Re: An Intesting Ethics Situation
 

[ QUOTE ]
I believe telling the other player the structure is collusion and therefore unethical.

[/ QUOTE ]

In my mind this is ALMOST correct....If you change it to......

I believe telling ONLY the other player the structure is collusion and therefore unethical.

It goes to the question of "priviledged information". I know that one can easily make the argument that all players should be totally aware of the rules of this tournament, and therefore, should be responsible for figuring it out on their own.

I liken it to the "show one, show all" rule.

In this case, it's...... "tell one, tell all".

IMHO, the moral dilemna is solved by either saying nothing or telling all players involved.

Re: An Intesting Ethics Situation
 

I was leaning towards saying this is unethical, but you've convinced me otherwise, tipperdog. Well said.

Re: An Intesting Ethics Situation
 

[ QUOTE ]
No. It is perfectly ethical for the player to explain his understanding of the rules of the game to any other player. That his explanation may affect the play of that opponent is irrelevant.

At the WSOP this year, remember when Gus Hansen "reminded" his table that they were officially on the bubble--after the next player was eliminated, they'd all cash? He was obviously hoping they'd tighten up after he "enlightened" them (as if they didn't know!) However, his comment clearly wasn't unethical. It was a simple statement of fact.

Here's another hypothetical (and one that's closer to David's example). Let's say that you're playing in the final event of a big tourney, and that tourney has a big cash award for best all-around player. A player in the running for best all-around (we'll call him Jim), is at your table. He's a good player with position on you; you don't want to tangle with Jim. Fortunately, you're a math whiz and understand the very complex formula by which they'll determine the best overall player. In an effort to get Jim to tighten up, you say to him (assuming it's true), "Hey Jim, if you're not one of the next four players eliminated, you'll be guaranteed best overall player." Is saying that unethical? Of course not! All you're doing is making a statement of fact. Yes, it might affect Jim's play, but that doesn't make your speaking out unethical. (Obviously, if you're lying to Jim and presenting that lie as a statement of fact, your conduct would be clearly unethical IMO).

[/ QUOTE ]

.....as long as you make that statement publicy to the whole table, imo, there is no problem.

Re: An Intesting Ethics Situation
 

I don't think its unethical at all. However, I would expect that all the participants in this tourney would be able to figure it out on their own, thereby negating the issue of one player needing to bring this to the attention of another. What player(s) would be chosen for this televised tournament that didn't have an understanding of the fairly simple math involved in the discussion? (rhetorical)

Re: An Intesting Ethics Situation
 

Also this sounds like the stupidest format I've ever heard of!

Re: An Intesting Ethics Situation
 

No.

Re: An Intesting Ethics Situation
 

No.

As stated in YOUR version, I agree with you
 

However, given the public statement theme that you used, do you still think that DS's example is ethical?

Is the third place finisher of the first round doing something wrong if before the second freezeout he approaches the last place finisher and explains to her that she can't bust him

This raises some other questions:

one- Is it ethical or not for Gus to make the statement ONLY to his friend, in order to take advantage of his friend's resulting play?

As to your other example, I think it's different than David's. In yours, you are not implicitly agreeing to an action between the two of you and only the two of you (don't bust me out if you want to win) ; instead, you are taking advantage of your special knowledge of this player (his expected reaction to your comment to him)

two- Is tipperdog's comment more ethical or less if he makes it publically, rather than privately?

three- this statement: <font color="blue">Obviously, if you're lying to Jim and presenting that lie as a statement of fact, your conduct would be clearly unethical IMO</font>

Manipulating with honest information is ethical; lying to take advantage of Jim's stupidity is not?

I'm still wavering on this.

good points
 

It seems your questions boil down to "what is ethics in poker and should it go beyond the written rules?"

(or am I paraphrasing too much?)

Re: An Intesting Ethics Situation
 

When I first read your post, I agreed with you that if he tells one, he should tell all, but now I'm wavering. On the one hand, it's not like the information isn't out there for everyone already. It's possible the 4th place finisher (as well as the 1stPF and the 2ndPF) is already aware of this little quirk to the system. On the other hand, by telling, the 3rdPF now has reason to believe that the 4thPF will never go all-in against him (if he could knock him out) and that little piece of info can be pretty unbalancing if only the two of them know it.

In any case, I don't think saying anything is unethical and the 3rdPF should be able to do so. Maybe telling the whole table is more ethical, but IMO not telling the table info they already have access to wouldn't automatically make it wrong. (But I'm still wavering.)