The Grandma dilemma: Debunking the myths

[Paddylad]

One ticket per IP isnt the whole answer but it can go a way to helping stamp out this disease. Yes I know you can get more Ips at the same address but it will make it harder for the "casual" multiaccounter. You will whittle the field down to determind cheaters. This issue wont be resolved by one big answer it will be a number of steps just as it is for the casinos to stop card counters, I dont see this as being any different, it will / could be an ever evolving battle with new steps to be taken but they need to happen or as stated earlier it will kill online poker.

Laters

Paddy

[sirio11]

To all:

Guys, I would appreciate if you limit to discuss in this thread the examples addressed and the validity of them. I wouldn't like them to be lost in yet another general discussion about cheating.

[Max Weinberg]

[ QUOTE ]
To all:

Guys, I would appreciate if you limit to discuss in this thread the examples addressed and the validity of them. I wouldn't like them to be lost in yet another general discussion about cheating.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think you can effectively quantify the odds on how much this impacts Joe Normal at the table (ie. 16:1 odds that "cheating" is happening). The benefit comes from being able to play ABC on one account, and go balls-out crazy on another, rolling the dice for a big stack or bust. I don't know how you can work in that to your simplified scenarios. And even if it's possible to accurately quantify how much cheating is going on, why does it even matter?

The solutions don't exist for this sort of thing, short of an idiot like JJ admitting that he did it on a public forum. In that case, you can email the poker room and they'll look into it. Banning multiple accounts from the same IP won't work, and will only hurt roommates who play.

In thirty minutes, you could have a farm of virtual machines with different IP and MAC addresses that are virtually untraceable, so all these debates on the ethics of the situation are pretty meaningless. Unethical? Yeah. Anything you can do about it? Nope.

[Exitonly]

[ QUOTE ]
The benefit comes from being able to play ABC on one account, and go balls-out crazy on another, rolling the dice for a big stack or bust.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

If he does this then he's winning less money than he would just playing one account in the tournament.

Sweet benifit.

[derosnec]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The benefit comes from being able to play ABC on one account, and go balls-out crazy on another, rolling the dice for a big stack or bust.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

If he does this then he's winning less money than he would just playing one account in the tournament.

Sweet benifit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, what's the benefit here? He can play crazy in a Saturday tournament and ABC in a Sunday tournament. To do so in the same tournament gives him no edge.

[rockin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To all:

Guys, I would appreciate if you limit to discuss in this thread the examples addressed and the validity of them. I wouldn't like them to be lost in yet another general discussion about cheating.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think you can effectively quantify the odds on how much this impacts Joe Normal at the table (ie. 16:1 odds that "cheating" is happening). The benefit comes from being able to play ABC on one account, and go balls-out crazy on another, rolling the dice for a big stack or bust. I don't know how you can work in that to your simplified scenarios. And even if it's possible to accurately quantify how much cheating is going on, why does it even matter?

The solutions don't exist for this sort of thing, short of an idiot like JJ admitting that he did it on a public forum. In that case, you can email the poker room and they'll look into it. Banning multiple accounts from the same IP won't work, and will only hurt roommates who play.

In thirty minutes, you could have a farm of virtual machines with different IP and MAC addresses that are virtually untraceable, so all these debates on the ethics of the situation are pretty meaningless. Unethical? Yeah. Anything you can do about it? Nope.

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't know why because of one article written, everyone assumes that if you play 2 accounts that one you would play LAG and the other TAG. This doesn't make sense. Why not play the style you are best at (most comftorable or experienced playing) for both accounts? I don't follow what benefit you would gain from confusing the crap out of yourself by playing 2 different styles on 2 different accounts, especially if you are better at 1 style than the other.

Sorry Sirio, one last off OP comment.

[locutus2002]

One ticket to what?

You don't know what you are talking about. Most ISP's NAT their user space so the source IP address does not uniquely distinguish a user, only an ISP: which in most cases is a University.

[Analyst]

[ QUOTE ]


i don't know why because of one article written, everyone assumes that if you play 2 accounts that one you would play LAG and the other TAG. This doesn't make sense. Why not play the style you are best at (most comftorable or experienced playing) for both accounts? I don't follow what benefit you would gain from confusing the crap out of yourself by playing 2 different styles on 2 different accounts, especially if you are better at 1 style than the other.


[/ QUOTE ]

Think Tiger Woods getting four shots off the tee. He can swing away looking for that 320-yard monster drive and not worry about a snap-hook out of bounds, knowing that his other "account" will safely put it 280-yards down the middle of the fairway.

[LearnedfromTV]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


i don't know why because of one article written, everyone assumes that if you play 2 accounts that one you would play LAG and the other TAG. This doesn't make sense. Why not play the style you are best at (most comftorable or experienced playing) for both accounts? I don't follow what benefit you would gain from confusing the crap out of yourself by playing 2 different styles on 2 different accounts, especially if you are better at 1 style than the other.


[/ QUOTE ]

Think Tiger Woods getting four shots off the tee. He can swing away looking for that 320-yard monster drive and not worry about a snap-hook out of bounds, knowing that his other "account" will safely put it 280-yards down the middle of the fairway.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're wrong. The difference is that in poker you are charged for each tee shot.

[Analyst]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


i don't know why because of one article written, everyone assumes that if you play 2 accounts that one you would play LAG and the other TAG. This doesn't make sense. Why not play the style you are best at (most comftorable or experienced playing) for both accounts? I don't follow what benefit you would gain from confusing the crap out of yourself by playing 2 different styles on 2 different accounts, especially if you are better at 1 style than the other.


[/ QUOTE ]

Think Tiger Woods getting four shots off the tee. He can swing away looking for that 320-yard monster drive and not worry about a snap-hook out of bounds, knowing that his other "account" will safely put it 280-yards down the middle of the fairway.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're wrong. The difference is that in poker you are charged for each tee shot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, the analogy holds. How much do you think Tiger Woods would win every year if he got 4 tee shots while everyone else got one? As much as he wins now, it would be a lot more.