![]() |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I see nothing wrong with ghosting, and can't see myself ever being convinced otherwise [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Say someone stakes 20 neutral EV players in a tourney and when they get far he ghosts them. You guys have no problem with this? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I think its fine as long as the ghoster doesn't have a financial interest in the horse, if it meant no ghosting and no multiaccounting / JJprod super sweats I would give it up in a heartbeat.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
HEY SOMEONE DEFINE THIS WORD BEFORE STUPID ARGUMENTS WITHOUT KNOWING THE DEFINITION OCCUR
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
HEY SOMEONE DEFINE THIS WORD BEFORE STUPID ARGUMENTS WITHOUT KNOWING THE DEFINITION OCCUR [/ QUOTE ] seriously, is "ghosting" "sweating and giving advice" or "taking over when the big money is on the line"? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
the former
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
if its the former, its fine. if its the latter, its not fine at all. but there's really no way to stop it, so there's nothing we can do about it.
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] HEY SOMEONE DEFINE THIS WORD BEFORE STUPID ARGUMENTS WITHOUT KNOWING THE DEFINITION OCCUR [/ QUOTE ] seriously, is "ghosting" "sweating and giving advice" or "taking over when the big money is on the line"? [/ QUOTE ] What in the OP or any of the replies possibly indicates it could be the latter?? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
From what ansky is saying, ghosting = sweating and giving advice without any financial interest in the sweatee.
Gets a bit more murky if a backer sweats/coaches his backee though imo. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
OP didnt mention financial interest, and that doesnt really make a difference IMO.
i.e. if a staker was on the phone with one of the guys he backs while the backee wins a tournament, i think it's fine |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] HEY SOMEONE DEFINE THIS WORD BEFORE STUPID ARGUMENTS WITHOUT KNOWING THE DEFINITION OCCUR [/ QUOTE ] seriously, is "ghosting" "sweating and giving advice" or "taking over when the big money is on the line"? [/ QUOTE ] What in the OP or any of the replies possibly indicates it could be the latter?? [/ QUOTE ] Well, considering it's KIND OF A BIG DEAL RIGHT NOW, I think it's totally fair to assume that it fits in the discussion-- especially if we're trying to define what's ethical and what isn't, we have a reference point for "clearly isn't". |
![]() |
|
|