Not only would I play him, I'd sit to his left.

Look, if he understands money and gambling enough to sit down at a poker table, then he's fair game. It's not your job at a poker table to protect people from themselves.

This happens with fully-functioning people all the time. Do you soft-play them as well?

I never soft-play.

But I could suggest to someone to leave the table. I've done it twice with a friend who had drank too much and was losing more than he should. I'd also do it if I think the person is in over his head, and I like him enough. I know this is -EV but life isn't all about money.

^this

come to my home game.There's 5 ******s every night.

use some of this ur good to go

http://www.pharmacy2u.co.uk/******ex...FVCZ2AodxkSesQ

Who are the 4 others?

your mom and his girl friends

Honest answer:
First time I would do exactly what you would have done and feel like crap afterwards, exactly like you did.
As a result of all that I'd just avoid playing against the same person ever again.

If avoiding the person is not enough for you, you can always buy him a drink next time you see him in the casino and try to explain to him why he has no chance of winning at poker.
If he is going to gamble his best chances is to play black jack or any other casino game other then poker because there he is going to be a less of a dog.

I think the OP touches on an important point when he mentions the (in)ability to learn from a mistake. An oft-sited definition of madness is 'doing the same the thing over and over again but expecting the outcome to change'. In an ideal world I would want those who are physically unable to change their behaviour through self-willed effort to be protected from predatory environments. In reality I suppose I would just step away from the table without intervening further because as others have said, a person is going to lose their money somehow if that's what they're set on doing.

Most of you seem to be interpreting '******ed' as just meaning a very low IQ but someone who can still take responsibility for their actions. The sad fact is there are people who are able to function well enough as not to need round-the-clock care, but have seriously defective models for brains - a difference of kind not just of degree. For example someone who has been having epileptic seizures their whole life has suffered the loss of millions of neurons at a time in what is essentially an electrical storm.

I mean, the guys with one arm run in their own separate race, right? There's nothing politically correct about challenging a mentally sub-normal individual in an intellectual contest.

I play mid-stakes tourneys all day.

I like that you understand the distinction between a "mentally disabled person" and a "dumb poker player", which was my point from the begining.

Knew a bloke. father of my ex girlfriend, had this horrible turn in his neck and speech inpediment, he would pass as a severe ****** at one glance, he wasnt, and was able to steal alot from many