Well done rag2gar

Requiem4adream

The-Rigger wrote: »

Cliffnotes?

Gary uncovered as a super-genius-evil-mastermind a la some of these guys:


Hans Gruber


Keyser Soze


Dr. Evil

eoghan104

luckylucky wrote: »

I told mrs. LL about this thread, she knows next to nothing about poker but I was kinda surprised how readily she agreed with me (doesn't happen too often ) that it's a bit ridiculous that people have a major problem with this, it's the internet - you can't control what people are doing on the other side, as she bluntly put it they could be having a w$%^ on the other side for all you know. I think it's kinda farcical that he's meant to tell his friends you better leave the room now, I think it's just an unsual circumstance that took him beyond the site's Terms and Conditions. I reckon most people here have gone beyond terms and conditions at one time or another. All your software on your pc all bought and paid for btw chaps?

I don't really like having to come back to this thread but I couldnt let this kind of comment go again with out, for the umpteenth time, clarifying why the above is irrelevant.

The problem i have is that he made the choice to go the 2nd house in order to get help from two more poker players. His 3 friends didnt happen to stumble in on him playing a game and start firing advice at poor old Gary and he couldnt exactly tell them to leave. He made the predetermined action to go down the road in order to set up the "4 man tag team" so gimme a break with all the "oh he could hardly tell his friends to leave" **** and just admit what he did was wrong and leave it at that!

And seen as you had a few questions for me to answer heres one for you....... your the other guy who loses the ticket heads up and then reads gary's blog and this thread. What do you do? Do you just say " ah fcuk sure its on the internet I cant control the other side sure he could have been having a wa*k!"

And to answer Kayroo no I don't understand why he hast posted on the thread more. Its not like this thread will lead him to lose the ticket. In my opinion is silence is the most damning evidence of all.

doke

luckylucky wrote: »

I told mrs. LL about this thread, she knows next to nothing about poker but I was kinda surprised how readily she agreed with me (doesn't happen too often ) that it's a bit ridiculous that people have a major problem with this, it's the internet

Not really that surprising. It's basic anthropology: outsiders take a more common sense approach, whereas insiders often convolute themselves into ridiculous positions that contravene basic common sense because "things developed that way". Like bringing enforceable laws from one area into another where they are almost entirely unenforceable (and therefore silly, as they effectively punish the scrupulous and reward the unscrupulous).

Internet poker should be regarded as intrinsically different from live poker, and in fact it already is in many respects (so why not this one? It just seems arbitrary). You can use software you couldn't use live, you can consult books, your pot odds are easier to compute etc. etc.

Chess went through this with correspondence chess, and in the end had to ditch laws that apply to the live game, like not being allowed to consult BCO, that are unenforceable in correspondence.

luckylucky

Jaysus more amateur dramatics... thought we were done with all that.

eoghan104 wrote: »

He made the predetermined action to go down the road in order to set up the "4 man tag team"

This is against the spirit of the game, no doubt, I still think they were extenuating circumstances in that he got caught up on the whole buzz of it.

eoghan104 wrote: »

And seen as you had a few questions for me to answer heres one for you.

Jeez a bit egotistical there aren't yeah, don't remember asking you any questions specifically.

eoghan104 wrote: »

your the other guy who loses the ticket heads up and then reads gary's blog and this thread. What do you do? Do you just say " ah fcuk sure its on the internet I cant control the other side sure he could have been having a wa*k!"

The most honest answer I can give to this is it would be very easy for me to say I'd have no issue with it, just like it's very easy for some $1 mtt players to say that no they wouldn't get a friend to play for them even in under dire circumstances. I genuinely think I would leave it go however, to me the reality is friends play together from time to time, if anything I should have bigger issues with this than most, none of my social circle play poker, so I never have any occasion where I could even have the possibility of a friend to watch my play. I would imagine for you young'uns, particularly Dublin based guys that ye'd have quite a few poker playing pals, I would've thought it was normal enough that from time to time, you'd be at each others houses and watching each other play.

Anyway as has been said already this whole thing has been done to death... There are some very different takes on this, and as Sproodle said many different good arguments made.

A side issue... in general it's not EV+ for tag teams anyway. If the members of the Tag Team are good players in the first place they'd make more money cumulatively playing on their own.