Is REVERSE BANKROLLING unethical?
I'm not going to name names but certain players on here think they're studs and constantly try to bankroll you, meaning they will either sit at a table with over the max buy in and wait for players, or they constantly rebuy to keep from busting out, staying at least even with you and pushing you around until you get unlucky.
In order to combat this, is it unethical to min buy in and double or triple up, then move to another table and play them with another min buy in and win, then move to another table or move back to the original table 30 minutes later with a min buy in so they can't just add on and match ur stack then push u around?
Think of these bankrollers as Wal-Mart and reverse bankrollers as mom and pop stores. We can't possibly compete with their volume so we have to pick our spots and find our niches.
In order to combat this, is it unethical to min buy in and double or triple up, then move to another table and play them with another min buy in and win, then move to another table or move back to the original table 30 minutes later with a min buy in so they can't just add on and match ur stack then push u around?
Think of these bankrollers as Wal-Mart and reverse bankrollers as mom and pop stores. We can't possibly compete with their volume so we have to pick our spots and find our niches.
The problem with that analogy is that Wal-Mart is putting the mom and pop stores out of business. Why don't we combat it by not playing at a stake that's over our head? What does it matter that he's sitting at 200bb or keeps rebuying? You buy in for the max you're still playing 100bb poker. If it gets too deep for your liking, bank it. If it's about roll over and can't buy in for the max, do whatever you want with it. Who cares about ethics in poker as long as it's in the rules?
