injustice, which is very famous is the collusion between players

Recently, I wrote about a rather quirky book, “Dirty Poker,” which is about cheating at the poker table. The author, Richard Marcus, admits to having cheated on poker and other games of chance, his career. Marcus describes various forms of cheating, the most famous of which is collusion between players.

In my column, I write about an occasion when I strongly believed that I had been duped by collusion between two opponents sitting to my left. Thinking about it, I have been wondering if fraud at the poker table could be considered cheating. Some people might think so.

First, let’s define “cheating.” According to Wikipedia: “Cheating is … generally used to break the rules to gain an unfair advantage in competitive situations. Visit BAMBUQQ.” This includes “acts of bribery, cronyism, nepotism, and any situation where an individual is given a preference using inappropriate criteria. Rules that are violated may be explicit, or they may be from unwritten codes of conduct based on morality, ethics or customs. “

On this basis, comparing fraudulent acts in poker with those of collusion and card marking, it seems clear that the various forms of fraud are not fraudulent. Bluffing, including using semi-bluffs and Esther Bluff tactics; slow play, trapping, and raising pay to build pots are all legal and acceptable at the poker table. And indeed, that’s part of the skill that makes a winner.

But what about corner shooting, which uses a variety of underhand methods, it’s unfair to take advantage of an opponent (especially an inexperienced one). The difference between an “angle shooter” and a “conman” is a matter of degree. What a cheat does is easily against the rules; Angle shooter action may be a little legal, but usually unethical or polite, nor in the spirit of the game.