Thread: On Ghosting
View Single Post
  #56  
Old 08-17-2007, 07:14 PM
stealthmunk stealthmunk is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Hustle Harder
Posts: 946
Default Re: On Ghosting

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have a general problem with people playing on multiple accounts, or different people playing the same account, or two people making decisions together for a single account. All the switching names stuff is fine with me.

So there's no reason for me to be opposed to anything other than stuff going on when a player is involved in the operation of two accounts in the same tournament.

If the person giving advice was/is in the same tournament, but the person playing the account is making their own decisions, I think that's fine, as long as the advisor isn't at the same table or giving mutually beneficial advice (late in tournaments two accounts still in the tournament shouldn't be in the same room with each other). The difference between this and multiaccounting being that a multiaccounter can't avoid being at the same table with himself or being aware that a neutral or slightly negative EV decision (calling to a bust a short stack, for example) will benefit his other account. Two friends playing the same event in the same room and occasionally sharing ideas can.

What I have a real problem with is someone making all the decisions (or being the final decision making on the majority of decisions, or on the majority of key decisions) for more than one account in the same tournament, especially when they have a financial interest in both accounts. I didn't really think about the scenario where a much better player makes all the decisions for a friend without getting anything in return. This does bother me, as does it happening with a 5% stake, but the greater the financial interest, the more it bothers me. I don't think that's unreasonable. Ethics aren't black and white, and two versions of the same unethical behavior can be different degrees of unethical.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand your point, but it baffles me as to why people wouldn't blindly follow the advice of the better player? Does it matter who gets the "final" decision? I know plattsburgh went against JJ's advice, as apparently did mlaggoo/that crew's advice. But isn't that kind of like....
not having Barry Bonds pinch hit for you?
Reply With Quote