Is player A a nit if...

C

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
fan-tum said:
he wins 3 sets, $20 a set. Player B wants to play one more set for $80, but A will only play for $60. B calls A a nit.
Click to expand...
Regardless of how much $ the sets are for, player A is being more than fair to go double or nothing on the final set. A number of players wouldn’t even be willing to do that. Many players feel you can win it back the same way you lost it - one set at a time for the same $ stakes.

I’ve seen a player in here in a similar situation, get three sets up and then tell their opponent they are done, and then ask that same player who is down if they’d like to play some just for fun. I’m not kidding!
 
C

canwin

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
haystj said:
Not so fast....


Here is the math:

Player A agrees to play for 20 a set------ no nit here.

Player A does not quit when up 3 sets--------- no nit here

Player A agrees to play another set for 60--------- no nit here

Player A does not agree to up the bet------ no nit here

If Player A got up 60 and then outright quits and refuses to play more---- that IS a nit move.

I have a question for anyone who thinks A is a nit for not wanting to up the bet.

Would you still consider Player A to be a nit if B wanted to play a set for $800 and
A declined?
Click to expand...

Player A got ahead then stopped gambling and wanted to play with no pressure and put all the pressure on player B = nit move IMO. Player B still wanted to gamble by wanting to put a tiny amount of pressure on A..nothing wrong with that
 
Patrick Johnson

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
haystj said:
I think the "point" of gambling is taking an exciting chance of winning or losing.

If the only point was to get the cash then it would be robbing or stealing.

giving someone a chance (if they want it) to get back to even is considered good sportsmanship,,,
Click to expand...
Maybe I just don't get it because I don't do it ("gamble" at pool).

Carry on...

pj
chgo
 
tucson9ball

tucson9ball

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
fan-tum said:
he wins 3 sets, $20 a set. Player B wants to play one more set for $80, but A will only play for $60. B calls A a nit.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of years ago....this guy always wanted to play double or nothing once he was down $50 or so. Eventually he would win a game and then quit....
Why play a guy all night and be up $100 or even $200, just to lose it all in 1 game? Makes no sense.
So, I would say Player A is not a NIT
 
PoolBum

PoolBum

Ace in the side.
Silver Member
I believe the old-school definition of a nit was anyone not willing to risk going flat broke.
 
Coos Cues

Coos Cues

Coos Cues
fan-tum said:
he wins 3 sets, $20 a set. Player B wants to play one more set for $80, but A will only play for $60. B calls A a nit.
Click to expand...

Totally up to player A. You dig a hole with a shovel I'll decide whether to let you attempt to fill it in with heavy equipment or not. Don't like the game pull up loser. It's not like A is quitting winner.
 
jimmyg

jimmyg

Mook! What's a Mook?
Silver Member
canwin said:
Player A got ahead then stopped gambling and wanted to play with no pressure and put all the pressure on player B = nit move IMO. Player B still wanted to gamble by wanting to put a tiny amount of pressure on A..nothing wrong with that
Click to expand...

Putting it that way, it does seem to make some sense. :smile:

Nothing with that at all...and nothing wrong with player A rejecting and counter-offering either.
 
Last edited:
Johnny Rosato

Johnny Rosato

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
haystj said:
Not so fast....


Here is the math:

Player A agrees to play for 20 a set------ no nit here.

Player A does not quit when up 3 sets--------- no nit here

Player A agrees to play another set for 60--------- no nit here

Player A does not agree to up the bet------ no nit here

If Player A got up 60 and then outright quits and refuses to play more---- that IS a nit move.

I have a question for anyone who thinks A is a nit for not wanting to up the bet.

Would you still consider Player A to be a nit if B wanted to play a set for $800 and
A declined?
Click to expand...
I think the nit pickers on here would spell this one with uppercase letters - NIT
 
C

canwin

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
jimmyg said:
Putting it that way, it does seem to make some sense. :smile:

Nothing with that at all...and nothing wrong with player A rejecting and counter-offering either.
Click to expand...

Glad to know someone can make some sense out of it. I think A wanted to quit actually because 20 wasnt all that much more. I dont know what really transpired but let's just agree it was a borderline nit thing
 
jimmyg

jimmyg

Mook! What's a Mook?
Silver Member
Originally Posted by jimmyg View Post
Putting it that way, it does seem to make some sense.

Nothing wrong with that at all...and nothing wrong with player A rejecting and counter-offering either.
Click to expand...

canwin said:
Glad to know someone can make some sense out of it. I think A wanted to quit actually because 20 wasnt all that much more. I dont know what really transpired but let's just agree it was a borderline nit thing
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not saying it was a borderline nit move for A....just saying that I understand B's reasoning...but neither one was being a nit or a$$hole. Each had a right to do/ask as he pleased and the other had a right to accept or refuse...that's life.
 
C

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
fan-tum said:
he wins 3 sets, $20 a set. Player B wants to play one more set for $80, but A will only play for $60. B calls A a nit.
Click to expand...
I think an important factor here that no one has mentioned is whether this matchup is between two regular players in a pool room that could easily resume their session on another day, or is it between 2 players that are not likely to ever have an opportunity to match up again anytime soon? This can make a huge difference in what many here would consider as appropriate gambling etiquette, if there is such a thing.
 
Last edited:
T

Thecoats

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
fan-tum said:
he wins 3 sets, $20 a set. Player B wants to play one more set for $80, but A will only play for $60. B calls A a nit.
Click to expand...

Player A is not a nit for wanting to bet $60, he is a nit for not offering to bet $160. He obviously has the nuts on player B.:grin::grin::grin::grin:
 
B

Banger

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
fan-tum said:
he wins 3 sets, $20 a set. Player B wants to play one more set for $80, but A will only play for $60. B calls A a nit.
Click to expand...
I don't gamble on pool, so I'm curious about this.

If player A wins 3 out of 4 sets, and ends up a $20 loser, wouldn't that make him a dumb ass? I mean, isn't that called "getting hustled"?
 
MattPoland

MattPoland

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
If one has more gamble than the other, any failure to live up to the highest uncommon numerator will be considered a nit move by the bigger gambler.

It’s all relative.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top