[bobbywaves]

For the players with a top 20 seat already locked up, is it ethical to play these last 5 daily tourney's & basically steal pts that other players desperately need to qualify?

[cincinnatikid513]

how many dumb questions are you going to ask today

[bobbywaves]

how many dumb questions are you going to ask today

Haven't asked a dumb question yet, what are you referring to?

The results of this poll may play a huge factor in deciding if I register for this weeks tourney's, or sit out & give my extra qualifying pts to someone who desperately needs them, like you.

Your poor attitude is not helping to sway my vote.

[209 Life]

I voted fukk everyone, play when you want

[blankoblanco]

Of course you should play if you want to play. This ain't the WSOP main event, bro. Nobody cares

You're not even stealing points directly from any particular person if you're already ahead so the logic makes no sense

[snapperman2]

By playing you don't deprive anyone of a seat. If you already have a top 20 seat locked up, the same number of other people will qualify whether you play or not. The only thing you can do is influence who gets a seat by who you gain chips from or lose your chips to. You also make it slightly harder for others to gain points by playing, and thus help players who need to preserve their current ranking while hurting those that need to improve their ranking.

[chico2663]

bobbo has i said the other day. if i make top 20 good for me. But at no point do i want a participation trophy. So if you beat me to keep me out. my bad luck.

[bobbywaves]

Point being...there's no question if the top 15 continue playing this week their cashes are taking away qualifying pts from other players who could benefit. Via making top 100, top 50, or winning a guaranteed top 20 seat with those pts. When otherwise they wouldn't move up.

I agree, I'm too nice by even entertaining the thought of helping others qualify.

[snapperman2]

You're not too nice. That's for sure. Anyway, by refusing to play you would be hurting those players who are currently in the top 100, top 50 or top 20 but are in danger of being toppled by players behind them.

[Crusherrr]

You're not too nice. That's for sure. Anyway, by refusing to play you would be hurting those players who are currently in the top 100, top 50 or top 20 but are in danger of being toppled by players behind them.

This. It's more ethical to play than not play if you would have anyways.

[bobbywaves]

You're not too nice. That's for sure.

Much nicer than you, that's for sure.

How can you not pity pathetic chumps like CincyKid & Ochronico, who won't make top 100 when top players are taking their qualifying pts unnecessarily with a seat already locked up?

[Chipup]

Much nicer than you, that's for sure.

How can you not pity pathetic chumps like CincyKid & Ochronico, who won't make top 100 when top players are taking their qualifying pts unnecessarily with a seat already locked up?

Ethically your playing is fine. You have no control on the hands that are dealt or whom plays them how. So by not playing you can't help or improve the chances/ability of those on the different teir's bubbles. Now it most definitely would be kind of you to allow less skilled players to face a easier field. But you didn't ask was it kind of you, you asked about the ethics.

I mean the entire basis of poker is to exploit weaker players inability to make good decisions.

[chico2663]

bobbo you are alright by me. You and rawley eastwick are my favorite guys from new jersey. J.j. suxs