Brian Hastings

[Honeybadger]

Saw some vitriol towards him on twitter etc and so googled to find out what he had done.

Turns out he was playing online from the USA using a VPN and someone else's pokerstars account.

It seems to me that this is not exactly the worst crime in the world. He was not multi-accounting in order to cheat (by having his opponents not know it was him), he was only doing it so that he could play some online tourneys whilst in the USA. And from what I gather he contacted as many of his opponents as he could to tell them it was him playing on the account.

What do you guys reckon? Was he really all that out of order/unethical? I realise ofc that by the letter of the law what he did was wrong, since it break the T&Cs etc. But it just does not seem that bad to me.

[rfgqqabc]

The account started off playing smaller stakes and played a lot worse. I thought it was a fish until a few days later I saw he'd 10xed the stakes and the games werent full anymore. Even if he didnt set out to cheat his opponents by hiding his name, the advantage he did from doing so was simply huge. The account played a bunch of plo against people who might not have played Hastings and he only contacted a few friends to tell them. David Baker who pointed it out had played thousands of hands with the account before being told it was Stinger. Berri Sweet posted 2 hands he would have almost certainly played very differently if he knew it was Hastings on the account, one where he 3bet bluffed a flop and one where he checked back a pretty slam dunk valuebet vs a reg. Stingers name change cost Berri probably 30k across those two pots and a pretty large amount in "ev" too if you'd rather not be results orientated.

Hastings has offered a bunch of his friends friends some equity back. I think this shows that he knows it was extremely unethical. I do kinda feel for him, and if he someone had got it out much wider in the community to the extent where he was just vpning I wouldn't particularly have a problem even though it is extremely harsh on the other american grinders that have had to significantly change their lifestyle to move out of the US to play on stars. He certainly exploited playing under a fresh account to get action. He even got to play isildur, a privilege the Hastings account probably doesn't enjoy too much.

http://calvinayre.com/2015/06/29/poker/brian-hastings-scandal-a-view-the-poker-world-doesnt-want-to-hear-by-obst/

The above link is the best summary/opinion I've seen.

[doubleup]

****

[vegaslover]

If that was all he was doing (VPN), personally couldn't care less, but it appears muh more than that.
TBH, why the fuck would any new blood want to start playing poker. Pretty obvious there is a hell of a lot of very shady shit going on, what is still secret will no doubt be many times worse.

Even live is bad, when WSOP updates are stating that players on FTs are asking their rail for exact hand details in 30 mins time!

[Honeybadger]

The account started off playing smaller stakes and played a lot worse. I thought it was a fish until a few days later I saw he'd 10xed the stakes and the games werent full anymore. Even if he didnt set out to cheat his opponents by hiding his name, the advantage he did from doing so was simply huge. The account played a bunch of plo against people who might not have played Hastings and he only contacted a few friends to tell them. David Baker who pointed it out had played thousands of hands with the account before being told it was Stinger. Berri Sweet posted 2 hands he would have almost certainly played very differently if he knew it was Hastings on the account, one where he 3bet bluffed a flop and one where he checked back a pretty slam dunk valuebet vs a reg. Stingers name change cost Berri probably 30k across those two pots and a pretty large amount in "ev" too if you'd rather not be results orientated.

Hastings has offered a bunch of his friends friends some equity back. I think this shows that he knows it was extremely unethical. I do kinda feel for him, and if he someone had got it out much wider in the community to the extent where he was just vpning I wouldn't particularly have a problem even though it is extremely harsh on the other american grinders that have had to significantly change their lifestyle to move out of the US to play on stars. He certainly exploited playing under a fresh account to get action. He even got to play isildur, a privilege the Hastings account probably doesn't enjoy too much.

http://calvinayre.com/2015/06/29/poker/brian-hastings-scandal-a-view-the-poker-world-doesnt-want-to-hear-by-obst/

The above link is the best summary/opinion I've seen.

Okay fair enough, that does sound pretty shady then. I was under the impression after just a quick google search that all he had done was play some of the SCOOPs. If he has played loads of cash games using this different account then it is obviously very unethical - unless he told EVERYONE that he played against that it was him playing (in which case I have no problem with it), which he obviously did not.

[tikay]

Hi Stu,

Your OP had me gasping - "how can Stu be so wrong?" was my initial reaction - but it now appears you were not fully up to date, so that's fair enough.

And yes, he told SOME of his mates, who, please note, all said nothing. So the rest of us were getting screwed, unless we were amongst the elite clan.

And now he's offering to "refund some equity" (what that mean, what sort of clever form of words is that?) to those same mates. What about Billy No Mates though?

I've asked loads of people here in Vegas about the story. They mostly look down at the ground, afraid to make eye contact. It seems a whole bunch of people are doing the same thing.

This is eroding the very basis of Online Poker, & needs sorting.

Have PokerStars commented yet? They need to, they really do. As Mr H is such a prominent name, if 'Stars say nothing, & do nothing, they are effectively saying "it's fine guys, you can all, do it, off you go".

This sort of nonsense will soon destroy Online Poker at the higher limits.

Fortunately, the great bulk of players - 90% +? - are micro limit, & it does not happen much at that level, so it will be fine, & the smaller rooms who cater for small-ball players, & who have imaginative Promotions, & who disallow third party software, are seeing very significant y-o-y increases in revenue. No other sites are.  People need to be able to trust the Sites they play on.   

[Karabiner]

Fortunately, the great bulk of players - 90% +? - are micro limit, & it does not happen much at that level, so it will be fine, & the smaller rooms who cater for small-ball players, & who have imaginative Promotions, & who disallow third party software, are seeing very significant y-o-y increases in revenue. No other sites are.  People need to be able to trust the Sites they play on.   

Care to mention any of these smaller sites? 

[Marky147]

Fortunately, the great bulk of players - 90% +? - are micro limit, & it does not happen much at that level, so it will be fine, & the smaller rooms who cater for small-ball players, & who have imaginative Promotions, & who disallow third party software, are seeing very significant y-o-y increases in revenue. No other sites are.  People need to be able to trust the Sites they play on.   

Care to mention any of these smaller sites? 

[AlcaPwn]

There is another angle to this in that a lot of people had bracelet bets with Hastings this year - did he disclose that he had been playing (and crushing I understand) the big mixed games on Stars?

In addition it looks like a number of PS Team Pro must have known that Hastings was behind the NH account.  Did they have an obligation to report this knowledge to their superiors at Stars (without a doubt imo), and if they did and failed to do so what sanctions should they face for being complicit?

[mulhuzz]

He should have to pay every cent back he won whilst playing under another account and if anyone won from him he put himself in a position to be negatively free rolled.

It's really bad imo.

[tikay]

There is another angle to this in that a lot of people had bracelet bets with Hastings this year - did he disclose that he had been playing (and crushing I understand) the big mixed games on Stars?

In addition it looks like a number of PS Team Pro must have known that Hastings was behind the NH account.  Did they have an obligation to report this knowledge to their superiors at Stars (without a doubt imo), and if they did and failed to do so what sanctions should they face for being complicit?

It appears  lot of them knew all along, but, we have to assume, failed to mention it to 'Stars.

'Stars are in a horrible spot now, they really are. They need to act though.  For the record, I think 'Stars are amazingly good, but if they openly allow this sort of stuff, including the fact that their Pros knew all along, they'll run into strong headwinds soon.

Online Poker needs to grab this stuff by the scruff of the neck & sort it. I-Poker failed to act when they should have, & as a result their y-o-y revenue decline is staggering. Soon, there will just be 'Stars & a handful of small sites. That can't be good. 

[rfgqqabc]

He played 376 tournaments at abi of 369 this year for 138744 in buyins with 308874 in cashes. He seemed to be playing virtually every day and virtually every high stakes scoop. I'd estimate myself and my horses played well over 2k hands with him across the month, which isn't loads and loads but these were some of the biggest buyins we will play all year. If I hadn't have seen some of the cash games beforehand and didn't have a good idea of what was going on my reads would have been a lot as the account played some crazy hands in some of the smaller tournaments.

http://www.highstakesdb.com/profiles/pokerstars/NoelHayes.aspx

Plus any games that were untracked, I saw him playing 10/20 plo zoom and 40/80 8game etc. This was really dirty.

[arbboy]

Saw some vitriol towards him on twitter etc and so googled to find out what he had done.

Turns out he was playing online from the USA using a VPN and someone else's pokerstars account.

It seems to me that this is not exactly the worst crime in the world. He was not multi-accounting in order to cheat (by having his opponents not know it was him), he was only doing it so that he could play some online tourneys whilst in the USA. And from what I gather he contacted as many of his opponents as he could to tell them it was him playing on the account.

What do you guys reckon? Was he really all that out of order/unethical? I realise ofc that by the letter of the law what he did was wrong, since it break the T&Cs etc. But it just does not seem that bad to me.

What is the difference between this and me sitting in vegas using a VPN and using my mate's Hills sports betting account to have £5k on Murray to win wimbledon as i don't want hills (my customer effectively) to know it is me betting with them because they will refuse to take the bet but they are happy to accommodate my friend on his account?  Why can't Hastings play on another account in order to get 'action' he might not get under his own name?   Whether it is good for the game long term is another argument.  As long as he is not doing anything underhanded ie collusion with other players at the table who he knows i really don't see what business it is of anyone else who is actually playing on any account.  

FWIW this has been going on for years and is impossible to police in reality.  I lost count of the amount of 'new' accounts the stt regs on Crypto/ongame/betfair back in the day had every other month with new names who were effectively the same person.  

I really don't see what the big deal is tbh.  Everyone knows this goes on.  Why are you not going as mad at pro punters (or even Tikay/Tighty on TFT) who effectively do the same thing to 'defraud' online gaming firms in order to get their bets on?   Is it because we are 'defrauding' betting companies with our actions rather than individual poker players.  The reality is the two things are identical.  

[DaveShoelace]

Saw some vitriol towards him on twitter etc and so googled to find out what he had done.

Turns out he was playing online from the USA using a VPN and someone else's pokerstars account.

It seems to me that this is not exactly the worst crime in the world. He was not multi-accounting in order to cheat (by having his opponents not know it was him), he was only doing it so that he could play some online tourneys whilst in the USA. And from what I gather he contacted as many of his opponents as he could to tell them it was him playing on the account.

What do you guys reckon? Was he really all that out of order/unethical? I realise ofc that by the letter of the law what he did was wrong, since it break the T&Cs etc. But it just does not seem that bad to me.

What is the difference between this and me sitting in vegas using a VPN and using my mate's Hills sports betting account to have £5k on Murray to win wimbledon as i don't want hills (my customer effectively) to know it is me betting with them because they will refuse to take the bet but they are happy to accommodate my friend on his account?  Why can't Hastings play on another account in order to get 'action' he might not get under his own name?   Whether it is good for the game long term is another argument.  As long as he is not doing anything underhanded ie collusion with other players at the table who he knows i really don't see what business it is of anyone else who is actually playing on any account.  

FWIW this has been going on for years and is impossible to police in reality.  I lost count of the amount of 'new' accounts the stt regs on Crypto/ongame/betfair back in the day had every other month with new names who were effectively the same person.  

I really don't see what the big deal is tbh.  Everyone knows this goes on.  Why are you not going as mad at pro punters who effectively do the same thing to 'defraud' online gaming firms in order to get their bets on.  Is it because we are 'defrauding' betting companies with our actions rather than individual poker players.  The reality is the two things are identical.  

Nope.

On a network like Crypto, the opponents factor anonymity into their decisions. They expect to be facing unknowns most of the time because there is an awareness that multiple accounts are likely. 

On Pokerstars this is not allowed and at the high stakes where the player pools are small, every assumes that the person they are playing against is who their name says they are. Previous experience, personal reads and reputation play a much bigger factor in the decision making process.

At the low stakes on all sites, multi accounting doesnt make much of a difference because the player pools are so large. At the high stakes it makes a big difference.

[arbboy]

Saw some vitriol towards him on twitter etc and so googled to find out what he had done.

Turns out he was playing online from the USA using a VPN and someone else's pokerstars account.

It seems to me that this is not exactly the worst crime in the world. He was not multi-accounting in order to cheat (by having his opponents not know it was him), he was only doing it so that he could play some online tourneys whilst in the USA. And from what I gather he contacted as many of his opponents as he could to tell them it was him playing on the account.

What do you guys reckon? Was he really all that out of order/unethical? I realise ofc that by the letter of the law what he did was wrong, since it break the T&Cs etc. But it just does not seem that bad to me.

What is the difference between this and me sitting in vegas using a VPN and using my mate's Hills sports betting account to have £5k on Murray to win wimbledon as i don't want hills (my customer effectively) to know it is me betting with them because they will refuse to take the bet but they are happy to accommodate my friend on his account?  Why can't Hastings play on another account in order to get 'action' he might not get under his own name?   Whether it is good for the game long term is another argument.  As long as he is not doing anything underhanded ie collusion with other players at the table who he knows i really don't see what business it is of anyone else who is actually playing on any account.  

FWIW this has been going on for years and is impossible to police in reality.  I lost count of the amount of 'new' accounts the stt regs on Crypto/ongame/betfair back in the day had every other month with new names who were effectively the same person.  

I really don't see what the big deal is tbh.  Everyone knows this goes on.  Why are you not going as mad at pro punters who effectively do the same thing to 'defraud' online gaming firms in order to get their bets on.  Is it because we are 'defrauding' betting companies with our actions rather than individual poker players.  The reality is the two things are identical.  

Nope.

On a network like Crypto, the opponents factor anonymity into their decisions. They expect to be facing unknowns most of the time because there is an awareness that multiple accounts are likely.  

On Pokerstars this is not allowed and at the high stakes where the player pools are small, every assumes that the person they are playing against is who their name says they are. Previous experience, personal reads and reputation play a much bigger factor in the decision making process.

At the low stakes on all sites, multi accounting doesnt make much of a difference because the player pools are so large. At the high stakes it makes a big difference.

You are not allowed to have two Hills accounts either in the same name.   All the bolded factors will also play a huge part of Hill's decision as to whether to take your action sports betting wise as well.  Two punters can ask for an identical bet and stake size and one will get it and the other one won't.  Therefore i will ask the question again are winning sports bettors (TK/tighty included) as bad as Hasting's by betting on other people's online hills account in order to get their bets on?

If you are not smart enough to cope at high stakes then don't play.  It is a brutal world and survival of the fittest will always rule.