Bingo Players Should Not Be Banned


I have one small observation to make about the way the discussion has been going in this thread:

The majority of those who came to defend bingo players have said that they have never seen or experienced the behavior in question.
So I guess my question is, why defend something you have never experienced so strongly? It’s one thing to have opinions and theories about something, and another thing to experience it. Maybe the experience would change your mind, and maybe it wouldn’t, but it’s always good to keep an open mind, especially about things that are yet to be experienced. Just saying :slight_smile:


Well, if you do not like the all in play…perhaps you should play limit games because they have a rule against going all in…:slight_smile:


Who said we don’t like the all in play? I personally hate the fixed limit games and prefer the NL by far. Never said I didn’t like the all in play. Just a very specific very rare and very annoying type of play explained in earlier posts. I do want the option to go all in preflop whether for me or others to use, but not to abuse, that’s all :wink:


I am not a great expert of saints. So I googled “Patron saint of patience”, and I expected the result to be “Saint Maya”, but no, apparently there was an older one.
Poor Maya, I don’t know how many times you have explained the same ELEMENTARY concept, again and again, and you keep getting irrelevant responses about something completely different.
You have all my support. :slight_smile:


'Cause I might like it?
'Cause I have enough heartburn from malcontents running around trying to change the rules to suit their lives here in California?
'Cause daddy taught me to go out and do my best and not complain when I didn’t win.
'Cause I’m a conservative, white, male, baby boomer who is apparently the cause of all the problems in the world.
And lastly 'cause I have little respect for folks who want to change the rules in the middle of the game. That’s my definition of cheating.
I mean this most respectfully and though I know it won’t change your mind maybe it’ll give you a little insight into why I won’t change mine either. :v:


Please let me refer you to miri’s post:

And mostly because I never said I wanted to change any rules, did I??


So I didn’t answer your question, or you just didn’t get the answer you were hoping for?
Maybe it was rhetorically and you really didn’t want any answer.


That’s your answer to my question? :joy:


Yeah, that was part of it. :wink:


Maybe he was on a hot streak and had pocket aces 30 times in a row…




Speaking just for myself, if something is a problem, but that problem has never been observed in over 10,000 hands played on RPP, then I’m going to venture to say that it’s not a very prevalent problem.

But because I know that humans are prone to hyperbole, I can read the claim as being not literally all-in preflop every hand, and be more inclusive to talk about strategies where shoving pre-flop is an integral part of their strategy, and they do it more often than most players do, and may include a lot of post-flop shoving as well.

I have to differentiate between someone who literally shoves all-in preflop every hand, and someone who frequently shoves.

Because I have been at tables where a player would shove frequently, even preflop, but even they would fold their cards some hands. If someone wants to play like that, I think it’s a strategy. An honest to gersh strategy. It’s not easy to beat someone who plays so aggressively. But I do see a lot of idiot shoves, particularly in the opening phase of a tournament, or in ring games

I usually laugh at them when they buy the 15/30 blinds and show AA, because they just got terrible value for their premium pair.

It can be annoying to have to fold a hand like KT-suited because someone decided to shove before the flop, and I’m not going to call with those cards. But I don’t know what they’re holding:

  • Maybe they DO hold AA, and just saved me a bunch of chips. If so, thanks for making it so obvious.
  • Maybe they’re holding 3-4 offsuit in the Big Blind, and are defending their blind with an imposing bluff. Bluffing is part of the game. If you have a read on someone and can guess that they are likely bluffing, and you have playable cards, you can beat them. Or if you’re holding premium cards, you can beat them. But it’s risky. To play NLHE, you need to be able to embrace risk.

I’ve shoved with garbage when the blinds were big enough and my stack short enough that I couldn’t afford to lose it, and couldn’t expect to win the hand with the cards I was dealt, and it’s a big gamble if someone does call me, I’m likely out of the tournament. But close to the bubble, everyone’s playing tight, if my stack’s big enough to intimidate players, or the big stacks at the table folded already, I can get away with it. See, there’s a lot of thought going into the decision, which means it’s strategy.

Usually I don’t shove; most of the time I can accomplish the same thing with a big enough bet, holding something back. And something about the all-in bet seems to induce people to call more, especially if you’re over-using it. If I’m betting to get everyone to fold, that’s the opposite of what I want, and then my tournament life is on the line. So for me it’s bad strategy to shove too much.

But I can see other people using it effectively, if they know what they’re doing.

You live by the shove, you die by the shove. It’s not something everyone can do. But just because someone does it, even if they do it a lot, doesn’t mean that they should be prevented from playing that way, whether by social pressure or appealing to the referees. It’s within the rules, and people should be allowed to play their game.


I understand your point of view and respect your opinion.


Maybe it’s a ring game thing. At low stakes ring I see it maybe once in every three or four sessions. Less often at higher stakes.


How lucky can one player get he has to lose on some of those hands if he has callers. :slight_smile:


Agreed, I do think it’s more of a RG thing. In mid-stakes RG play, people often buy in at 125,000 chips on a 1000/2000 table, and immediately raise 15x-30x BB. I’ve played there and won chips, but it’s mostly folding all day long waiting for Aces, and I don’t get to play a lot of cards that I otherwise would.

Rather than complain about it, I recognize why it happens, the buy-in stacks are too large relative to the blinds, the blinds never raise because it’s an RG, and players get bored, so they start betting big chunks of their stack in order to pull in a lot of chips in as few hands as possible. If they lose, they can re-buy and keep playing, so the threat of losing all their chips doesn’t seem to bother them.

And those are the factors that make that style of play prevalent. The noteworthy observation here is that you can control the behavior through the structure of the game, and you don’t need to rely on a sympathetic moderator being around who will take your side if you raise a fuss over it.

But even there, it’s not one player preflop shoving every single hand. It’s more like out of 9 players, someone’s likely to have a hand that they’ll be willing to bet 20-30x BB preflop, and take the hand all-in by the river.

I don’t play there as much. I’ve played them and won big, I’ve played them and lost big. But mostly, if I’m patient, I can win. I bleed blinds for several orbits until I get something playable, then I do the same thing they’re doing, and bet it big, or I call someone who bet big ahead of me, and trap them. If I lose 4-5 SNG tables in a row, I can pop over to a ring game, sit down for 5-60 minutes, and win all my buy-ins back in one hand. But I just prefer a style of game where I can be more engaged, by which I mean play more hands.


For those who want bingo players banned, how many all ins are allowed exactly?


@ZZ_Tilt I don’t think anyone in this thread said they wanted bingo players banned. I could be wrong, but I’m almost certain nobody wants them banned.


It’s a matter of principal. I’m not defending bingo play specifically, I’m defending the right to play as one wishes generally.

Does the fact that I have never been the victim of domestic abuse stop me from speaking out in defense of those who have?

Does the fact that I have never been sent to the Gulag for political speech stop me from speaking out in defense of those who have?

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill


You’re not though. You’re defending the abuser. :wink: