Seeing grims Point of view (I'm not saying that I agree with it)

ski · #1 09-19-2006, 04:47 AM

I'm not saying that I agree with it or condone it, (I have done many coinflips with 2+2ers and never backed out).

but I would assume it goes something like this.

Poker is a game to make money, all aspects are involved in this game, chat, relationships, 2+2 posts, etc.

Almost all of grims posts involve him going allin with ridiculus garbage. I have only played with him a bit, but It doesn't seem like he plays anywhere near as insaine as he posts.

He makes posts, chats, creates relationships all as part of the game in the larger scheme of getting into +EV situations.

The important thing to remember is any relationship that you have with him is solely as a player in his game, not as a friend or anything else.

I am not speaking for him, but this is the only rational explaination I can think of. It is also entirely possible he didn't think at all and just got greedy for 5 sec, but I doubt it given how much he has attempted to justify it.

Ellsworth T · #2 09-19-2006, 04:50 AM

Using that logic, disconnection protection is ethical because it is +EV.

bmxicle · #3 09-19-2006, 04:50 AM

I agree he doesn't play insane, but it is largely true that he doesn't fold. and no i'm not trolling, i have played a fair number of hands with him.

ski · #4 09-19-2006, 04:52 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Using that logic, disconnection protection is ethical because it is +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I am not saying I agree with it, but objectively yes.

Ansky · #5 09-19-2006, 04:52 AM

Who cares.

If he wants to explain his point of view, he can do it.

aggie · #6 09-19-2006, 05:07 AM

O/U on how long it takes to lock this thread?

terp · #7 09-19-2006, 05:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Using that logic, disconnection protection is ethical because it is +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

ski never suggested this line of reasoning to show that grimm's action was ethical, only to possibly suggest why grimm might have done it.

Ellsworth T · #8 09-19-2006, 05:10 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Who cares.

If he wants to explain his point of view, he can do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing is no one wants to hear it. The most effective method for dealing with someone who abuses other people's honesty is universal castigation. We can't physcially harm him, and we have no legal claim. The only recourse we have and an effective deterrent to this kind of action is precisely what the community is engaging in, and thats blackballin this mothafuqer.

ski · #9 09-19-2006, 05:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using that logic, disconnection protection is ethical because it is +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I am not saying I agree with it, but objectively yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, what is even worse, by this logic, it would not be right to DP at lower stakes often since PP would take away your protection. They key would be DPing at the higher stakes as often as possible which would probably be once a day at most.

Also, as pointed out earlier, please understand that I am not advocating this simply examining the possibility from the most objective viewpoint I can.

(although given this logic if I DID think like this I would NEVER admit to it) [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

...however nor would I make this post, unless I was setting you up to trick you later. GOD THIS IS GETTING CONFUSING.

Kilillan · #10 09-19-2006, 05:32 AM

LET IT DIE