On Ghosting

[Soulman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Coaching in poker is so totally different than coaching in other sports that it would be akin to someone's bowling coach throwing the ball for them during a tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the opposite of correct. Coaching or giving advise in a tournament is more like the bowling coach saying, "If you throw the ball with more spin, you will hit more strikes" and is equally unlikely to influence the outcome of the game beyond the player's actual skill level.

[/ QUOTE ]
The difference is, in bowling or other sports, there's a physical aspect that the coach can't perform. If the coaching involves giving advice while a hand is still playing out, that is very different from other forms of coaching. This is pretty obvious isn't it?

[KneeCo]

[ QUOTE ]
In other sports there are two elements needed to succeed - knowing what to do and having the skills to do it. In poker there is one - knowing what to do. Clicking a mouse takes no skill. Telling someone where they should be placing their bowling ball is not the same as telling someone they should raise $4k in this situation. The player's skill in bowling determines whether they can succeed in that situation. There is no poker skill needed by the student to succeed if Shaniac tells them to raise in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, you understand poker goot.

[/ QUOTE ]

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Coaching in poker is so totally different than coaching in other sports that it would be akin to someone's bowling coach throwing the ball for them during a tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the opposite of correct. Coaching or giving advise in a tournament is more like the bowling coach saying, "If you throw the ball with more spin, you will hit more strikes" and is equally unlikely to influence the outcome of the game beyond the player's actual skill level.

[/ QUOTE ]


In other sports there are two elements needed to succeed - knowing what to do and having the skills to do it. In poker there is one - knowing what to do. Clicking a mouse takes no skill. Telling someone where they should be placing their bowling ball is not the same as telling someone they should raise $4k in this situation. The player's skill in bowling determines whether they can succeed in that situation. There is no poker skill needed by the student to succeed if Shaniac tells them to raise in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason I disagree is because I feel like a lot of the true success at the table comes from being in tune with the rhythm of the game, being able to absorb all the game dynamics and create your own style/opinions based on that. Anyone who's tried coaching a rank amateur in a tournament can tell you that giving them specific instructions on plays during a hand does not easily translate to that person being able to play well.

Getting one-time advise from an expert friend when I am in a tournament has been useful at times for me, and I never thought it was unethical, although I guess it's possible that I am a scumbag, too.

[Yuv]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I understand your point, but it baffles me as to why people wouldn't blindly follow the advice of the better player? Does it matter who gets the "final" decision? I know plattsburgh went against JJ's advice, as apparently did mlaggoo/that crew's advice. But isn't that kind of like....
not having Barry Bonds pinch hit for you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, you understand poker goot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I generally dislike stealthmunk's posts, and I generally like your posts, but Justin is spot on here. Your sarcasm is kinda absurd considering he's right.

Yes, Matt wasn't being unethical since he did play on his own. BUT, if he thinks gobbo is better than him and doesn't care about ethics, he should have let gobbo play for him. It makes no sense not doing so. The only reason other than ethics is pure pride.

If you don't care about the rules, let the best player make the decisions.

[BAK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Coaching in poker is so totally different than coaching in other sports that it would be akin to someone's bowling coach throwing the ball for them during a tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the opposite of correct. Coaching or giving advise in a tournament is more like the bowling coach saying, "If you throw the ball with more spin, you will hit more strikes" and is equally unlikely to influence the outcome of the game beyond the player's actual skill level.

[/ QUOTE ]


In other sports there are two elements needed to succeed - knowing what to do and having the skills to do it. In poker there is one - knowing what to do. Clicking a mouse takes no skill. Telling someone where they should be placing their bowling ball is not the same as telling someone they should raise $4k in this situation. The player's skill in bowling determines whether they can succeed in that situation. There is no poker skill needed by the student to succeed if Shaniac tells them to raise in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason I disagree is because I feel like a lot of the true success at the table comes from being in tune with the rhythm of the game, being able to absorb all the game dynamics and create your own style/opinions based on that. Anyone who's tried coaching a rank amateur in a tournament can tell you that giving them specific instructions on plays during a hand does not easily translate to that person being able to play well.

Getting one-time advise from an expert friend when I am in a tournament has been useful at times for me, and I never thought it was unethical, although I guess it's possible that I am a scumbag, too.

[/ QUOTE ]

While the couching during a tournament may not have a dramatic effect on their poker skills over the long term, it certainly can during the particular tournament and that is completely unfair to the other participants in the tournament.


Whether that makes you a scumbag, well, if the shoe fits. Not that I expect anyone ro really care. But this whole thread has been very disappointing.

[Yuv]

Bak, i'm not sure you two are talking about the same thing. If Partrik Antonius tells Shane during the break that he should be raising more in EP or that he should c-bet less, that's not unethical.

If your coach online tells you to raise a specific hands and walks you thru it, it's def unethical.

I think you're correct about the difference between poker and other sports. I'm not sure that what Shane means qualify for the bowling analogy.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]

While the couching during a tournament may not have a dramatic effect on their poker skills over the long term, it certainly can during the particular tournament and that is completely unfair to the other participants in the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

You missed my point completely. It has a negligible short-term effect, too. If I go up to my friend in a live tournament and whisper to him information I have on one of his opponents such as a tell or playing patterns, that's equally unfair. Having friends who are good at poker gives you an advantage in poker, it's true.

[ QUOTE ]
Whether that makes you a scumbag, well, if the shoe fits. Not that I expect anyone ro really care. But this whole thread has been very disappointing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, you sound like a self-righteous jerkoff.

[KneeCo]

Yuv,

The first part of SM's post is the part that I strongly disagree with and is inconsistent with the pinch hitter analogy (although the JJP = Bonds reference is quite good in a lot of ways).

SM says:
"it baffles me as to why people wouldn't blindly follow the advice of the better player?"
To me this is laughable statement.

He then says "But isn't that kind of like.... not having Barry Bonds pinch hit for you? "
But that's not what it's like at all.

It is true that, ethics be damned, if having our name at the top of the results is all we care about we should hand over the controls to the better player, I agree with that (although notice that I said, if all we care about is having our account win the tournament, rather than if all we care about is $$$. Although off-topic, I'll mention that if all we care about is money I think it isn't the right decision in a lot of sitautions to hand over the controls, given the real possibility of being caught and the monetary consequences of having our account(s) frozen and/or having our reputation in the poker community destroyed).

However, having a pinch hitter, i.e. handing over the controls, is very, very different then "blindly following the advice" of the better player while we are in the hand. There are a bunch of times better players than I have ghosted me given me a piece of advice that I wouldn't agree with because of X, Y and Z and we would then talk about it, and sometimes I can convince the player that my line was better, but more important than convincing him after the fact, I understood at the time I rejected the advice why it was flawed IMO.
Similarly, I've sweated worse players than me and they've made moves contrary to my advice which, upon further inspection, made a lot of sense.

A huge part of this is in what Shaniac posted, but also it's just the nature of the game, in fact it's kind of what 2p2 hand posting is based on. There are a ton of posters on here who are way better than me, but in a given thread, on a given line, my decision might actually be better. In fact, the idea that where there is disagreement the better player's line is always right, is completely preposterous, and I stand by my statement that someone who thinks like that still has a lot to learn about poker.

Even if JJP is 100 times the player Platts is overall, it doesn't change the fact that even JJP has leaks (ZOMG NO!!) and in some spots Platts might, because he is better in that situation and/or he is in the tournament in a way JJP can't be, recognize that the advice is flawed and ignore it.

This is so completely different than having a pitch hitter. The analogy breaks down because the cards have already been dealt so there is concurrency between the advice and the situation, which is totally different than choosing to hand off before the next decision arises (which again, is the way to go if you are amoral, know the pinch hitter is better than you and you're primarily interested in getting the gold FTOPS avatar for your account).

[BAK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

While the couching during a tournament may not have a dramatic effect on their poker skills over the long term, it certainly can during the particular tournament and that is completely unfair to the other participants in the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

You missed my point completely. It has a negligible short-term effect, too. If I go up to my friend in a live tournament and whisper to him information I have on one of his opponents such as a tell or playing patterns, that's equally unfair. Having friends who are good at poker gives you an advantage in poker, it's true.

[ QUOTE ]
Whether that makes you a scumbag, well, if the shoe fits. Not that I expect anyone ro really care. But this whole thread has been very disappointing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, you sound like a self-righteous jerkoff.

[/ QUOTE ]


We were talking about coaching during an online tourney. We are not talking about a situation like posting in this forum that you are at someone's table in a tourney and having people post their thoughts on how that person plays. I also see those situations as different. That is not the point I was addressing. I was adressing your point that coaching online during a tourney and coaching a bowler were the same thing. They are not.

If the shoe doesn't fit, that is good.

[Soulman]

[ QUOTE ]
A huge part of this is in what Shaniac posted, but also it's just the nature of the game, in fact it's kind of what 2p2 hand posting is based on. There are a ton of posters on here who are way better than me, but in a given thread, on a given line, my decision might actually be better. In fact, the idea that where there is disagreement the better player's line is always right, is completely preposterous, and I stand by my statement that someone who thinks like that still has a lot to learn about poker.

[/ QUOTE ]
This obviously goes out the window if the coach/sweater has followed the whole/most of the tournament. In that case, following the advice of the better poster will, in general, be better.