quick ethics checkup: are any of these cheating?

[WutRUTryin2Hit]

I don't really play tourneys often cause I'd rather make less swingy poker money, but a good friend of mine is a high volume tourney player and occasionally I will play for him when the need arises. After reading the thread about the bluffmag/sorel thing, I wanted to just doublecheck a few spots that I have been in recently, cause I don't want to break the rules, and I don't think any of these feel like cheating, but I got to thinking that probably a lot of people are doing unethical things that don't feel like it (ghosting type stuff). Here are 3 examples which are different because of the actual reason the account-holder can't play:

1. Friend is in a bunch of tourneys and has to go pick up his mom from somewhere unexpectedly, so I hop in and play for an hour. (also build up bigstack in 100r he blows, bastard).

2. Friend is on massive tilt from a few sick beats in a row, so I play his tourneys for 15 minutes while he has a jog around the block to cool off.

3. Friend is heads-up for live event seat and his internet dies, I play it out for him on the phone but he's actually saying what he wants to do.

The main diff between these is the urgency of him having to leave the computer, you know? Like in case 1 he COULD tell his mom to get a long taxi ride, in case 2 he could play on tilt, case 3 he is obviously in huge trouble.

Just wondering if any of these cross any lines. If it matters, we don't have a strict deal on $$, although he has given me some money in the past when I win money for him, but mostly it's a matter of jumping in to help out.

Sorry if this doesn't belong in mttc or is retarded. I'm not smart with the tourney scene.

[schwah]

all of those are fine imo as long as you didnt enter any of the tourneys yourself

[THEOSU]

[ QUOTE ]
all of those are fine imo as long as you didnt enter any of the tourneys yourself

[/ QUOTE ]


i'd say #1 and #3 are clearly fine, but #2 is dodgy. i mean, if he's going to go cool off, he shouldn't have a substitute.

[Pudge714]

[ QUOTE ]
all of those are fine imo as long as you didnt enter any of the tourneys yourself

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you saying if you are still in or if you entered them?

[MJBuddy]

I think 2 is dodgy.

When we do something to tilt a player, the benefits of that play are also meant to be a reward (crack rockets with LSC and send someone off on tilt to get the rest of their stack). Someone's mental ability to handle bad beats should be a factor in their ability to win. If everyone had a player sit in while they were tilting, poker would become a tag game. That said, online poker is not one player per hand, and for that reason, #3 is clearly fine and it may justify #2, but I do feel it's a tad dodgy.

[Pudge714]

BTW from a poker ethics perspective the answer to all three should be the same, from a real life ethics perspective it's different.

[Mondogarage]

Obviously, opinions are going to differ greatly.

I think that ethically, #3 is the only one that is not dodgy. You're clicking the buttons, but essentially, you're filling the role of the guy that read the cards to that blind pro in WSOP. You have zero decision making, and you didn't play in the tournament yourself.

The other two are simply flat out dodgy. If it's unethical in live poker, it's unethical online -- it's just often harder to prove to have taken place. Lots of people in life have to leave lots of things unexpectedly. Unless that same benefit is made available to everyone, it is an unfair advantage.

Of course, if you played in any of the above tournament examples, then stepping in under any circumstance is highly unethical.