Cheating in Online Poker

[Ansky]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm not going to lie, if this was as easy as "belowabove2" and "lilholdem2" in the 109r and 1k tuesday suddenly, i'm pretty sure i'd just go ahead and approve of it, and then see if annette_16 wanted to paly also

[/ QUOTE ]

1/3 of those ppl is good actually btw.

[0evg0]

[ QUOTE ]
The argument that is -EV so we shouldn't do it just further exposes the divide I see everyday here between people without a whole lot of life experience outside of poker and people who do. The whole thing comes to two fairly simple equations that everyone needs to ask themselves:

A) Is my EV lost from multiaccounting pro's > or < the lost EV from an article decrying those who cheat and its effects on fish

and

B) Is my EV gained short term by not alerting the general public > or < my EV gained long term by creating transparency?

If you must look at things in an "EV" perspective please do so with these two questions.


A few others musings:
-This problem is far less a problem then some are making it out to be
-It is a very complicated problem that would require an exhaustive effort to truly fix
-The analogy to the baseball steroid era is a, frankly, brilliant one in that it explains, with pinpoint precision the fact that for problems such as cheating (multiaccount, et al) and steroids things work on what works out to be a public opinion "reverse bell curve" The game's reputation is hurt short term only to rebound long term from transparency and rule changes. Something to think about.
~J

[/ QUOTE ]

While what you say is true to an extent, I think I didn't make clear that I'm not a great example of the rest of the opinions here as I rarely ever play tournaments anymore, so there would be benefit to MTT players to go along with the harm a damaging article in a major publication would do, whereas there is no benefit to cash players, but only the damage done by possibly scaring off a client pool that merges both MTTs and cash.

[Clayton]

[ QUOTE ]
The game's reputation is hurt short term only to rebound long term from transparency and rule changes. Something to think about.
~J

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just really, really wrong. Baseball isn't poker. For such bad publicity to hit poker at this time post-legislation would be a death sentence. If you really think in this day and age of UIEGA (sp) and the PPA trying to get poker to be loved again by congress that articles like this are good for poker, then I don't know what to say.

When we're talking about a problem that affects less than 1% of online poker players being brought to light and potentially hurting the entire industry, this is just wrong. Because poker isn't baseball, poker is gambling. We've had the Pete Rose era, we're having the Tim Donaghy era.

Do you really think something like what Paul is going to write is going to let poker grow again? wtf? no! it's already viewed negatively by so many people, why give them opportunities to further bury online poker into obscurity?

I'm all about cleaning up whoever does this cheating in online poker. That doesn't include supporting Paul writing an article that will only serve to scare those this doesn't affect into not depositing, and further bringing a negative light to online poker via those who aren't involved in the industry, including congress as well as my family and non-poker friends.

[0evg0]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The game's reputation is hurt short term only to rebound long term from transparency and rule changes. Something to think about.
~J

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just really, really wrong. Baseball isn't poker. For such bad publicity to hit poker at this time post-legislation would be a death sentence. If you really think in this day and age of UIEGA (sp) and the PPA trying to get poker to be loved again by congress that articles like this are good for poker, then I don't know what to say.

When we're talking about a problem that affects less than 1% of online poker players being brought to light and potentially hurting the entire industry, this is just wrong. Because poker isn't baseball, poker is gambling. We've had the Pete Rose era, we're having the Tim Donaghy era.

Do you really think something like what Paul is going to write is going to let poker grow again? wtf? no! it's already viewed negatively by so many people, why give them opportunities to further bury online poker into obscurity?

I'm all about cleaning up whoever does this cheating in online poker. That doesn't include supporting Paul writing an article that will only serve to scare those this doesn't affect into not depositing, and further bringing a negative light to online poker via those who aren't involved in the industry, including congress as well as my family and non-poker friends.

[/ QUOTE ]

oh [censored] this is exactly what needed to be said

[Clayton]

additionally, adanthar is always right

[Soulman]

Wow Clayton, I was totally on the other side until your post. Very well said.

[uclabruinz]

I am all for being educated that this problem is not as bad in scope as I was lead to believe be "he is always right" Adanthar, who made it sound like this is a massive problem but has offered nothing in the way of solution and, as far as I am aware, done nothing to address the problem. I have asked him to clarify with specifics as to what he learned in Vegas that caused him to make this statement, but he has thus far been unwilling to offer any specifics.

If the problem is in the range of a few players multiaccounting on Sundays, then perhaps Clayton is correct that it is not worth damaging the game by making into a huge deal in a mainstream publication.

However, I do want to say again this goes back to two groups of people. First, the poker sites themselves that are apparently doing little to combat cheating and seem confused and inconsistent about their own rules and their application. Second, people have specific knowledge about the cheating that is taking place and refuse to share that knowledge, turn people in, address the problem, etc.

Adanthar sounded a huge warning signal in the other thread, yet I remain completely at a loss as to what he thinks should be done about it, other then that he feels fish do not have a right to know, particularly if it effects winning player's EV, whether the games they are playing in are truly fair.

I do not want to damage online poker more then it needs to be, but if my ultimate decision is to go forward with an article that exposes cheating in online poker, then you can blame me if you want, but you ought to blame the cheaters themselves, the sites that do little to combat them, and the otherwise honest people that would rather sweep it under the rug then address it directly.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
I am all for being educated that this problem is not as bad in scope as I was lead to believe be "he is always right" Adanthar, who made it sound like this is a massive problem but has offered nothing in the way of solution and, as far as I am aware, done nothing to address the problem. I have asked him to clarify with specifics as to what he learned in Vegas that caused him to make this statement, but he has thus far been unwilling to offer any specifics.

If the problem is in the range of a few players multiaccounting on Sundays, then perhaps Clayton is correct that it is not worth damaging the game by making into a huge deal in a mainstream publication.

However, I do want to say again this goes back to two groups of people. First, the poker sites themselves that are apparently doing little to combat cheating and seem confused and inconsistent about their own rules and their application. Second, people have specific knowledge about the cheating that is taking place and refuse to share that knowledge, turn people in, address the problem, etc.

Adanthar sounded a huge warning signal in the other thread, yet I remain completely at a loss as to what he thinks should be done about it, other then that he feels fish do not have a right to know, particularly if it effects winning player's EV, whether the games they are playing in are truly fair.

I do not want to damage online poker more then it needs to be, but if my ultimate decision is to go forward with an article that exposes cheating in online poker, then you can blame me if you want, but you ought to blame the cheaters themselves, the sites that do little to combat them, and the otherwise honest people that would rather sweep it under the rug then address it directly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I <3 adanthar but I agree that there is something perverse and outright contradictory about claiming there's a huge problem of unknown proportions (which adanthar did in the jeff thread):

"you guys have no idea of the magnitude of the situation. I didn't either but I learned a lot this month. listen to Jeff, because he knows what he's talking about, and it's a Big Deal."




Then claiming "everyone knows about it, so there's no reason to publicize it":

"think of it this way: the people whom it directly affects more than 99% of the rest of the poker world are the marginal winners at the 215's, most of whom are right here at 2+2/p5's/wherever and already know about it."



So which is it? Is it a 'big deal' that we're all in the dark about the magnitude of? Or is it something we're already all aware of and really doesn't effect many people?

I think it's a bit disingenuous for adanthar to make a rather alarming proclamation ("it's a big deal and no one is aware of the magnitude") to turn around and then ask not to be too alarmist about it.

I think this is clearly complicated, and I'm not sure I would make any conclusions about the wisdom of publishing such an article -- but I completely empathize with what ucla is trying to do here. It's altogether disconcerting to be told what a big, mysterious problem this is by those "in the know" while simultaneously being told to shutup about it because we already know about the extent of it (o rly?) or because it could be an EV drain. Again, I could understand the case for remaining silent about it, but then again, I question why that advice didn't apply to adanthar and jeff when they made their "it's a big problem and many are unaware" posts.

[Clayton]

[ QUOTE ]

However, I do want to say again this goes back to two groups of people. First, the poker sites themselves that are apparently doing little to combat cheating and seem confused and inconsistent about their own rules and their application.

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to stop throwing this around so lightly imo in this discussion topic until you can quote conversations with PokerStars and have them specifically address your questions in a public venue.

[ QUOTE ]
Second, people have specific knowledge about the cheating that is taking place and refuse to share that knowledge, turn people in, address the problem, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this needs to immediately be addressed as well, but I fail to see how writing a public article that can potentially hurt poker can instantly be considered the best choice.

[ QUOTE ]
I do not want to damage online poker more then it needs to be, but if my ultimate decision is to go forward with an article that exposes cheating in online poker, then you can blame me if you want, but you ought to blame the cheaters themselves, the sites that do little to combat them, and the otherwise honest people that would rather sweep it under the rug then address it directly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I feel like these are really strong words from someone who proclaims to relatively uninformed on the subject manner.

As a matter of being direct, to what extent do you think your article will do anything? What could you hope to write that is going to make PokerStars change their policies?

Why do you think writing an article is the answer to the rampant cheating?

When there are other plans to undertake that do not involve putting the entire reputation of poker at risk, I highly suggest you do your homework.

You're driven, Paul, I'll give you that. It's a very commendable trait. But when you seem so driven as to ignore other options that can prove to be just as effective without potentially ruining online poker's reputation to the general public, then that's borderline being stubborn.

All I ask is that you strongly reconsider other options to an end, while reconsidering your means and the potential damage they can do.

[Clayton]

And let me further clarify my entire motive in this thread.

I think Paul is doing a great thing by charging in and saying something needs to be done, because frankly something definitely needs to be done.

I just happen to be in the camp that thinks writing an article about it is the absolute worst possible solution this community would want, because the uninformed "real world" that we all make fun of for not knowing what it's like to be an online poker player is going to take Paul's words and turn it right back on the entire industry, leaving Paul's intentions moot.

It's simple the wrong atmosphere and environment to write an article. That's all. I suggest we find other means first and foremost.