ZeeJustin the next to get caught multi accounting Party MTTs

[zabt]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but there's no big picture here.

[/ QUOTE ]
There is always a big picture. If you do not understand this then you do not understand history, society, the present, politics, anything really. I do not pretend to understand all these things. And, I do not mean in any way to suggest that what ZeeJustin did is excusable. But, society will be more tolerant of his action now than they would have been in the past (and maybe more tolerant now than they will be in the future). Ignoring the effects society's tolerance of certain behaviors has on those bahaviors is ignore the whole picture. Again, I'm not saying that ZeeJustin is not to blame or that he hasn't done something terribly wrong. But, context is important, not for blame shifting but for better understanding. Notice, I did not say we should blame society, but simply that we ought to examine the big picture.

It's very easy to say: wrong is wrong, and that's the end of the story. ZeeJustin will not be totally ostracized (which would likely be the best deterrent to others). Why not?

[valenzuela]

Ok,I want to give opinion as well... a bit about myself,Im 17 and used to play poker but I left it because I simply didnt had an enviroment to play in( crappy family-shared PC, account reputation,etc).

The ZJ case:
1)Im really happy.. dirtbags with no ethics got screwed, 6 fckuing accounts !!!SIX!!!, SEIS!!! 2+4!!
2) On the other hand, Im guessing that he simply met the wrong kinda friends. Sorry but Its just isnt that easy to say " you guys are inmoral, I wont hung out with you anymore"
3) After this incident Im not sure if I want to become a succesful semi-pro. I think I will become an "expert" chess player instead.

The discussion:
Curtains: if youre inocent read a, if ure not read b
a) You were just unlucky to have your name mentioned, because ppl like me ,who dont know you ,will begin to ponder if youre a cheater or not.
b) fcuk off.
( please dont reply to this part of the post, I dont know curtains at all.. so dont reply telling me that u know him since 2003, etc.)
Bluffthis: I think youre kinda exagerating, but you are right that its better to walk-off from bad influences and that not doing so is a coward act. read my random thought number 2
shaniac: I wouldnt hung out with someone who cheats but I wouldnt turn them in. However thats all theory and no practice
Eldiablo: youre performance on this thread is kinda overrated IMO, but u go make good points.
GrannyMae: lol, i liked youre post.
The guy whow posted the 72o vs AA hand: the best post ive ever seen on 2+2.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]

The point is that the law is not in place for you to decide whats important and what isn't. And if you do decide that you can pick and choose which illegal things are important enough so that you must rat someone out for them and which aren't, anyone else should have that right also.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this statement is that if everyone followed it we'd still be under british rule. There are laws that I choose not to follow. One of them is illegal transportation of alcohol. Having a 20 year, 364 day, and 19 hour old brother be a sober driver while you happen to have beer in the trunk of your car is illegal in the state of Indiana. I know I've stood infront of a judge because of this. Will that prevent me from doing it again? nope. Does that mean I think Justin Zee should cheat? nope.

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
I do not think ZJ took advantage when he had multiple accounts at one table. I have met him and know plenty of people who are friends with him. If you'd read my post, you'd realize that I am not defending his actions, and I realize that others could take advantage, I just don't think he did.

I also clearly acknowledged that each entry has equivilent value and does hurt others because he is a +EV player.

I think the awful logic here is for you to suggest that I consider several pros with multiple accounts when discussing whether the effect of ZJ's multiaccounting was small. ZJ is not responsible for what other pros do.

If someone ends up with two accounts on the same table and takes advantage, it affects EV. I don't think ZJ did... although I do think if he got two accounts at a final table it would be impossible to avoid. The chief affect on others' EV is, as you stated, having to play against extra entries from a good player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Slow down these posts .. I am only on page 116 (50 more than when I went to sleep). Would someone please comment on my opinion on why multi-accounts are +EV. I posted it before but I have seen many posts simply get ignored because of the volume of responses. I may not get to this post for another 20 pages.

"I think most people are not aware of the main advantage of having multiple accounts besides the obvious ones of chip dumping and seeing more than one set of holes cards if you are at the same table.

It is called Kamikaze accounts. If you are one of the top pros in these events who do you fear the most - other pros. If you can eliminate them, then your EV goes way up. It would be easy for you to beat a tournament full of amateurs.

So what do you do - you wait until one of your kamikaze accounts is seated at a table with a known pro. Then, when the opportunity is there to bust them on a coin flip, you take it. You would normally never risk your only entry on a coin flip at this point but since you have kamikaze accounts, go for it. If it fails, you still have accounts left. But if it succeeds, you have doubled up as well as taking out a main competitor. Then you can use him to take out more pros until finally chip dumping to yourself at the end. Pretty slick and totally immoral in my book."

[liz890]

I can't believe this guy. It's amazing. His reply was HORRIBLE. He's actually trying to justify breaking the rules.

It doesn't surprise me that people do this but the most I got out of his thing was: Everyone else does it... what's the big deal.These kids really need to grow up. This is the sort of crap that is going to get online gaming banned in the US.

[bocablkr]

Very nicely stated, sir.

[BassMasterK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We feel largely the same way about it. The difference is that I knew about it and you didn't. Other people seem to think my ethical issue is that I knew about it and didn't inform on people. Maybe they are right.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you were the sort of person who was going to inform on people, you wouldn't know about any cheating because nobody would tell you about it.

To expect you to suddenly change personality is unfair.

Lori

[/ QUOTE ]



You are probably right Lori. He is a coward and one WHO LOOKS THE OTHER WAY and DOESN'T RAT OUT A CROOK to help those being preyed on. Such a person probably doesn't have the backbone to change.

[/ QUOTE ]

I and others have made my position on snitching pretty clear throughout this thread. It's a non-controversial ethical guideline to most, and I will try to not dignify your attacks on my character anymore, because they have been proven to be irrelevant and besides-the-point.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is stunning.

Shane, I feel you here. I am neither surprised nor disappointed that people are "going after" multi accounters. It is something that needs to be done to clean up this community, particularly at a time when it seems our livelihood/recreation/whatever may be in jeopardy.

It's equally stunning to me that people are up in arms at Shane for not ratting, snitching, informing the authorities - whatever verb you're keen on using. Shane was told something in confidence and was trusted to keep it in confidence. So what you're doing here is throwing stones at Shane for keeping his word. That's ludicrous.

A man is as good as his word.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong...a GOOD man is as good as his word.

If someone I know, friend or aquaintence did something dishonest that cheated you out of tens of thousands of dollars, would you still pat me on the back if I kept my mouth shut? How does it feel when it effects YOU?

Lucky for you I would do the right thing. To bad you wouldn't do that for the rest of us.

[Some Pig]

This will be a historic thread in that it will probably garner the most number of responses of any thread in the history of the 2+2 forums. I want to be able to say that I participated in this thread. I want to be able to tell my great grand children that I was there. So here is my post.

[ononimo]

quoted from Lee:
"4. We do *not* permit (and have never permitted) players to have multiple accounts. Now, what does that mean? Suppose Gank goes to get his sandwich and his cousin sits down to play for him. Suppose further that his cousin has a PokerStars userid “GanksCousin”, that he uses regularly. Is this a problem? No – he’s just sitting in for Gank for a little while. What we *do* want to avoid is one player having two or more userids that he uses for anonymity, multiple tournament buyins, or other inappropriate uses. When we find that sort of abuse, we close the duplicate accounts. We would usually warn players before confiscating any money from accounts, but if the warnings were ignored and the violations were blatant, we might go so far as to confiscate money won by a single player using multiple accounts."

Looks like Stars warns offenders before confiscation and Party doesn't ... does anyone prefer the Stars policy to the Party approach?

[locutus2002]

Whoever took the account names out should put them back.

The community has a right to as much transparancy as possible in this issue.