The Grandma dilemma: Debunking the myths

[locutus2002]

It's likely that money making endeavors happen at ALL levels of the game. It's profit maximizing.

Sirio's estimates are probably way off, because a decent player is likely to last through the first break at which point the field size is cut in half.

He doesn't talk about the value of additional information at a table. With two hands it should be fairly easy to amass a huge chip stack simply by limping the nuts and raising with the shill hand, as well as additional information on complicated flops including nut cards discarded, suits, key cards. This is most damaging on deep stack tournaments, and will mess with other players reads.


The most profitable events from an ROI are going to be the smaller ones.

I am now wondering why I see the same names on the final tables of the stars 55K. Come to find out many of these players are multiaccounting, and I wouldn't put it past any of them to share key card info with their friends, at someone elses expense.

You help me build a big stack, I'll help you.

There is always HU.

[Clayton]

David,

By my own math in the Party 500k the odds of cheating or getting another grandma in your tournament is approximately 1 in 81.5 tournaments, or once every 19 months. This is assuming a constant tournament field size of 3500. Should the field size increase then the likelyhood could jump up to 90 or higher.

The odds of this happening increases when you throw in the Bodog 100k, the Stars big tournies, etc.

If my math is wrong, someone please correct it. I am about to sleep.

[shag]

im gonna get you get you getyou drunk. get you love drunk off my hump. my hump my hump my hump my hump. my hump. my little lump.

superb. vagina gina china men get those dumb cheaters out of this country!

seriously though. I get sick to my stomach when i replay hands and it would make perfect sense if there was the same person playing twice at my table. It happens a lot and the actual self knowing cheaters will target the smaller fields on sites like pokerroom so they can be at the same table regualarly. check it bitch

[fiskebent]

One ticket per IP address

[LearnedfromTV]

Doesn't the software prevent accounts from the same IP from being at the same table until necessary (i.e. until the final table)? I had been operating under this assumption. This makes a huge difference, clearly.

For the record, I don't like multiaccounting, but my main issue with it is the collusion possibility, not the multiple shots at one tournament possibility, so if I am wrong and Sirio's math is correct (of course, the math is correct, the question is whether his assumption that clones can randomly be assigned to the same starting table, etc. is correct.), then I have a bigger problem with this than I would otherwise.

Regardless, the toughest thing is that these rules are basically unenforcebable, as long as a blanket one-account-per-IP rule is justifiably absent.

[odellthurman]

Here is an excellent article by gank, in which he takes a stand against the Grandma issue, without calling JJProdigy out by name. As he correctly points out, it's about growing the online community. JJProdigy's actions increase skepticism about the fairness of online poker, and I believe such actions will work to decrease the popularity of online poker. This will hurt all of us.

http://pokertrails.com/articles/multiaccount.php

[rockin]

[ QUOTE ]
One ticket per IP address

[/ QUOTE ]

as i pointed out yesterday, this will not deter this from happening, you can have more than 1 IP address at the same street address.

[Exitonly]

Am i the only one not understand the 'edge' he's talking about?

Plyaing recklessly in one because you can play tight in the other is not an edge... thats just pissing away EV.

I don't see the possible edge this could have, unless a) they both make it aroudun to bubble time b) they are ever at the same table.
---


This isn't to say i dont think it's cheating, or that it's not a big deal, just it doesn't give them an extra edge. Until they are at the same table, or maybe if they both get to the bubble, it's the same thing as them playing the tournament on two seperate occasions.

[rockin]

[ QUOTE ]
Am i the only one not understand the 'edge' he's talking about?

Plyaing recklessly in one because you can play tight in the other is not an edge... thats just pissing away EV.

I don't see the possible edge this could have, unless a) they both make it aroudun to bubble time b) they are ever at the same table.
---


This isn't to say i dont think it's cheating, or that it's not a big deal, just it doesn't give them an extra edge. Until they are at the same table, or maybe if they both get to the bubble, it's the same thing as them playing the tournament on two seperate occasions.

[/ QUOTE ]

how about negating some of the "variance" by getting 2 chances to FT a tourny. and of course the possibility that you end up at the same table.

[Jason Strasser (strassa2)]

Sirio,

You seem to think very clearly and present your thoughts very well when dealing with this math problem and those numbers are very telling.

I have done things like this, though:

- I'm on the bus on the way home, and I look at my watch and whoa its 4:15pm on sunday. I call a friend and ask him to log on and play the first hour of the sunday tourneys for me until I get back.

- My friend gets deep in a tourney and says, "strass, come help me out". So I go over to his room and talk with him as he plays.

- Friend calls me up: "crap I'm deep in xyz tourney and have to go, can you play for xx%?"

- This happened once: "Yo strass, I can never win a double shootout on stars, they are rigged. I want to go to the bahamas." So, with him in the room, I played a shootout and got lucky and won him a seat to the WPT.

I'm curious how terrible these things are. I always felt like I haven't crossed the line, but maybe I have.
-Jason