Am I a nit??

mrsmith1976 said:
I think the stronger player trying to stong arm a weaker player into doubling the bet and getting pissy cuz he wouldn't go for the move is the nit.
It amazes me that when you go off you're a sucker and when you smart your a nit
I mean isn't the 'lose the first set and double the bet move' the oldest one in the books?? He offered to play him again and cuz the stronger player could man up and fight for his money I think he is nit.
Click to expand...

Not really, all you can do is end up with what you would have had if you won the first set then the guy will probably quit anyway so what is the point. You never let the other player get ahead if you can help it, you always make them chase their money if you can. If they quit then you were not going to win anything anyway. If they show some heart they will chase their money and you may make a score. In general, YOU NEVER WANT TO LET THE OTHER PLAYER GET YOU STUCK. That is just in the movies. The last thing you want to do is play against your own money and break even.
 
Last edited:
TommyT said:
Yesterday I played some one pocket a race to 3, 9-7 with a better player than I and happened to beat him. He wanted to double the bet and play again and I told him I would gladly give him a chance to win his money back playing with the same weight but if the bet doubles, I needed the breaks also.

That didn't go over with him very well and we never did play the second race, am I a nit or just smart.

TommyT
Click to expand...

No, you're not a nit. Just being smart. As the weaker player you are supposed to change/adjust the game if he wants to up the stakes, doesn't matter if you think the other guy was on the stall or not. It's your dough we're talking about here.
 
TommyT said:
Yesterday I played some one pocket a race to 3, 9-7 with a better player than I and happened to beat him. He wanted to double the bet and play again and I told him I would gladly give him a chance to win his money back playing with the same weight but if the bet doubles, I needed the breaks also.

That didn't go over with him very well and we never did play the second race, am I a nit or just smart.

TommyT
Click to expand...

The betting system he was trying to use against you is called a Martindale.

Just keep doubling the bet until he wins once. When he wins once, he stops playing. No matter how many times he loses, when he finally wins, he will always be up the amount of the original bet. Julius Caesar is known to have lost shitloads of money and property using the Martindale.

Example:
first bet - 5 bucks, he loses and is now down 5 bucks.
second bet - 10 bucks, he loses and is down 15 bucks.
third bet - 20 bucks, he loses and is down 35 bucks.
fourth bet - 40 bucks, he loses and is down 75 bucks.
fifth bet - 80 bucks, he wins and is now up 5 bucks.

It's an interesting system to use, but you must have a large bankroll because things can get out of hand fairly quickly.
 
Really you probably are not all that smart if you were matched up with-
1 A game you did not think you could win at.
2 Playing a opponent who would act like that.
3 You come on a public forum looking for re-assurance!:confused:
 
TX Poolnut said:
The betting system he was trying to use against you is called a Martindale.

Just keep doubling the bet until he wins once. When he wins once, he stops playing. No matter how many times he loses, when he finally wins, he will always be up the amount of the original bet. Julius Caesar is known to have lost shitloads of money and property using the Martindale.

Example:
first bet - 5 bucks, he loses and is now down 5 bucks.
second bet - 10 bucks, he loses and is down 15 bucks.
third bet - 20 bucks, he loses and is down 35 bucks.
fourth bet - 40 bucks, he loses and is down 75 bucks.
fifth bet - 80 bucks, he wins and is now up 5 bucks.

It's an interesting system to use, but you must have a large bankroll because things can get out of hand fairly quickly.
Click to expand...
The Martindale system is the reason casinos have limits. Once you win you bank your profit and return to the original bet. It doesn't really work in pool though because once you raise your bet in pool you don't go up and down. If you have the worst of it you will go broke to the better player. Unless of course you quit the first time you win.
 
I would have needed to have been there to see how you presented the offer to say if you are a nit or not.

It all depends on the presentation (IMO)

What I would have said is..."Let's play one more set for the same amount....If I win that....I will give you a chance at double or nothing"

I would not have even mentioned weight until after the next set....If I am winning...the word "weight" is not even in my vocabulary.........unless the losing end brings it up.....:wink:
 
TommyT said:
Yesterday I played some one pocket a race to 3, 9-7 with a better player than I and happened to beat him. He wanted to double the bet and play again and I told him I would gladly give him a chance to win his money back playing with the same weight but if the bet doubles, I needed the breaks also.

That didn't go over with him very well and we never did play the second race, am I a nit or just smart.

TommyT
Click to expand...

Both.

The first rule of playing for money is:
If you think you are in a 'fair' game - never change the game when
you are winning.

Your phrasing "happend to win" seems like you think you may actually
have the worst of the game.

If that is the case, never double up.

Dale
 
SKILLZELITE said:
That whole Nit bit is lame, your either playing for money or your not, if the action isnt set to someones liking all the sudden there a nit !?!
Thats nothing more than a poop flinging contest,grown men gossiping like old bitties about how it could ,would or should be. Get real:cool:
Click to expand...
:thumbup:...................
 
I think he has every right to adjust the spot if his opponent changes the bet. Especially after only one set where he wants to start doubling.

He would be a nit in the following circumstance:

IF He doesn't give his opponent another set, under the same bet and spot - so he has the opportunity to win his money back.

If the guy wanting to double the bet doesn't like the change to the spot - he should be told or made it known that the offer to play the same spot and bet is offered as an opportunity to win his money back. If that offer isn't on the table, then that would be nitty.


The player who lost the set should play another set or two all things the same. To show good faith in the process, at which point if he gets beat - he can legitimately ask for a change in the spot. Asking for a change in the bet is suspicious because the logical response to dealing with a loss when there is a weight is to adjust the weight- not up the bet. That only increases the risk for the player who has already lost the first set. They are risking more money on an unfavorable spot. That's why it seems like a hustle type move.

Now, if after a few sets the guy asks for a change in the weight - the other player should agree and, show good faith on their part and play a couple of sets (with the same bet) using the new weight. See how that goes. If that person still loses, nothing changes. This process continues if they both agree until weight is found that equalizes and makes for a good match up. If that person wins consistently. Then the other player has a right to stop without being nitty, since the other guy was given a chance to win money back and did, or that player can ask to adjust the weight again, maybe to something between the previous two spots. Find a proper weight balance between the players.


This assumes the intent of those involved is to gamble. Rather than hustle. Two very different things.


By asking for more weight, he effectively stuffed the other guy's potential hustle. By asking for higher stakes, he would have to pay for the higher stakes in the form of a change in weight. From the perspective of that player, if he is not trying to make a move with doubling the bet - it may very well seem extremely nitty. But how can his opponent possibly know what his intents are? To be fair, the common thing to do is to play more sets of the existing race, or adjust the weight - not the bet. And give the opponent opportunities to win their money back. You win only when the other guy quits. If you run away, you're a nit.


Just my $0.02
 
macguy said:
The Martindale system is the reason casinos have limits. Once you win you bank your profit and return to the original bet. It doesn't really work in pool though because once you raise your bet in pool you don't go up and down. If you have the worst of it you will go broke to the better player. Unless of course you quit the first time you win.
Click to expand...

Yup. The worst part about the Martindale is that you have to bet all that money just to get back above water. Like I said, it can get way out of hand very quickly.

Quitting the first time you win is the only solution. Eventually, you will go on a run of bad rolls and the Martindale will break your wallet.
 
BRKNRUN said:
...
It all depends on the presentation (IMO)

What I would have said is..."Let's play one more set for the same amount....If I win that....I will give you a chance at double or nothing"
Click to expand...

So now he has to win 3 sets in a row against a better player? I guess stranger things have happened...

But really, this game is getting worse every time I turn around.
 
TX Poolnut said:
Yup. The worst part about the Martindale is that you have to bet all that money just to get back above water. Like I said, it can get way out of hand very quickly.

Quitting the first time you win is the only solution. Eventually, you will go on a run of bad rolls and the Martindale will break your wallet.
Click to expand...
Actually it would take a pretty good run of bad luck if you stay with games where the odds are only slightly against you such a red or black on a roulette wheel. You will certainly win in a short enough time to not go broke and then you readjust your bet. You would have to be betting well below the house limit though to assure yourself of enough bets to win. Playing so cheap it is hard to win much but you will win. My wife plays a similar system of bet adjustment at the crap table and if she sits there for 8 or 10 hours she will walk away with a profit. The problem is, it is hard to stay with such a system it is so boring and you will inevitably start to bet different trying to win faster. Although it works it's like a job. "And", My wife can have a run of very bad luck that can wipe out a dozen hours of earnings quickly. You have an edge but only slightly and you must not vary what you are doing. Best bet in the world, "Call it, heads or tails".
 
Last edited:
How about this? :grin:
 

Attachments

  • nit.jpg
    nit.jpg
    23.2 KB · Views: 138
Comment

I would say you were smart. Playing against a better player, and 9-7 isn't much of a spot. You never did say how much you were playing for?
$20 one pocket is a pretty cheap game, $50 a game is a good game.

I am not one to be adjusting the game often when I play someone, after all, the game was negotiated to begin with, and agreed to by both parties, and I am not trying to get to the 'middle'. I want the game to my advantage always, if I can. There is a difference between being a smart gambler as opposed to being a smart player.
 
Like I said not changing the bet isn't nitty. Asking for more weight while winning is most certainly nitty. The short and simple answer was to say no keep the game the way it is. Thats it ...thats all. Asking for more weight when you are up is simply unacceptable.
 
Black-Balled said:
So now he has to win 3 sets in a row against a better player? I guess stranger things have happened...

But really, this game is getting worse every time I turn around.
Click to expand...



LOLOLOL.......

Ummmmm....if you want to get the money when gambling...you have to win the games....You don't get to lose 3 games and take home the money....:wink:

He already won the first set....Why on earth would he need to adjust to play the next set for the same amount????

If he loses the second set....he is even and can re-evaluate if he feels the spot is right.

If he wins the second set....he has now won two sets with whatever spot was agreed upon......He has to feel like he "can" win with that spot....(since he just won two sets).....Now is the time that he can go for the score by doubling the bet (in the 3 set).

IF he loses the third set...he is back to even and can re-evaluate if he feels like he is being hustled or the spot is not right....he can either adjust or get out of the game clean.

IF he wins the third set....he is now on his way to making a score...or at worst break even if they decide to keep doubling the bet.

At minimum he has this "better" player re-evaluating his own position on the game.

How hard is this to figure out?

I am NEVER going to let the "better" player (that is down) jack the bet so much that he can win more in one set than he is down.

Call it the "hustle stopper" .....:wink:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top