Impressive, or standard?

[pleno1]

The WSOP support, encourage, advertise and promote this interestingly.

[WotRTheChances]

Wonder if Panka folds if the guy cold to like 1,475,000. Got to assume vs cold 4 of this size he's up against 88+ AQ+, maybe even as tight as TT+ AK. At least vs something <1.6 or 1.7, he can feasibly have a range he's not calling it off with.

edit: not saying I think everyone who cold 4-bets to 2.1 here has a range as tight as 88+ AQ+, some would do it with any pair making it a size where they have to call off vs the ss, making it look strong, but having some equity vs the range villain goes with as well as stuff like ATs+ some suited broadways. Less likely at a massive FT though, vs a guy i assume he has a read on as being unlikley to get very OOL or take hugely high variance lines.

[tikay]

It's fairly obvious that this will be argued along partisan lines, & be self-advocating, & nobody is going to change their mind any time soon.

It begs the question though, if we find it acceptable in "Live" poker, which probably amounts to less than 0.01% of all poker played....

What happens Online, on a Sunday night, when all the Big Boys come out to play, & are able to do so in the privacy of their homes, or maybe with a bunch of like-minded mates?

We have players who are staked, or stakees, who are horses or have horses, who run stables or are part of stables, & people taking action in each other.

Do we all get on Skype & help each other with info?

Have to add, I have zero knowledge of how all this works, or even if it does, but if we can defend it in Live poker, it must surely happen a great deal more often Online?

 

[pleno1]

It's fairly obvious that this will be argued along partisan lines, & be self-advocating, & nobody is going to change their mind any time soon.

It begs the question though, if we find it acceptable in "Live" poker, which probably amounts to less than 0.01% of all poker played....

What happens Online, on a Sunday night, when all the Big Boys come out to play, & are able to do so in the privacy of their homes, or maybe with a bunch of like-minded mates?

We have players who are staked, or stakees, who are horses or have horses, who run stables or are part of stables, & people taking action in each other.

Do we all get on Skype & help each other with info?

Have to add, I have zero knowledge of how all this works, or even if it does, but if we can defend it in Live poker, it must surely happen a great deal more often Online?

 

people regularly buy accounts deep in major tournaments online. previously if there was a german or a russian who was deep in a tournament and went from tight to loose you could know who it was pretty easily. now almost every countries grinders are monopolized by one big staking group. spanish, portuguese, brazilian, bulgarian, romanian, they all have these super stables ran by the top players in the respective countries and i would bet a lot of money they are taking over when deep

[tikay]

It's fairly obvious that this will be argued along partisan lines, & be self-advocating, & nobody is going to change their mind any time soon.

It begs the question though, if we find it acceptable in "Live" poker, which probably amounts to less than 0.01% of all poker played....

What happens Online, on a Sunday night, when all the Big Boys come out to play, & are able to do so in the privacy of their homes, or maybe with a bunch of like-minded mates?

We have players who are staked, or stakees, who are horses or have horses, who run stables or are part of stables, & people taking action in each other.

Do we all get on Skype & help each other with info?

Have to add, I have zero knowledge of how all this works, or even if it does, but if we can defend it in Live poker, it must surely happen a great deal more often Online?

 

people regularly buy accounts deep in major tournaments online. previously if there was a german or a russian who was deep in a tournament and went from tight to loose you could know who it was pretty easily. now almost every countries grinders are monopolized by one big staking group. spanish, portuguese, brazilian, bulgarian, romanian, they all have these super stables ran by the top players in the respective countries and i would bet a lot of money they are taking over when deep

That's scary.

It's unpoliceable though, I assume?

I guess poker players will get what they deserve - whatever that is.  

I'm now digging anyone out here btw, I just find the topic disturbing, & I'm trying to see how it extends Online.

[pleno1]

yeah unpoliceable, done over team viewer given control. or simply on Skype saying the exact bet sizes/timings etc to do.

[pleno1]

oh and the group of indians who are playing the early phase of tournaments for high stakes grinders and then they take over whichever guy has the deepest stacks.. i should probably stop!

[tikay]

oh and the group of indians who are playing the early phase of tournaments for high stakes grinders and then they take over whichever guy has the deepest stacks.. i should probably stop!

You should probably continue, imo.

Seriously though, this can't end well for poker generally, can it?

Are there any instances of players being disqualified for such things? 'Stars, for example, always seemed to me to carry their responsibilities as "the" Online poker provider to deal with these matters very responsibly.

I'm wayyyy out of touch, but other than the Telscher thing, & that 16 year old kid who got the lot then chirped about it, I don't know of any examples. Presumably a few have been disqualified?

Do 'Stars (not picking on them, but you'll get my drift) have specific rules, T & C's etc to deal with it? Do they consider it a problem, do you know?

[TightEnd]

if this sort of thing was widely known by the recs, it would be terrible news for poker wouldn't it?

just seems like a PR disaster waiting to happen. Again.

[tikay]

if this sort of thing was widely known by the recs, it would be terrible news for poker wouldn't it?

just seems like a PR disaster waiting to happen. Again.

I can't imagine for a moment they would envisage such a thing. It would certainly not encourage them to keep investing in these big buck Tourneys. 

I can't imagine it happens at the lower end much though. 

[Tal]

if this sort of thing was widely known by the recs, it would be terrible news for poker wouldn't it?

just seems like a PR disaster waiting to happen. Again.

Exactly.

It's stuff like this that completely puts me off wanting to play an EPT or similar.

People pretend the game's moved on from Puggy Pearson and Amarillo Slim.

[arbboy]

The amount of players whom do not wish to participate in EPT's because of the inevitable issues the live stream brings are far far outweighed by the amount of new participants the live stream brings not only to the EPT, but to the poker world in general.

The positives outweigh the negatives in my opinion.

You never hear about the ones who just leave poker though because of these issues.  I could name numerous people who have stopped playing poker at semi serious levels for various reasons because of live streams but no one knows about them and/or the reason why they stopped playing they just leave the game quietly.

[George2Loose]

The amount of players whom do not wish to participate in EPT's because of the inevitable issues the live stream brings are far far outweighed by the amount of new participants the live stream brings not only to the EPT, but to the poker world in general.

The positives outweigh the negatives in my opinion.

You never hear about the ones who just leave poker though because of these issues.  I could name numerous people who have stopped playing poker at semi serious levels for various reasons because of live streams but no one knows about them and/or the reason why they stopped playing they just leave the game quietly.

Probably an excuse for not being able to win anymore

[arbboy]

The amount of players whom do not wish to participate in EPT's because of the inevitable issues the live stream brings are far far outweighed by the amount of new participants the live stream brings not only to the EPT, but to the poker world in general.

The positives outweigh the negatives in my opinion.

You never hear about the ones who just leave poker though because of these issues.  I could name numerous people who have stopped playing poker at semi serious levels for various reasons because of live streams but no one knows about them and/or the reason why they stopped playing they just leave the game quietly.

Probably an excuse for not being able to win anymore

It can be but not always.  I could name 5 people who stopped playing low stake donkfests at genting stoke on a nightly basis (events these guys could easily afford obviously and had played for years) when they were being streamed on the net for a few months for various reasons not involving cheating (ie benefit cheats/family/boss potentially finding out they were gambling/owing people money and not wanting to be seen etc etc).  I don't think people really think through this live stream stuff fully.  There is a reason why casinos don't live stream roulette wheels with punters on them in their casinos (because they wouldn't have any punters left if they did - i could think of numerous roulette sessions with certain punters who would be much more entertaining for the average live stream loner at home to watch than a bog standard £30 donkfest).  Yet they charge poker players a lumpy risk free rake to host an event and expect them to gamble in the full view of the public without receiving anything in return.  A lot of people just choose not to play.

IMO you should be able to play any poker event with total discretion and you should never be forced to show your hole cards if you choose not to.  I have played in numerous GPS's etc and been warned if i don't put my cards in the spot for the camera to pick them up i will be thrown out of the event. If casinos think they have this right then they need to be paying players a fee to play their events imo.  I just choose not to play any more.  If you want to say i can't beat the game any more then you have that right to believe that.  When i pay big money to gamble i expect to have total control over the situation and not give away any information i don't want to when i pay a 10% risk free fee for the event to take place to the casino.  I don't pay 10% rake to entertain people at home for free and allow professional staking groups to use my info to their stables advantage.

[JGill_DTD]

I don't see what realistically can be done about the live situation with streaming. They either keep it as it is where friends may relay information (that potentially they could have picked up on breaks) or isolate the players away from any external viewers killing the atmosphere but not being able to receive this information (and I imagine legally they wouldn't be able to implement this, stopping people from going outside, contacting friends/family etc.). There's nothing stopping a player from setting up a recording of the live stream then running to see what happened between hands or on breaks in any key hands.

I might be a little off with my comparison, but the way I see it is two low league teams playing one another, team A get a penalty. A fan catches eye contact with the penalty taker and says "I've seen him train, he ALWAYS dives to the left". Inevitably he slots it away to the right as the keeper dives to the left. The fan shouldn't come under fire for offering advice, the goalkeeper should come under fire for implementing an exploitable strategy.

Think this is entirely different to 'ghosting' that may occur online. In the live situation the player goes into and comes out of the hand making all the decisions himself, the online situation means the player can hand his account over, go to sleep and wake up to find out where "he" finished.