeavor - assuming they want him to stay. Yep - I'm talking about an intervention. A few of you get together and tell him his bahavior is unacceptable and needs to change. You all are willing to help him but he needs to step up or step out.

Different opinions, love it! And yet we find a way to express them without insulting each other. On 2+2 even. Mind-boggling.

It's because I like this person and I would like him to find a way to change. I am willing to help him with that. But if he takes that line, there are conditions: not arguing with me over what I tell him to do.

Right. And this is why I didn't let it get to me too much on Thursday. For most of the game I was in a fine mood. His behavior was directed towards me, but it wasn't about me.

I can't do face-to-face, at least not until we agree to the terms of the discussion. I tried that last time, and it went on for HOURS. A lot of dumping of emotions, and then never-ending interruption on any thought I'd have. We're talking defenses and accusations and deflections every direction. I'm not strong enough to hold my ground completely throughout it, and even if I did, I would have to repeat the same thing over and over, and eventually leave the situation without having reached accord.

Poor turn of phrase on my part. I mean I need ways to maintain with control without bantering.

I feel too much detail means too many things for him to defend. The cleaner and more direct I can initiate this, the more focused the conversation. If he wants to change and wants my help, then I can give him specifics. But I feel jumping in with a full list of "this is exactly why you suck" would lead to argument. This is a very clean "these are very basic conditions" that I can't see anybody finding issue with in concept.

We may disagree with what "prompt" means, but I can't imagine anybody can find a way to argue that players should be able to act as slowly as they like. I can, however, find plenty of ways to argue over specifics of what "prompt" means, and find excuses for why none of what I mention is being satisfied.

There can be difference of opinion all he wants. On my end, he listens to what I say and doesn't argue with me, or that's it.

See, that's what #2 and #3 do. I've tried the "work with me, not against me" approach, but that also has wiggle room. #1 is open-ended, you're right. #2 & #3 say, "You need to defer to me when I tell you #1 is being violated." No argument, no discussion. I'm okay with you not immediately changing, but I'm not okay with you arguing when I point out what needs to change.

I like this, and I think it's a good way to handle it without getting involved. Heck, we could get in three or four hands in the time it takes him to play one.

Not opening with it, but it will be high on the continued conversation. If he's willing to work, then I'll spell out the conditions ("listen to me") and the consequences ("time out for contradicting me during the game"). Giving too much too soon gives more room for argument and resistance, but I think this is a solid second step.

Good stuff, this is dead-on.

Interesting idea, but we're down a different path now. He has far too many times now disrespected me to my face, shown no consideration for what I'm doing, and sabotaged my enjoyment of my own party. He can find his own support network.

Well, I sent it. Now I have to fight the part of me that craves drama drama drama. I have nothing to prove, I will not argue anything. I did add a little bit to the last line, saying that I will work with him if he wants, but I will not argue.

I expect him to challenge me and ask a lot of questions about what he did and who's complaining and so forth, but I won't even answer those until he accepts the terms of my conditions. I'll answer them in order to serve him listening to what I say. I will not answer them in order to serve me proving to him that I have a case.

I have a case. These are the conditions for playing in my game. I don't need to prove that to anybody.

[I'm on pfapfap's ignore list - mental or electronic (which is fine), and he's repeatedly made clear my advice is unwelcome -- but to the others reading this thread...]

Email is an awful medium to deliver an ultimatum to someone whom you regularly see in person. It's like your boss saying, "See you Monday!" and getting your pink-slip in the mail on Saturday. It reeks of passive-aggressive bullcrap.

I offer you simple advice:

When you have a problem with someone; sit down, in private, face-to-face with them, and have a simple, straightforward discussion.

...you know, like a human.

If you feel you can't keep on task in the conversation, if you think you'll stray or you won't remain emotionally distanced from the issue -- bring a clear list of things you wish to discuss, or bring a partner into the conversation to keep you on task.

• It's hard.
• It's the right thing to do.
• Doing the right thing is often difficult.
• Man up.

I never understand why these threads go on so long. Have people forgotten how to engage in normal social interaction? Do poker tables make people forget?

Oooh, I know, de-friend him on Facebook, that'll let him know you're serious!

...except us, apparently.

Really?

.

I agree with this. He is always saying "pfap says I can't do this...etc". Make sure to let him know that it's others in the group too, be completely honest with him and tell him that others have quiit b/c you make them uncomfortable. Make your wsop season like a soccer relegation session. But use voting instead of points.

Invite him over 30 minutes before the next game. Have the discussion. Make sure that he understands what is at stake and that he is on probation. If he discusses this meeting or makes fun of it with others once the game starts than he is out! how much abuse do you need.

Try uses "I encourage you to...."

That's all for now.

I agree with having written rules, but I don't agree with having everyone signing a copy. Have written rules and let your players know that they exist. Have the rules on site so you can tell your players that if they are curious about the rules they can read it. If a player complains about a crappy ruling you as the floor can refer them to the rules.

Casinos do the exact same thing and they generally run a sustainable game. It is implied that players agree to the rules as soon as they step into the establishment. When the floor make a ruling and a player complains, he has only himself to blame (GENERALLY!! let's leave the crappy floorman rulings to B&M) for not knowing the house rules.

My suggestion about the intevention really had nothing to do with a support group for the guy. It was about support and back up for you.

Unless some switch gets flipped and he immediately acts like an adult there's going to be some work on your part to keep him moving in the right direction. Assuming you want to help him improve then having others, which you've deputized with authority to act on your behalf, policing his actions takes some of the pressure off you.

Ah, gotcha. That's a bit in line with what I was thinking. I don't want to go wide, but I think I should flag a couple of inner circle trusted people to have my back if I call on them. But I've laid out the conditions of playing. When he responds, I'll lay out the terms (listen to me, or else time-out penalties). If this disrupts the game, I will pause the clock and talk with him outside. If that doesn't solve it, then good-bye.

Unfortunately, talking with him before a game is not an option, because those 30 minutes are the most stressful for me of the night. I'm dealing with a bunch of phone calls and text messages, handling buyins, arranging pizza orders, answering questions, etc. I'm also trying to remain centered and balanced so I can play a good game. This is not the conversation I wish to have at that point. And there's no way it would end in 30 minutes. And I'm not going to see him in person before the day of the next game, either.

It might not come to it. So far no response, and usually I get text messages immediately. This may have been a good slap in the face.

But I have no illusions that it's a 180 in attitude. I've been down this path with people before. I scare them into realizing I'm serious, they pretend to have reformed until I've relaxed a little, and then it's back to the same ol' bullcrap.