It's pretty common to see people online berate a player they think is bad who happened to suck out and win the hand. This is a strategy that makes no sense - we should encourage bad players to stay in the game, not drive them away with insults. Some people just don't get it, though, and sometimes even well-meaning people lose their temper. I've had some times when it's been tough to hold my tongue after a bad beat, especially when it knocked me out of a tournament.
I was playing in a NLHE cash game recently that was a good example of why you want bad players around. The max buy-in was $100. I usually play a little lower, but this table looked really good. There were lots of players seeing the flop, and the one big stack left right after I arrived. I bought in for $100 and had everyone covered.
People seemed to be having fun at the table, which usually helps create action. Then suddenly one of the players started complaining about a hand that had happened before I arrived. This player was a short buyer - he had a small stack when I sat down, and even when he rebought it stayed small. That's usually a good clue that someone doesn't really understand the game.
Apparently the Short Buyer had played a hand with a bad player at the table earlier and had gotten busted. The Bad Player had seen the flop with a really junky hand, then he flopped a small pair and moved in. The Short Buyer called with two overcards, he missed and didn't catch up.
The Short Buyer proceeded to tell us how stupid the Bad Player had been to move in with rags, and what a bad beat he had taken. What seemed like an isolated comment or two at first started building into a tirade.
Now, the Bad Player was bad, don't get me wrong. I had only been there for a few minutes but I already had notes about a couple of crazy plays he had made, including a big bluff that got picked off. Since that setback he had gone on a bit of a run and built his stack up.
Some of the other players and I tried to reason with the Short Buyer and shut him up. I told him that he should be glad if someone else makes a bad call, and that if he's the best player he will get the money in the long run. I added that if losing that amount of money bothered him that much, he might want to move to a lower buy-in.
"You mean higher," he said, explaining that you see less crazy plays at the higher buy-ins. I told him that no, I did mean lower, that if losing a buy-in bothered him that much that he should be playing for less money. (Ironic, I know, since I was playing above my bankroll at the time. But I bought in for the max, and I wouldn't have freaked out if I had gotten busted once. I knew that was a risk I was taking.)
Finally I just got tired of the conversation and I muted the Short Buyer, who obviously didn't understand that you shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you.
A few minutes later I played a hand against the Bad Player that made me very glad the insults had not driven him away. I limped with T9s, he was the big blind and checked. The flop came TTA, I had flopped trips. There was $2.50 in the pot and he bet $5. I "thought" for a bit and called. The turn was a blank, he bet $5 again and I called.
The river was another blank and he bet another $5. I paused, but this time it wasn't an act. The fact that he was still betting the same amount was odd, he had just bet $5 into a pot of $22.50. It seemed like he actually wanted a call.
I had a good hand, but not the nuts. If he had AA I was toast. But he had been very aggressive with some bad hands, it was hard to imagine him not raising with AA. And the overbet on the flop didn't seem to fit, someone who flopped aces full would be a lot more likely to check. He could also have had AT or trips with a better kicker, but again, those are hands most people would play slower.
I thought I had the best hand, and I moved in for about $70. The Bad Player called pretty quickly and turned over AK. He had flopped two pair, and called off most of his stack after I smooth called him on the flop and turn. I had him covered by a bit so I busted him, and instead of rebuying he left immediately.
I resisted the temptation to tell the Short Buyer, "I told you so." Instead I made notes on both of them, and added the Bad Player to my list of people to look for in the future.
That's how you deal with bad players. If they get lucky you say, "Nice hand," and wait for an opportunity to bust them. It may not come that same session, but in the long run if you outplay people you will get the money, it's that simple. You need to remember that you're playing for the long run, don't let one bad beat throw you off your game. Hang in there and play smart.
Ted
I was playing in a low buy-in NL cash game recently when the following hand came up. I haven't looked at the history and can't remember the exact sequence, but there were a series of raises and re-raises pre-flop, until a player with KK made it about 30x the big blind. Another player moved in, the player holding KK called, and they played heads-up. Of course the player who moved in had AA and it held up.
Afterward something like this showed up in the chat box:
KK Player: Unreal! That's just my luck!
Another Player: Well, what hand did you put him on, the way he bet it?
KK Player: I had KK.
Of course that wasn't the question. This guy was playing his own hand, he liked his KK, and he hadn't put the other player on AA even when the other guy moved in after the pot had been re-raised several times. As someone watching I honestly wasn't sure which of the players had AA, but I was pretty convinced someone did.
Now, I'm not saying I could get away from KK in the same circumstance. There are some pretty bad players at that site, and some of them probably could have made that same play with a hand weaker than AA. But when you've made it 30x the big blind to go and someone raises you again, I think you have to at least consider that they have aces. It doesn't seem this player did.
Every bet that happened in that pre-flop sequence was more information the player with KK could have used to help define his opponent's hand. He had about a third of his stack in the pot, but he was not pot committed. If he could have layed it down there he would have saved the rest, instead of going into the hand a huge dog.
Ted