Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

Is it unethical if one guy uses a HUD and the other guy doesn't?

Seriously, this is the worst thread ever; not surprised to see it was started buy a guy who reg'd less than a week ago.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

I think 3 great players, all of varying styles, would actually add more confusion than help in a game with a very finite amount of time to make decisions.

However, if they switched off playing (one for 10 hands, then the other, then the other) that would an absolute nightmare.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

cts has never ever conferenced about a hand - when he stayed w us this summer he would go in the other room to play and not talk to anybody the whole time

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

if there swapping info on betting patterns and tells ect seems a bit low to do that.when there is that much money at stake thers more incentive to do that sort of thing tho. obv more open to questionable activitys.imo

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
cts has never ever conferenced about a hand - when he stayed w us this summer he would go in the other room to play and not talk to anybody the whole time

[/ QUOTE ]

ya but he has a superuser account

evidence: http://www.pokerhand.org/?1261209

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

i really really really hate having the opinion of multiple people with varying styles, plays on later streets are often set up by style and play on previous streets and there are very few combinations of players that are good for each other. there are definitely people that i would like to have help me, but others that i would not even enjoy the help of. in fact, ine some cases, i'd rather have someone who plays lower stakes just so i could ask fundamental questions to from time to time before i made a REALLY bad call, or to stop me from tilting (the biggest, by far, benefit of multiple people 'conferencing').

i actually have a pretty funny story about 'conferencing' or two or three people playing on the same name, but the world will never know..

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

Really stupid of Evils to say somthing like this in chat

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

We know for sure Caby played alone

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

uhm, its kinda a given they split action. has not anyone seen the weed brownies 200/400 video?

welcome to the internets

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

Out of interest, is this cheating, angle shooting or totally acceptable when the other person asks you if its you or if you are chatting to people on AIM/Skype etc and the person lies in response to them?

-----

I feel uncomfortable with the concept, but i dont think my opinion is important as im not remotely close to those stakes and i dont think ive got the mentality i could ever play that high anyway even assuming i bridged the skill gap.

CTS in his blog, about a week back, linked to a good 2+2 thread started by Jman a while back. I dont have the link but its easy to find. Basically it was a hand Jman played against Roland de Wolf, where by about halfway into the thread it became clear that everyone accepted that though the account belonged to Roland the player behind it was Patrik Antonius.

If i were in Jmans shoes (ie, i was just a random fish who sat down with Roland) i would be totally pissed that instead of someone who probably has an edge over me im playing HU with the person who is said to be the best heads up player.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
uhm, its kinda a given they split action. has not anyone seen the weed brownies 200/400 video?

welcome to the internets

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think anyone has a problem with splitting action (if by splitting action you mean selling pieces that is). Have u read the thread?

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
uhm, its kinda a given they split action. has not anyone seen the weed brownies 200/400 video?

welcome to the internets

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think anyone has a problem with splitting action. Have u read the thread?

[/ QUOTE ]

the video evidences helping each other also

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

agree with curtain's et. al. that 3 people playing together probably makes them an overall worse player. group think 101

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

aejones' point about tilt control is super important. Teaming up gives them an advantage in a high stakes HU match guaranteed.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

Hey team can we beat tie for a lot more money right now?

<3 Andrew

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did CTS team up too?

[/ QUOTE ]

wtf? show some restraint before randomly bringing someone else's name out to try to drag through the mud

[/ QUOTE ]

So you'd agree it's a slimy thing to do? Or why else would it be dragging your name through the mud?

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

While I don't think this is against the rules, in a case like this where the player is obviously picking who he plays, it seems a bit worse because he has obviously chosen not to play the others(ya, krantz and whitelime were not sitting, but its still true). Also, many people have a huge problem with PA and others having multiple screen names, whats the big difference between that and this ? The fact the FWF is the one hitting the buttons ? He very well could just be getting told what to do, I have no idea if this is true or not, but if it was, does it change your opinion ?

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

vs this particular player i dont think it matters really. its unethical if you play a vastly different style than you have played earlier.

sort of the urindanger vs ansky thread.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

Unethical, ya. Impossible to prove though.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did CTS team up too?

[/ QUOTE ]

wtf? show some restraint before randomly bringing someone else's name out to try to drag through the mud

[/ QUOTE ]

So you'd agree it's a slimy thing to do? Or why else would it be dragging your name through the mud?

[/ QUOTE ]He said trying, which still leaves it open as to whether or not he considers it unethical. Nice play imo

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

Fwiw, its actually allowed what Krantz, White and fwf are doing.
On the other hand i dunno if i would like it, if i was tie.
But u know, its online poker, gotta see this more pragmatic instead of starting big [censored] ethical discussions.

Lee Jones once said on his blog something - imo very interesting - about unenforcable rules.
If i would have a problem with that kind of stuff fwf and co are "accused" of, i´d just stop playing online.
Everybody basically knows whats going on.

It would be a very different story if tie asked fwf who he is playing. But well,tbh, even then i wouldnt trust some online person, when there are a few hundo k´s on the line

Edit: And btw, i agree very much with curtains. I do not see that big of an advantage

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
i really really really hate having the opinion of multiple people with varying styles, plays on later streets are often set up by style and play on previous streets and there are very few combinations of players that are good for each other. there are definitely people that i would like to have help me, but others that i would not even enjoy the help of. in fact, ine some cases, i'd rather have someone who plays lower stakes just so i could ask fundamental questions to from time to time before i made a REALLY bad call, or to stop me from tilting (the biggest, by far, benefit of multiple people 'conferencing').


[/ QUOTE ]

this makes the most sense of anything said here

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
Honestly, I think that in poker, I'd prefer to play a headsup match against 3 people of equal strength colluding, than one player.

This is very pronounced in blitz chess, when working together with 2-3 people, assuming all are relatively equal strength, generally produces worse results than just playing normally because all the differing viewpoints can be really distracting. At least this has always been my experience.

Whenever I have played poker with someone watching me, it drives me completely insane when they try to give advice that's contrary to what I'm about to do. It's simply impossible to focus when you only have so much time to make a decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bet if you took a group of three very strong chess players who were close friends, worked on each others' games a lot, and had a lot of experience playing together, that they would play better as a team than individually (assuming this was some version of chess where taking longer on every decision didn't hurt you).

I think, ethically speaking, that it is somewhat shady, but not that bad. I think people can generally assume it's going on at nosebleed stakes, so it isn't super dishonest or anything.

I think what PA does is significantly worse. These guys are still playing on their own accounts, and the owner of the account still has the final say on a given action.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

while i think it might be borderline unethical, i couldn't care less if the situation was similar to what happened, i.e. some vv good players teaming up, playing on one of their OWN accts. now say the acct was of a known fish, a big loser, and that he had agreed with two vv good players to team up and play together. THAT would be [censored] up obv, bc you're not playing the fish you thought, but the fish and two experts (who would undoubtedly be making all the decisions). i realize however a situation like this hasn't happened yet (that we know about). fwiw i would hate playing on a "team" personally, as no two players have the EXACT same playing style and i could see some big disagreements in some pretty big pots. that's not good.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
cts has never ever conferenced about a hand - when he stayed w us this summer he would go in the other room to play and not talk to anybody the whole time

[/ QUOTE ]

ya but he has a superuser account

evidence: http://www.pokerhand.org/?1261209

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously though wtf cts, what a sicko

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i really really really hate having the opinion of multiple people with varying styles, plays on later streets are often set up by style and play on previous streets and there are very few combinations of players that are good for each other. there are definitely people that i would like to have help me, but others that i would not even enjoy the help of. in fact, ine some cases, i'd rather have someone who plays lower stakes just so i could ask fundamental questions to from time to time before i made a REALLY bad call, or to stop me from tilting (the biggest, by far, benefit of multiple people 'conferencing').


[/ QUOTE ]

this makes the most sense of anything said here

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the greatest benefit of 'conferencing' is the elimination of egregious slips and of tilt.

But I think that's pretty huge at nosebleeds, where the pressure of winning/losing 6 figures is a crucial part of the game.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

3 people trying to come out with 1 decision
wouldnt that end up with arguements and confusion?

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

against the rules nah, unethical meh, pretty ghey yup

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

i think 4 people to hand would actually be counter productive ifa nything, dobut iw would help much

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
while i think it might be borderline unethical, i couldn't care less if the situation was similar to what happened, i.e. some vv good players teaming up, playing on one of their OWN accts. now say the acct was of a known fish, a big loser, and that he had agreed with two vv good players to team up and play together. THAT would be [censored] up obv, bc you're not playing the fish you thought, but the fish and two experts (who would undoubtedly be making all the decisions). i realize however a situation like this hasn't happened yet (that we know about). fwiw i would hate playing on a "team" personally, as no two players have the EXACT same playing style and i could see some big disagreements in some pretty big pots. that's not good.

[/ QUOTE ]

This does happen. Except with just one expert instead of two experts and the fish on the account.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

It's totally unethical, just like cheating on your taxes, and just about everyone who's successful is unethical.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

you don't even play poker, but ok.

[ QUOTE ]
Honestly, I think that in poker, I'd prefer to play a headsup match against 3 people of equal strength colluding, than one player.

This is very pronounced in blitz chess, when working together with 2-3 people, assuming all are relatively equal strength, generally produces worse results than just playing normally because all the differing viewpoints can be really distracting. At least this has always been my experience.

Whenever I have played poker with someone watching me, it drives me completely insane when they try to give advice that's contrary to what I'm about to do. It's simply impossible to focus when you only have so much time to make a decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

Just imagine if it were live.

You make a bluff on the river, and another player at the table tells the villian that he knows your bluffing and that he should call.

I don't care if it is against the rules. It is unethical.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
Just imagine if it were live.

You make a bluff on the river, and another player at the table tells the villian that he knows your bluffing and that he should call.

I don't care if it is against the rules. It is unethical.

[/ QUOTE ]

what if the other player is wrong?

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
just about everyone who's successful is unethical.


[/ QUOTE ]

jesus. so dumb.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

This is the worst thread ever.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
Just imagine if it were live.

You make a bluff on the river, and another player at the table tells the villian that he knows your bluffing and that he should call.

I don't care if it is against the rules. It is unethical.

[/ QUOTE ]

your logical reasoning skills are very poor imo

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just about everyone who's successful is unethical.


[/ QUOTE ]

jesus. so dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]yeah, probably the opposite is true tbh

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just about everyone who's successful is unethical.


[/ QUOTE ]

jesus. so dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]yeah, probably the opposite is true tbh

[/ QUOTE ]

ya, i heard jesus was smart too.

Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
 

lol at the people debating the effectiveness of tag teaming when the question being asked is that of ethics.