[UW85]

Originally Posted by jojobinks

hrm. in a friendly home game, okay. but in a competitive environment, the name of the game is to win, yes? do you think it's wrong for in the ncaa to stall with a 10 point lead and 90 seconds left? or in the NFL for a team to kneel and run out the clock? the spirit of the game to win within the rules. the governing bodies can then make rules if loopholes are particularly egregious. the ncaa put in a shot clock to keep stalling to the minimum, and so now stalling is harder to do. but sitting out is legal in poker, and so it's okay right?

PLUS, and let's not forget, it's not EV+ for the player sitting out. unlike in basketball, where stalling can win you the game, sitting out of a tournament can NEVER win for you...unless you consider sneaking into the money a win.

Jojo -- I'm ASSuming a friendly game. If it's a casino, or something like that, OK, I'll give you that. As for my "stall" analogy, you're a bit young to remember this, but there were teams that literally got a lead early on, say 8 pts to 2pts,against a much stronger team and they'd stall out for 3 quarters. That is where I was coming from -- I do understand a team that's in the lead and there is little time on the clock slows down it's play -- that's good play for sure.

More stupidity showing -- what's EV+? (even or better?)

[jojobinks]

Originally Posted by UW85

Jojo -- I'm ASSuming a friendly game. If it's a casino, or something like that, OK, I'll give you that. As for my "stall" analogy, you're a bit young to remember this, but there were teams that literally got a lead early on, say 8 pts to 2pts,against a much stronger team and they'd stall out for 3 quarters. That is where I was coming from -- I do understand a team that's in the lead and there is little time on the clock slows down it's play -- that's good play for sure.

More stupidity showing -- what's EV+? (even or better?)

expected value. linky dink cliff notes: what a given play should be "worth" over the long run.

[abby99]

In a SnG that I played in recently, I found myself third in chips with four remaining, well behind the two chip leaders but a little ahead of somebody who had built up a stack but had been sitting out for several levels. I folded everything until that player was blinded out, letting the two big stacks go at each other. None of my hands were that great anyway (no top 10 hands), but I knew that it would bother me to bubble behind somebody who wasn't even playing.

I don't think it's an etiquette issue, but other players do have to be aware of the change in the dynamics of the table and adjust accordingly.

[Irish Se7en]

Originally Posted by TheMightyJim2k

when people make -EV decisions that give me a better chance of make $$$ I usually don't get too upset. Dead money in lots of pots, and one less hand to fade every time you try to steal. that sure does suck!

so basically the guy with the big stack who has the most options and is one of the biggest threats to your tourney has decided to go ultra-weak-tight (ie not play any hands) and you are complaining? I guess I just don't get it.....

I have to agree with JM2k as I don't have an issue with someone who wants to sit out. It's one less player and another blind to steal without a fight.


Irish

[dad604]

In any tourney, you pay your money, you should be able to do what you want, as long as there is no colluding!! Therefore I think it is ok for the player to sit out and I think most sites will fold his hands right away if he is sitting out and not delaying the game.