1 I do not care if others soft play. It happens all the time and there is nothing I can do about it so I chose not to care

2 I have been asked countless times thing like,"if I call will u check it down" or some soft play type of variant. I simply state, "I am here to play poker. If my grandma were still alive and in the hand with me I would do my personal best to stack her ass. That is how I play poker"

Poker Theory posits that making a value bet that is only going to be called by a better hand is not a smart play.

That is why you sometimes see OMC vs. OMC checking the 2nd nuts. They know that their opponents are only going to call if they have a better hand.

1. Same.
2. I will occasionally check down the blinds if asked by one of the more pleasant elderly regs. But yeah otherwise "I'm going to play my hand".

If that's true, they should be bluffing the other OMC over and over again. If they refuse to do that.....well, then they're probably softplaying their buddy.

OMC's are not playing to win. They're playing not to lose. The only hands they're interested in losing are when they can get cracked aces or a bad beat. If they bet, fold.

By definition, OMC doesn't bluff.

Sure they should, but they don't. That is why they are OMC. So there are plenty of OMC vs. OMC that involves the 2nd nuts checking that isn't soft play.

So you seriously think there is an OMC who would not bet Aces full because the other guy would only call if he had quads. And the other guy could have KK on a board like AKTT5, and he would not even call a small bet? I don't believe it for a minute.

Arguments taken to the extreme always seem silly.

...it's your argument.

It may have been my argument, but it wasn't the context I intended, hence my point that arguments taken to the absurd extreme don't demonstrate anything.

To be more direct, I stated that there were plenty of OMC vs. OMC that would involve the 2nd nuts checking. Then poster responded with an extreme example.

Plenty means plenty. It doesn't mean all.

So, when do you think this would happen? Do you think there are many OMCs who would check back a rivered King high flush that hit on the river, after they called bets on the flop and the turn hoping to hit their draw? If not, give me your example where someone would check the second nuts.

I mean there is no distance between your argument and what you call the absurd extreme case. Same as in the other thread where you made the reductio ad absurdum claim in response to pushback. If a light breeze can bring your argument over the line from where you constructed it, then it's weird to describe it has having been "taken" to an "extreme" or to be surprised that it ended up there. Maybe reevaluate the merits of your argument instead.

Not everyone you think is an OMC plays like that. There are 5-6 of us in my player pool and have clipped more than a few "pros" that have passed through and misread us.

Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill.

I literally saw a guy check back the nuts the other day and I played 2 more hands and left.

I’m not saying this is a common occurrence but on more than one occasion I’ve been playing and the person last to act doesn’t bet their hand and the only possible reason is soft play.

Some people view “betting their friends” as bad etiquette.

I view soft play as cheating.

These people simply just don’t get it and never will.

There is a chance they'll get it if you say "I hope you'll check back the nuts when you're in a hand with me, too". They might not stop doing it, but it at least points out what they're doing wrong.

You need an example of where someone would check when they are only going to be called by better? Really?

Ok. 5 players. Board runs out 5c 6c 10h. Qc. Jc.

Flop and turn are both checked through. River checks through to button who is an OMC and knows that everyone knows he he is an OMC. He turns over the Kc. If he bets, what is anyone going to call with? If he is playing with other OMCs he knows they will check raise any Ac and fold everything else. Why should he bet?

[QUOTE=albedoa;57722164]I mean there is no distance between your argument and what you call the absurd extreme case./QUOTE]

Your failure to see a difference does not mean it does not exist.

The difference is obvious. That you cannot see it is your problem. Not others.

I always find the Alex Foxxen slow play allegations against his wife Kristen in a 3 handed table to be a perfect test of a person's ability in leveling. A person's response to that hand makes it quite clear at what level they are able to think.

Alex and Kristen's actions in that hand are perfectly understandable when someone goes deep into the whole leveling exercise. I don't even want to be defending either of them. I personally detest both of them, but when taken in that context, their actions are perfectly understandable. Yet many people are unable to understand why they did what they did.

Same with OMC versus OMC.

That people do not understand why there are certain situations where an OMC would check the 2nd nuts against other OMCs reflects on their failure to understand the leveling game.

Sure soft play exists. No argument from me. Unfortunately happens a lot of the time. However I think much of it occurs in an unspoken manner. The result of a leveling contest. That people do not understand that leveling contest and why it results in the 2nd nuts being checked occasionally.

Also, please understand the difference between understanding and thinking their actions are correct. Just because I can understand what an OMC is thinking does not mean I think it is correct thinking.

Yeah, a hand where it's checked around on the flop, turn, and river., so the pot isn't worth calling for...that's way more contrived than my example.

Except it isn't more contrived in the context of OMC vs OMC. Most OMC vs. OMC is going to be checked.

That is literally the nature of OMC.

By literal definition, OMC do not ever bluff. They do not make thin value bets. They check or they bet/raise the nuts.

To put it bluntly, a person can either keep complaining about softplay among OMCs, or they can understand why it happens.

As with anything in poker .. it depends. Without going back to the OP I'm going to assume that the main issue was two Players who simply wont go to battle against each other once it's HU no matter the strength of their hands. We certainly can try to 'class' versions of soft play with some pushing (or crossing over into) the realm of collusion.

There is another thread about a WSOP ME poker tournament league where Player A is 'slow playing', even chip dumping, to another Player since the elimination of that Player would eliminate Player A from possibly winning the ME seat based on the point system. In this case the behavior is +EV for Player A, but certainly frowned upon in TDA and general poker mindsets.

IMO the 'extreme' OMC discussion is really fringe slow playing, if it's even slow playing at all. Any time we bet we have to evaluate the spot and take our image as well as the tendencies of the opponents into account. OMC v OMC is just 'knowing your opponent' and not necessarily slow play. While other Players may never let the 2nd nuts go by without an attempted value bet (against certain opponents) that doesn't mean it not the 'right' play in that spot when OMC v OMC applies.

As mentioned before .. as long as the two parties aren't 'working together' to create HU spots .. and then back off the gas pedal regardless of holding .. there really isn't much that anyone can do to prevent these spots other than to apply some peer pressure. As experienced Players, we should be able to recognize the spots and then try to figure out how to take advantage of them. GL

So again, you are the one actually being extreme. I've played tons of poker, and only ever played with one player who only bet or raised the nuts, and the guy who organized the game estimated that guy lost at least $20K per year, so he's not exactly even an OMC. Even the people who most players would consider an OMC bet or call all the time with less than the nuts. Maybe only what they consider to be a strong hand, and maybe they don't bluff, but of course they bet less than the nuts.

Maybe you just thought these guys were OMCs, but they really were softplaying other regulars they were friendly with. Unless they treat a stranger the same as they do a regular, they are softplaying. Try playing at a table of players who are mostly regs, but they've never played with you before, and see if they check behind the second nuts on the river.