I went into a casino today and saw (in my opinion) some pretty shocking behaviour. There were 2 games running, a full 1/2 and a 3 handed 2/5. I pull out 1k and try to sit down at the 2/5 - only to be told that I can't play by one of the regs as it's a "private game." I'm a good player (but not a professional) and the 2 regulars (who may or may not be professionals) I recognise at the table know this.

I enquire with a relatively inexperienced floor and don't manage to get anywhere. At first I didn't jump to conclusions, as these guys could know this random player at the table and be hosting/entertaining him. However, it became apparent that he was a random and a huge whale, that spoke very little English and probably had no idea what was going on.

After the whale got stacked, he went to reload and the 2 regulars immediately stopped playing. They even got up to spy on him and make sure he was going to the cash machine. I called them out on this and they started playing (briefly) - open folding every hand for 6 hands before getting bored and giving up.

I told the 2 regulars when the whale was reloading (and away from the table) that what they were doing was "disgraceful." One of then got very defensive and started verbally abusing me.

Was their behaviour "disgraceful," or am I over reacting? I'd be interested to hear other people's opinions on this. Thanks.

You "called someone out" from the rail? You shouldn't do that.

The regulars' behavior wasn't ideal, but unless the "whale" noticed I don't see how it's harming anyone. Players who sit out or fold every hand while at the table are obnoxious, but unless it's a mixed game there's really not too much anyone can do about it.

The players are going to take whatever opportunities they are allowed to take by the poker room. It's not "honorable" in your eyes, but it's a fact.

If the circumstances are as you say and it wasn't the whale requesting a 3-handed game, then it is the poker room (or floor staff) that is being disgraceful by allowing the regs to shut out other players.

Typically I'd agree that the floor staff are at fault, but the regs were taking advantage of their inexperience. I don't see how (practically) colluding against a vulnerable and inexperienced player is good for the game. He will probably not come back to a live poker room in a hurry.

Who said it was good for the game?

I'll take advantage of an opportunity as much as the next person, but I have a vested interest in the long term prosperity of live poker. Events like this are bad for it.

Everyone has a line which they think is morally wrong to cross and everyone's line is different, which is why I thought this would be an interesting thread. Thanks for the contributions.

You have not offered any proof that they were cheating him

You act like if you were allowed to sit in the game, the novice would have had a better chance. Interesting.

There was a queue of at least 3 players. No proof of cheating and no way of knowing for sure.

The 2 regs were friends and calling all the shots aggressively without consulting the whale.

I don't think what they did was wrong. It's no different that playing against any other novice. Them crowding you or any other player out was inappropriate. The floor should have let anyone play in the game.

I'm more shocked that you listened to the reg. Unless the 2/5 game was marked as "3-max" I'm the 4th guy at the table until I hear otherwise from the floor.

Sounds like you got bluffed before you even got dealt in.

This obviously. A ****ing player telling me I cant sit. Sure, a 3 handed "private" 2-5 in what sounds like a place in the middle of nowhere.

I.e. The floor allow and enforce the made up ruling

Middle of London

Then why the hell are you blaming the regs? The floor effectively certified it as a private or three-max game. lol what does it even mean that the floor didn't "manage to get anywhere"? Did he or she just shrug and say "Welp, I tried to reason with them"?

Oh.

So if I punch someone in the poker room because I don't like them, it's absolutely fine if the poker room allow and enforce it?

I'm not convinced the players are blameless here.

Where was the game? If it was just a standard London casino like the vic, hippo or empire then I highly doubt it was a private game. Prob just the floor is friendly with the regs and wants to keep them happy. Ask to speak a manager. I wouldn't call their behaviour "disgraceful" more like predatory, it's prob not good for them to behave like that long term, but they obv just wanted to maximize their short term ev.

Yes, we all condone random illegal violence. Ugh.

Where did anyone say what the other players did is ok?

1. Comparing apples and screwdrivers

2. You should have demanded that you be allowed to play or else take the Floor's name and employee/badge number and tell him you will file a complaint with the management and/or gaming regulators

3. If you really were looking out for the novice, you would be arguing that the House should have barred him, to prevent him from loosing his money. Instead you are arguing for nothing else than increasing the size of the wolf pack that would devour the prey.

This should be irrelevant what I'm about to say, but just in case you feel morally obliged to stick up for these live regs - they aren't the professional, committed and humble sort that you often see. They are the lazy, obnoxious with a pretty poor game kind.

You could do 2 as Angus suggests above.

Far better imo is to look at your own "soft skills" and see if you could improve them. It's not uncommon to come across games where regs are reluctant to let other competent players in because they want to cannibalise the whale. If you're friendly with other regs and behave in a fun & friendly manner at the table, then normally you get into the game. If that doesn't work then yeah, just demand to play!

It was one of the above but I won't say any more than that. I think your choice of words is bang on. Predatory rather than disgraceful. I was probably a little tilted after being asked "who I was" and called a d**k; and exaggerated a little. Like it matters who I am?

mjm good point, there is definite value there. These 2 aren't the sort of people you want to be friends with, you'll just have to take that from me.

I should have tried the softer approach with the whale instead of aiming my efforts at the regs.

Why not just find another open friendly table/room and play some cards? I don't get the moral outrage your posts are full of.

Easy in some cities Bene, not in London

Sounds like you are jealous of them being in a good game.

How do you know the "whale" didn't know what was going on?

How do you know he didn't tell them earlier he only wanted to play with them 2?

What gives you the right to decide the rules in a privately owned business?

Who are you?

LOL at them not being people you want to be friends with because they wouldn't let you sit in a poker game. That was the only reason you came to that conclusion right? Maybe they judged you by appearance and thought you were a douche bag and didn't want to play with a douche bag.