#61
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
Fwiw, its actually allowed what Krantz, White and fwf are doing.
On the other hand i dunno if i would like it, if i was tie. But u know, its online poker, gotta see this more pragmatic instead of starting big [censored] ethical discussions. Lee Jones once said on his blog something - imo very interesting - about unenforcable rules. If i would have a problem with that kind of stuff fwf and co are "accused" of, i´d just stop playing online. Everybody basically knows whats going on. It would be a very different story if tie asked fwf who he is playing. But well,tbh, even then i wouldnt trust some online person, when there are a few hundo k´s on the line Edit: And btw, i agree very much with curtains. I do not see that big of an advantage |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
[ QUOTE ]
i really really really hate having the opinion of multiple people with varying styles, plays on later streets are often set up by style and play on previous streets and there are very few combinations of players that are good for each other. there are definitely people that i would like to have help me, but others that i would not even enjoy the help of. in fact, ine some cases, i'd rather have someone who plays lower stakes just so i could ask fundamental questions to from time to time before i made a REALLY bad call, or to stop me from tilting (the biggest, by far, benefit of multiple people 'conferencing'). [/ QUOTE ] this makes the most sense of anything said here |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
[ QUOTE ]
Honestly, I think that in poker, I'd prefer to play a headsup match against 3 people of equal strength colluding, than one player. This is very pronounced in blitz chess, when working together with 2-3 people, assuming all are relatively equal strength, generally produces worse results than just playing normally because all the differing viewpoints can be really distracting. At least this has always been my experience. Whenever I have played poker with someone watching me, it drives me completely insane when they try to give advice that's contrary to what I'm about to do. It's simply impossible to focus when you only have so much time to make a decision. [/ QUOTE ] I bet if you took a group of three very strong chess players who were close friends, worked on each others' games a lot, and had a lot of experience playing together, that they would play better as a team than individually (assuming this was some version of chess where taking longer on every decision didn't hurt you). I think, ethically speaking, that it is somewhat shady, but not that bad. I think people can generally assume it's going on at nosebleed stakes, so it isn't super dishonest or anything. I think what PA does is significantly worse. These guys are still playing on their own accounts, and the owner of the account still has the final say on a given action. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
while i think it might be borderline unethical, i couldn't care less if the situation was similar to what happened, i.e. some vv good players teaming up, playing on one of their OWN accts. now say the acct was of a known fish, a big loser, and that he had agreed with two vv good players to team up and play together. THAT would be [censored] up obv, bc you're not playing the fish you thought, but the fish and two experts (who would undoubtedly be making all the decisions). i realize however a situation like this hasn't happened yet (that we know about). fwiw i would hate playing on a "team" personally, as no two players have the EXACT same playing style and i could see some big disagreements in some pretty big pots. that's not good.
|
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] cts has never ever conferenced about a hand - when he stayed w us this summer he would go in the other room to play and not talk to anybody the whole time [/ QUOTE ] ya but he has a superuser account evidence: http://www.pokerhand.org/?1261209 [/ QUOTE ] Seriously though wtf cts, what a sicko |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] i really really really hate having the opinion of multiple people with varying styles, plays on later streets are often set up by style and play on previous streets and there are very few combinations of players that are good for each other. there are definitely people that i would like to have help me, but others that i would not even enjoy the help of. in fact, ine some cases, i'd rather have someone who plays lower stakes just so i could ask fundamental questions to from time to time before i made a REALLY bad call, or to stop me from tilting (the biggest, by far, benefit of multiple people 'conferencing'). [/ QUOTE ] this makes the most sense of anything said here [/ QUOTE ] I agree that the greatest benefit of 'conferencing' is the elimination of egregious slips and of tilt. But I think that's pretty huge at nosebleeds, where the pressure of winning/losing 6 figures is a crucial part of the game. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
3 people trying to come out with 1 decision
wouldnt that end up with arguements and confusion? |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
against the rules nah, unethical meh, pretty ghey yup
|
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
i think 4 people to hand would actually be counter productive ifa nything, dobut iw would help much
|
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ethicality of High Stakes HU - DaEvila
[ QUOTE ]
while i think it might be borderline unethical, i couldn't care less if the situation was similar to what happened, i.e. some vv good players teaming up, playing on one of their OWN accts. now say the acct was of a known fish, a big loser, and that he had agreed with two vv good players to team up and play together. THAT would be [censored] up obv, bc you're not playing the fish you thought, but the fish and two experts (who would undoubtedly be making all the decisions). i realize however a situation like this hasn't happened yet (that we know about). fwiw i would hate playing on a "team" personally, as no two players have the EXACT same playing style and i could see some big disagreements in some pretty big pots. that's not good. [/ QUOTE ] This does happen. Except with just one expert instead of two experts and the fish on the account. |
|
|