To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunday
 

I've been considering making this post for a couple weeks, and I think right now is the ideal time.

Over a year and a half ago, there were many top players who put multiple accounts in the big Party Poker tournaments. It was sketchy. It was clearly at best "treading on a gray line", as I believe Shaniac put it in the big p5s thread on this topic when it first arose.

Well, there is no longer a grey line. There is no excuse. Multi-accounting tournaments is cheating! The sites have all specifically stated that this is cheating. Examples have been made and hundreds of thousands of dollars have been taken from people, accounts banned and more, to make it clear that this is cheating.

I may not be the best person to post this, as it is somewhat hypocritical of me. I'm friends with many who have gotten in trouble in the past for multi-accounting. I've had financial stakes in people who were multi-accounting. I've bought peoples seats deep in tournaments (that I hadn't entered on my account of course) and won. Was this at least mildly unfair? Absolutely. Was it against the rules at the time? No, it definitely was not. I will be completely honest: If entering an MTT on multiple accounts was not prohibited by the sites in their TOCs, there is a decent chance I would be doing it in the big field tournaments right now. I know that I would never play 2 accounts at one table, but who knows whether these other guys would? I don't trust them not to, and I know of a few who have in the past. Every $1k tournament I enter is a few thousand dollars expectation, and I would love to greatly increase my chances at a big win in every major tournament. I'm not one to pass on a big advantage- but that advantage has to be within the rules. Multi-accounting is clearly not within the rules, and I am not going to sit here while I grind a living playing poker while others around me cheat and gain an unfair advantage while hurting my expectation, and do nothing.

I don't ever want to be deep in a tournament again and be up against some top pro who played three accounts and not know its them. And lets face it- they aren't quiet about this, and lots of people know who they are. There is absolutely no reason for the poker community to put up with this. I've gotten deep in massive online MTTs with hundreds of thousands for first and never taken one down once. I'm not going to stand for others having multiple shots and then bragging in my face about how much money they are winning.

That's it. You know who you are, I know who you are, and if you really have the nerve to keep doing this crap out of greed and disrespect for the rules, then you better at least not tell one [censored] person, because you are putting a lot of faith in your peers right now, and not all of them are as considerate and discreet as I am.

-Jeff

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunday
 

Agree 1000%

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
Agree 1000%

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

I don't think one's opinion on multi-accounting should change so much just because the rules were changed. It should either be okay or bad in your mind, and I don't think a poker site's decision should effect your morals.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunday
 

[ QUOTE ]
That's it. You know who you are, I know who you are, and if you really have the nerve to keep doing this crap out of greed and disrespect for the rules, then you better at least not tell one [censored] person, because you are putting a lot of faith in your peers right now, and not all of them are as considerate and discreet as I am.

-Jeff

[/ QUOTE ]

If you had some balls you would tell them: "if you continue doing this [censored] I will report you", not "somebody else may, bla bla bla bla bla". You would achieve more with than one sentence on aim than 150 posts in this thread will do. Instead of doing something you are looking for somebody else to do something.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think one's opinion on multi-accounting should change so much just because the rules were changed. It should either be okay or bad in your mind, and I don't think a poker site's decision should effect your morals.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really care about morals or any of that crap, as long as no one is outright colluding. But I play online poker for a living, respect the sites' rules, don't want people having an advantage I don't, and want online poker to be legit- so from that perspective it is unethical.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

good post jeff

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

I'm one of the people whothought it was a pretty shady practice to begin with (and by that I mean "obviously unethical"). For people to still be doing it after it's been explicitly made against the rules shows a complete lack of regard for the standards of our profession and for the other players in the game (and call me old-fashioned, but I'm one of the people who believe the ethical standards of poker matter for their own sake).

I think I yelled something about this the other night at O'Shea's; perheaps whomever I was talking to can recap it.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

I agree a few people in vegas I've met I've told them straightup that what they are doing is sooo wrong and they should stop because they won't keep getting away with it. People have too much ego to not brag about winning so and so tourney even when their most common account was out in first hour.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's it. You know who you are, I know who you are, and if you really have the nerve to keep doing this crap out of greed and disrespect for the rules, then you better at least not tell one [censored] person, because you are putting a lot of faith in your peers right now, and not all of them are as considerate and discreet as I am.

-Jeff

[/ QUOTE ]

If you had some balls you would tell them: "if you continue doing this [censored] I will report you", not "somebody else may, bla bla bla bla bla". You would achieve more with than one sentence on aim than 150 posts in this thread will do. Instead of doing something you are looking for somebody else to do something.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not reporting anyone. But that doesn't mean news about who is doing what doesn't spread, and that doesn't mean that people won't take a stand and put an end to this practice.

A lot of the people doing this are just young guys looking for money and the glory of a win. If everyone agrees that this practice is unethical and not be allowed, and no one feels safe telling anyone about their multi-accounting conquests, a lot of the glamour of it is gone and maybe people don't want to take the risk anymore. Who wants to risk having ZeeJustin's reputation from online?

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

Good post Jeff.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think one's opinion on multi-accounting should change so much just because the rules were changed.

[/ QUOTE ]

My opinion hasn't changed. My willingness to consider excuses and even engage in the debate though have become a lot shorter.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not reporting anyone. But that doesn't mean news about who is doing what doesn't spread, and that doesn't mean that people won't take a stand and put an end to this practice.

[/ QUOTE ]
Have you taken a stand? Doesn't taking a stand involve combating it, especially when it doesn't take a lot of effort?

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of the people doing this are just young guys looking for money and the glory of a win. If everyone agrees that this practice is unethical and not be allowed, and no one feels safe telling anyone about their multi-accounting conquests, a lot of the glamour of it is gone and maybe people don't want to take the risk anymore. Who wants to risk having ZeeJustin's reputation from online?

[/ QUOTE ]
Why go this long chicken route? Why not attack the problem directly, speak directly face to face to them, say that you won't accept it anymore?

Hint: If everyone speaks about "bla bla bla, it should stop", "bla bla bla, somebody should do something" it will never stop. These guys already know that i.e. you don't accept it, it won't help to point that out 1,000 times, the only thing that helps is an ultimatum.

If you have met them in Vegas and did not use the opportunity to stop it, you have almost lost the right to complain about it anymore.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

Or you can send me information about the worst ones, their accounts, proof, contact info etc. and I will contact them and end it, that's also an option.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

If you know people who are cheating and you do nothing to stop them then you are just as guilty as them... I bet if they were stealing from your mother you would be the first to out them... They are just steal from us fish, therefore you choose to take a half way moral stance... Why don't you post your mom's address? I think she "owes" us fish some hubcaps at the very least... I have no respect for you whats so ever and hope you sleep real well being a moral-less piece of [censored]....

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

I started this thread to make people aware of the situation. Not to destroy the reputations of people I like. If others want to do that, that is their decision, as not doing so is mine. I would consider it to be a very scumbaggy thing to do. This isn't at all comparable in my mind to not turning in someone colluding at a SNG or whatever- but I'm not gonna argue this and don't really care what people think I "should" do.

The fact is most people aren't aware that this is still going on and should be made aware. And the people doing this need to know that we know they are doing it, and don't approve of it. If they still choose to multi-account in the future, they risk one of many people in the know getting pissed and turning them in. And thats quite a risk.

-Jeff

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
I started this thread to make people aware of the situation. Not to destroy the reputations of people I like. If others want to do that, that is their decision, as not doing so is mine. I would consider it to be a very scumbaggy thing to do. This isn't at all comparable in my mind to not turning in someone colluding at a SNG or whatever- but I'm not gonna argue this and don't really care what people think I "should" do.

[/ QUOTE ]
It is not scumbaggy to give them a warning and then go through with it if it does not help.

[ QUOTE ]
And the people doing this need to know that we know they are doing it, and don't approve of it.

[/ QUOTE ]
And without any guts to do anything about it. Wow, must be scary to these guys that 20 spineless people know about it and do not like it.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

IMO the shady stuff that happens in online poker will never stop. It's well known that many of the high-stakes cash guys change accounts or screen names to misrepresent their identities, thus creating more (unwanted from opponents' perspectives) action for themselves. Further, many of us at MTTc stake people, who if they get deep in large MTTs, may essentially tell the stakee exactly what to do in every situation, so that while we are not directly clicking the mouse or typing in bet sizes, we are basically playing the tournament.

No disrespect at all meant to Mlagoo, but certainly some of you MTT guys at the house with far greater track records than Mlagoo were sweating and giving advice. I obviously don't know to what measure or extent this happened, and am not even necessarily saying its wrong or that I disagree with it, but it definitely violates the "1 person to a hand" rule.

I think multiaccounting MTTs is wrong, and I've never done and will never do it, but IMO its all on a continuum of shadiness that occurs everyday in the online poker world.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]

Well, there is no longer a grey line. There is no excuse. Multi-accounting tournaments is cheating! The sites have all specifically stated that this is cheating. Examples have been made and hundreds of thousands of dollars have been taken from people, accounts banned and more, to make it clear that this is cheating.

[/ QUOTE ]

There was never a gray line. How one could think it was, I have no idea.


[ QUOTE ]
I am not going to sit here while I grind a living playing poker while others around me cheat and gain an unfair advantage while hurting my expectation, and do nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like you are because you chose not to report them. You've decided to whine about players doing this that you know they are doing it and you seem to have knowledge of the accounts they own, yet you take no action to actually make them stop. If you want to be nice, tell them if you ever catch them again, you will report them.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

People still multi account?

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
IMO the shady stuff that happens in online poker will never stop. It's well known that many of the high-stakes cash guys change accounts or screen names to misrepresent their identities, thus creating more (unwanted from opponents' perspectives) action for themselves. Further, many of us at MTTc stake people, who if they get deep in large MTTs, may essentially tell the stakee exactly what to do in every situation, so that while we are not directly clicking the mouse or typing in bet sizes, we are basically playing the tournament.

No disrespect at all meant to Mlagoo, but certainly some of you MTT guys at the house with far greater track records than Mlagoo were sweating and giving advice. I obviously don't know to what measure or extent this happened, and am not even necessarily saying its wrong or that I disagree with it, but it definitely violates the "1 person to a hand" rule.

I think multiaccounting MTTs is wrong, and I've never done and will never do it, but IMO its all on a continuum of shadiness that occurs everyday in the online poker world.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with what you've said except the stuff about Mlagoo. He played the entire tourney including HU completely on his own. I know some clown who final tabled was accusing him of getting help from gobbo or something but thats total BS. What do you guys know about mlagoo's play and what he is capable of anyway? Definitely an insulting assumption with no real basis.

Also, there is no real "1 person to a hand rule". Pokerstars has even specifically stated that this rule does not exist for their site because it is unenforceable.

Sorry to take this off track, but Matt was pretty unhappy with the allegations that he wasn't playing the tournament and I felt the need to address that comment.

-Jeff

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]

No disrespect at all meant to Mlagoo, but certainly some of you MTT guys at the house with far greater track records than Mlagoo were sweating and giving advice. I obviously don't know to what measure or extent this happened, and am not even necessarily saying its wrong or that I disagree with it, but it definitely violates the "1 person to a hand" rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

Such a rule does not exist.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
IMO the shady stuff that happens in online poker will never stop. It's well known that many of the high-stakes cash guys change accounts or screen names to misrepresent their identities, thus creating more (unwanted from opponents' perspectives) action for themselves. Further, many of us at MTTc stake people, who if they get deep in large MTTs, may essentially tell the stakee exactly what to do in every situation, so that while we are not directly clicking the mouse or typing in bet sizes, we are basically playing the tournament.

No disrespect at all meant to Mlagoo, but certainly some of you MTT guys at the house with far greater track records than Mlagoo were sweating and giving advice. I obviously don't know to what measure or extent this happened, and am not even necessarily saying its wrong or that I disagree with it, but it definitely violates the "1 person to a hand" rule.

I think multiaccounting MTTs is wrong, and I've never done and will never do it, but IMO its all on a continuum of shadiness that occurs everyday in the online poker world.

[/ QUOTE ]

I seriously go back and forth in my head each day about the ethics behind this. Especially when my stakee is essentially paying to be coached by me, and thus doesn't have a very big % at all.

IMO, the shady [censored] in online poker will never end. Sheets/bax/timex staking infinite idiots is no different than multiaccounting. Does it matter if you get 50% or 100% if you are creating a huge chunk of the 109r field? Obviously I think actually physically playing 2 accounts is unethical and scummy, but the grey area after that is just something that is accepted because its online poker. There will never be one player to a hand, and there will always be a threat that you don't know if you are playing against a superstar.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

Why don't you cut out the BS... if they are winning players then they are stealing... You like people who are petty thieves? your only real objection is that they are taking money that should rightfully be in your pocket... the only reason you're not outing them is because they are your boys... you don't give a crap if your friends steal or not as long as they don't take it directly out of your pocket... keep making post trying to make yourself look like some kind of poker superhero... the bottom line is you know people who are stealing and choose to do nothing because you get more out of having drinks with them on the weekends... The only thing you actually accomplished by making this post, to anyone with enough common sense to read past your BS, is to see that you, along with your "friends" are moral-less scumbags...

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]


No disrespect at all meant to Mlagoo, but certainly some of you MTT guys at the house with far greater track records than Mlagoo were sweating and giving advice. I obviously don't know to what measure or extent this happened, and am not even necessarily saying its wrong or that I disagree with it, but it definitely violates the "1 person to a hand" rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

First of all, this rule does not exist online. It has been stated tons of times by Lee Jones in e-mails and posts on 2p2. So get off your high horse.

Secondly, you have no [censored] clue what happened in that tournament, and definitely don't have the right to accuse someone of doing something when you have no evidence to support it. It's things like this that hurt peoples reputations, and this isn't even a rumor, it's 100% pure speculation.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]

Well, there is no longer a grey line. There is no excuse. Multi-accounting tournaments is cheating! The sites have all specifically stated that this is cheating. Examples have been made and hundreds of thousands of dollars have been taken from people, accounts banned and more, to make it clear that this is cheating.

[/ QUOTE ]

There was never a gray line. How one could think it was, I have no idea.


I don't know if you were playing high stakes MTTs over 2 years ago, but there was a period of time when the TOC of UltimateBet did not even state that entering a tournament on more than one account was not allowed.

idiot who posted above,

Last response to these clown like posts. I don't give a [censored]. FYI there are plenty of people who multi account and who I am not friends with or outright dislike. That has nothing to do with it. I have 0 obligation to out someone doing something prohibited by the sites. There are dozens who have names like me who could report people if they wanted to. People who can say "I know who is doing this, and will report them in the future if they do it in the future" right now. They haven't done that yet. Maybe they don't care. Maybe they are like me and feel like they don't have the authority to do such a thing, and that it would place their own well being in jeopardy. It would be different if this was a ring of people colluding or something like that. I consider that to be different, and thats my opinion, and if you feel differently and want to be judgemental then that is your call but just be happy that I made this post to at least ATTEMPT to cut down on this practice and stfu with the personal attacks.

None of those guys wanted to take the initiative to start this thread though. So I'm doing it, because I want people to know about this, and I want the poker community to decide what to do about this on their own. People still multi-account, still act like it is acceptable as long as they can evade detection, and still brag about their multi accounting wins to their friends. Everyone should know this. Everyone should agree this is unethical and what actions they choose to take is completely their decision.

I did not make this post to impose on anyone with my opinions, I made it as a public service announcement to the MTT community. What opinions they form, and what they choose to do, is their decision.

-Jeff

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]

Last response to these clown like posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can see it as clown like, or you can see it as genuine advice from people who have been in similar situations and solved it. You are looking to get the feeling that you have done yours and to get the feeling that you aren't to blame.

However you haven't done yours and you are partly to blame. You don't escape from that by making this thread. Unluckily for you some people who read between the lines viewed the thread and not only other MTTC'ers in the same situation looking to create the same illusion.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


No disrespect at all meant to Mlagoo, but certainly some of you MTT guys at the house with far greater track records than Mlagoo were sweating and giving advice. I obviously don't know to what measure or extent this happened, and am not even necessarily saying its wrong or that I disagree with it, but it definitely violates the "1 person to a hand" rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

First of all, this rule does not exist online. It has been stated tons of times by Lee Jones in e-mails and posts on 2p2. So get off your high horse.

Secondly, you have no [censored] clue what happened in that tournament, and definitely don't have the right to accuse someone of doing something when you have no evidence to support it. It's things like this that hurt peoples reputations, and this isn't even a rumor, it's 100% pure speculation.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

1. Gobboboy stakes Mlagoo.
2. Mlagoo realizes gobboboy is a superior MTT player
3. Gobboboy has vested interest (see #1.)
4. You actually think gobboboy isn't going to tell mlagoo what to do/give advice because of ethics? HELL NO. (people like winning money not losing $) Gobbo essentially multiaccounted to some sense, but its completely within the rules.


Also, another random thought of mine. I think buying someone's account deep is WORSE from a player's perspective than multiaccounting. For example. 3tables left in the million. Odds are I'm head and shoulders better than everyone else left in the field. Jeff buys "randomdonkeyidiot1123" account immediately to my left. That essentially cost me tens of thosuands of dollars of expectation. Whereas if Jeff just multiaccounted 2 accounts, odds are he busts them both before the money even hits and I don't feel the effect close to as much.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


No disrespect at all meant to Mlagoo, but certainly some of you MTT guys at the house with far greater track records than Mlagoo were sweating and giving advice. I obviously don't know to what measure or extent this happened, and am not even necessarily saying its wrong or that I disagree with it, but it definitely violates the "1 person to a hand" rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

First of all, this rule does not exist online. It has been stated tons of times by Lee Jones in e-mails and posts on 2p2. So get off your high horse.

Secondly, you have no [censored] clue what happened in that tournament, and definitely don't have the right to accuse someone of doing something when you have no evidence to support it. It's things like this that hurt peoples reputations, and this isn't even a rumor, it's 100% pure speculation.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

1. Gobboboy stakes Mlagoo.
2. Mlagoo realizes gobboboy is a superior MTT player
3. Gobboboy has vested interest (see #1.)
4. You actually think gobboboy isn't going to tell mlagoo what to do/give advice because of ethics? HELL NO. (people like winning money not losing $) Gobbo essentially multiaccounted to some sense, but its completely within the rules.


Also, another random thought of mine. I think buying someone's account deep is WORSE from a player's perspective than multiaccounting. For example. 3tables left in the million. Odds are I'm head and shoulders better than everyone else left in the field. Jeff buys "randomdonkeyidiot1123" account immediately to my left. That essentially cost me tens of thosuands of dollars of expectation. Whereas if Jeff just multiaccounted 2 accounts, odds are he busts them both before the money even hits and I don't feel the effect close to as much.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying any of the above are not true.

What I'm saying is, I'm not going to stand by and let people completely speculate as to whether people were cheating in some way during a tournament. The speculation would never end. All of us have AIM. We could speculate that every single major win by a 2p2'r over the past 3 years has been tainted. That's not what this forum is for.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


No disrespect at all meant to Mlagoo, but certainly some of you MTT guys at the house with far greater track records than Mlagoo were sweating and giving advice. I obviously don't know to what measure or extent this happened, and am not even necessarily saying its wrong or that I disagree with it, but it definitely violates the "1 person to a hand" rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

First of all, this rule does not exist online. It has been stated tons of times by Lee Jones in e-mails and posts on 2p2. So get off your high horse.

Secondly, you have no [censored] clue what happened in that tournament, and definitely don't have the right to accuse someone of doing something when you have no evidence to support it. It's things like this that hurt peoples reputations, and this isn't even a rumor, it's 100% pure speculation.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

1. Gobboboy stakes Mlagoo.
2. Mlagoo realizes gobboboy is a superior MTT player
3. Gobboboy has vested interest (see #1.)
4. You actually think gobboboy isn't going to tell mlagoo what to do/give advice because of ethics? HELL NO. (people like winning money not losing $) Gobbo essentially multiaccounted to some sense, but its completely within the rules.


Also, another random thought of mine. I think buying someone's account deep is WORSE from a player's perspective than multiaccounting. For example. 3tables left in the million. Odds are I'm head and shoulders better than everyone else left in the field. Jeff buys "randomdonkeyidiot1123" account immediately to my left. That essentially cost me tens of thosuands of dollars of expectation. Whereas if Jeff just multiaccounted 2 accounts, odds are he busts them both before the money even hits and I don't feel the effect close to as much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm I'm pretty sure that Matt specifically dis-regarded some of Gobbo's advice deep in the Mil, actually, and he even told me he went outside to play alone because he had too many people yelling different advice at him.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


No disrespect at all meant to Mlagoo, but certainly some of you MTT guys at the house with far greater track records than Mlagoo were sweating and giving advice. I obviously don't know to what measure or extent this happened, and am not even necessarily saying its wrong or that I disagree with it, but it definitely violates the "1 person to a hand" rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

First of all, this rule does not exist online. It has been stated tons of times by Lee Jones in e-mails and posts on 2p2. So get off your high horse.

Secondly, you have no [censored] clue what happened in that tournament, and definitely don't have the right to accuse someone of doing something when you have no evidence to support it. It's things like this that hurt peoples reputations, and this isn't even a rumor, it's 100% pure speculation.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

1. Gobboboy stakes Mlagoo.
2. Mlagoo realizes gobboboy is a superior MTT player
3. Gobboboy has vested interest (see #1.)
4. You actually think gobboboy isn't going to tell mlagoo what to do/give advice because of ethics? HELL NO. (people like winning money not losing $) Gobbo essentially multiaccounted to some sense, but its completely within the rules.


Also, another random thought of mine. I think buying someone's account deep is WORSE from a player's perspective than multiaccounting. For example. 3tables left in the million. Odds are I'm head and shoulders better than everyone else left in the field. Jeff buys "randomdonkeyidiot1123" account immediately to my left. That essentially cost me tens of thosuands of dollars of expectation. Whereas if Jeff just multiaccounted 2 accounts, odds are he busts them both before the money even hits and I don't feel the effect close to as much.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying any of the above are not true.

What I'm saying is, I'm not going to stand by and let people completely speculate as to whether people were cheating in some way during a tournament. The speculation would never end. All of us have AIM. We could speculate that every single major win by a 2p2'r over the past 3 years has been tainted. That's not what this forum is for.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure every single major win by a 2p2'r over the past 3 years has been 'tainted.' That is if you view 'tainted' as breaking the 1player to a hand rule.

I am arguing the opposite and think that all these sketchy gray areas of online poker are just part of the game and there is nothing you can do to stop people from staking n giving advice/swapping %s/selling accounts/swapping accounts so there is no point in complaining about it.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Last response to these clown like posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can see it as clown like, or you can see it as genuine advice from people who have been in similar situations and solved it. You are looking to get the feeling that you have done yours and to get the feeling that you aren't to blame.


[/ QUOTE ]

You got any idea what you're saying? Similar situations? I bet.

When I made this post I was "LOOKING" to let "aggromttpro193242" know that I was tired of running into him multiple times in a given Sunday major, and that its gotten to the point where I don't want to put up with it anymore, and that there is a real risk that they get ratted out if they don't cut the [censored] out. I was looking to actually let the multi-accounters know that the poker community as a whole views this as an unethical practice tantamount to cheating.

This ain't no [censored] ego boost, and this ain't about you. I'm a selfish [censored] and I don't care if every table you sit at has 8 multi accounting pros and they tear your ass to pieces. This is about me, my expectation, and my HSMTT peers, and us being real about this issue. So you can take your morals and obligations and shove em up your azz, cuz u got no authority here, no experience with "similar situations" and clearly not much knowledge on the subject or situation.

and thats that 4 me, enjoy

GIFAFI

edit- o and it aint even as simple as just giving names. Even if I went nuts and put life and limb at risk to narc on a ton of people, you realize THERE IS NO PROOF. These are real people with different IPs, addresses, etc. It just isn't gonna work dude, and it ain't worth it, especially for me. It wouldn't be right. That's not how this thing is gonna end. People just have to know its wrong and unacceptable and won't be tolerated among their peers any longer.

-Jeff

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


No disrespect at all meant to Mlagoo, but certainly some of you MTT guys at the house with far greater track records than Mlagoo were sweating and giving advice. I obviously don't know to what measure or extent this happened, and am not even necessarily saying its wrong or that I disagree with it, but it definitely violates the "1 person to a hand" rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

First of all, this rule does not exist online. It has been stated tons of times by Lee Jones in e-mails and posts on 2p2. So get off your high horse.

Secondly, you have no [censored] clue what happened in that tournament, and definitely don't have the right to accuse someone of doing something when you have no evidence to support it. It's things like this that hurt peoples reputations, and this isn't even a rumor, it's 100% pure speculation.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

1. Gobboboy stakes Mlagoo.
2. Mlagoo realizes gobboboy is a superior MTT player
3. Gobboboy has vested interest (see #1.)
4. You actually think gobboboy isn't going to tell mlagoo what to do/give advice because of ethics? HELL NO. (people like winning money not losing $) Gobbo essentially multiaccounted to some sense, but its completely within the rules.


Also, another random thought of mine. I think buying someone's account deep is WORSE from a player's perspective than multiaccounting. For example. 3tables left in the million. Odds are I'm head and shoulders better than everyone else left in the field. Jeff buys "randomdonkeyidiot1123" account immediately to my left. That essentially cost me tens of thosuands of dollars of expectation. Whereas if Jeff just multiaccounted 2 accounts, odds are he busts them both before the money even hits and I don't feel the effect close to as much.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying any of the above are not true.

What I'm saying is, I'm not going to stand by and let people completely speculate as to whether people were cheating in some way during a tournament. The speculation would never end. All of us have AIM. We could speculate that every single major win by a 2p2'r over the past 3 years has been tainted. That's not what this forum is for.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure every single major win by a 2p2'r over the past 3 years has been 'tainted.' That is if you view 'tainted' as breaking the 1player to a hand rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is not a rule! It's not! Why do people keep saying it is! Arrrgghhh.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
and that its gotten to the point where I don't want to put up with it anymore,

[/ QUOTE ]

And not "put up with it anymore" is making a 2+2-thread? Lol. Not putting up with it is saying "stop this now or I will tell your mother who opposes gambling that you play poker" or "The friend of my friend is your boss, do you want him to know how little trustworthy you are?" or something similar. Or the nicer "stop it, or you aren't welcome at further social occasions in vegas", this is often the most effective.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


No disrespect at all meant to Mlagoo, but certainly some of you MTT guys at the house with far greater track records than Mlagoo were sweating and giving advice. I obviously don't know to what measure or extent this happened, and am not even necessarily saying its wrong or that I disagree with it, but it definitely violates the "1 person to a hand" rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

First of all, this rule does not exist online. It has been stated tons of times by Lee Jones in e-mails and posts on 2p2. So get off your high horse.

Secondly, you have no [censored] clue what happened in that tournament, and definitely don't have the right to accuse someone of doing something when you have no evidence to support it. It's things like this that hurt peoples reputations, and this isn't even a rumor, it's 100% pure speculation.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculously awful post.

1. Gobboboy stakes Mlagoo.
2. Mlagoo realizes gobboboy is a superior MTT player
3. Gobboboy has vested interest (see #1.)
4. You actually think gobboboy isn't going to tell mlagoo what to do/give advice because of ethics? HELL NO. (people like winning money not losing $) Gobbo essentially multiaccounted to some sense, but its completely within the rules.


Also, another random thought of mine. I think buying someone's account deep is WORSE from a player's perspective than multiaccounting. For example. 3tables left in the million. Odds are I'm head and shoulders better than everyone else left in the field. Jeff buys "randomdonkeyidiot1123" account immediately to my left. That essentially cost me tens of thosuands of dollars of expectation. Whereas if Jeff just multiaccounted 2 accounts, odds are he busts them both before the money even hits and I don't feel the effect close to as much.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying any of the above are not true.

What I'm saying is, I'm not going to stand by and let people completely speculate as to whether people were cheating in some way during a tournament. The speculation would never end. All of us have AIM. We could speculate that every single major win by a 2p2'r over the past 3 years has been tainted. That's not what this forum is for.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure every single major win by a 2p2'r over the past 3 years has been 'tainted.' That is if you view 'tainted' as breaking the 1player to a hand rule.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is not a rule! It's not! Why do people keep saying it is! Arrrgghhh.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, its not a rule. Rule's don't matter. I know that its not a rule , I'm not an idiot.

I'll just stake a bunch of idiots to click buttons and fold 37os for me utg. Whenever they get in a hand, they AIM me at stealthmunk "yo what do i do here, i got TT" I obv have the table open. I obv tell them the most profitable way to play this hand and you know what just happened? I MULTIACCOUNTED. I'm an unethical POS and have done this before and I might stop, idk. Especially because all my broke friends love getting free fpps and learning poker from a MTT superstar like myself (not to toot my own horn as this isn't the point of the post) THE SITE'S TOS IS IRRELEVANT. ITS ETHICS.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

All,
Jeff made a post about something that is a blatant violation of T&C that costs all of the people following the T&C equity. He asked that people stop voluntary and didn't out anybody.

If you want to talk about some gray areas like buying other people's accounts or some things that are blatantly not against T&C but may be immoral like receiving real-time hand advice from friends, start your own thread, and follow jeff's lead and don't name names--especially when you don't know wtf you're talking about.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
All,
Jeff made a post about something that is a blatant violation of T&C that costs all of the people following the T&C equity. He asked that people stop voluntary and didn't out anybody.

If you want to talk about some gray areas like buying other people's accounts or some things that are blatantly not against T&C but may be immoral like receiving real-time hand advice from friends, start your own thread, and follow jeff's lead and don't name names--especially when you don't know wtf you're talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, the gray areas definitely belong in this thread as well.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All,
Jeff made a post about something that is a blatant violation of T&C that costs all of the people following the T&C equity. He asked that people stop voluntary and didn't out anybody.

If you want to talk about some gray areas like buying other people's accounts or some things that are blatantly not against T&C but may be immoral like receiving real-time hand advice from friends, start your own thread, and follow jeff's lead and don't name names--especially when you don't know wtf you're talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, the gray areas definitely belong in this thread as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really care if the grey areas are in the thread.

I just don't want people being outed by people who have no idea what they are talking about.

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

[ QUOTE ]
All,
Jeff made a post about something that is a blatant violation of T&C that costs all of the people following the T&C equity. He asked that people stop voluntary and didn't out anybody.

If you want to talk about some gray areas like buying other people's accounts or some things that are blatantly not against T&C but may be immoral like receiving real-time hand advice from friends, start your own thread, and follow jeff's lead and don't name names--especially when you don't know wtf you're talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

do you really not understand the relationship between operating two poker accounts with your mouse and operating two poker accounts verbally?

Re: To the Multi-Accounters : some thoughts before this upcoming Sunda
 

To the people de-railing the thread and arguing just for the sake or arguing:

Shut up, you suck