Re: 100-200 Lifeline
 

[ QUOTE ]
Say what? I'm not gonna defend myself, I'll just say that having moral issues with this is absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

You either didn't read or don't respond to my post. Either way it doesn't matter. Moral issues aside, IM'ing a buddy and gaining info during a hand totally violates the one player to a hand rule. You feel you don't have to defend yourself about it. That's funny. So, in other words, there's 2 sets of rules about the integrity of poker - live and online. I'd like to see your reaction when the guy sitting next to you at the table asks the buddy next to him what he knows about you. I'm guessing you'd have a problem with it. Hypocritical.

Re: 100-200 Lifeline
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Say what? I'm not gonna defend myself, I'll just say that having moral issues with this is absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

You either didn't read or don't respond to my post. Either way it doesn't matter. Moral issues aside, IM'ing a buddy and gaining info during a hand totally violates the one player to a hand rule. You feel you don't have to defend yourself about it. That's funny. So, in other words, there's 2 sets of rules about the integrity of poker - live and online. I'd like to see your reaction when the guy sitting next to you at the table asks the buddy next to him what he knows about you. I'm guessing you'd have a problem with it. Hypocritical.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are your feelings on pokertracker and datamining?

Re: 100-200 Lifeline
 

[ QUOTE ]
What are your feelings on pokertracker and datamining?

[/ QUOTE ]

By asking that does it mean you feel IM'ing is the same as using PT?

What's your thoughts about IM'ing back and forth while playing a hand? Does it violate the rule, or is it different because it's hidden? I'm guessing you've done it, have no problem with it and correlate it with PT as justifiable.

BTW - there was a thread about Party not being able to be mined in the future. Not sure how accurate it is.

Re: 100-200 Lifeline
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Say what? I'm not gonna defend myself, I'll just say that having moral issues with this is absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

You either didn't read or don't respond to my post. Either way it doesn't matter. Moral issues aside, IM'ing a buddy and gaining info during a hand totally violates the one player to a hand rule. You feel you don't have to defend yourself about it. That's funny. So, in other words, there's 2 sets of rules about the integrity of poker - live and online. I'd like to see your reaction when the guy sitting next to you at the table asks the buddy next to him what he knows about you. I'm guessing you'd have a problem with it. Hypocritical.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are wrong. You cant possibly compare live poker to internet poker in this way. Information has become an accepted part of the game. Pokertracker, datamining, pokerstove, pokerace, notes files etc. I remember an article Negraneu wrote a while back about him and three of his friends sitting around playing omaha on his account sharing the decisions. Spliting buy ins, sharing accounts, sharing player info etc is a part of internet poker. As long as there is no collusion, as far as Im concerned they can check their notes, IM Aunt Bula or call the Hustler for information on my play. Its all fair game on the net.

Re: 100-200 Lifeline
 

[ QUOTE ]
You either didn't read or don't respond to my post. Either way it doesn't matter. Moral issues aside, IM'ing a buddy and gaining info during a hand totally violates the one player to a hand rule. You feel you don't have to defend yourself about it. That's funny.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you show me an online poker site out there that outlines this rule on their website?

Re: 100-200 Lifeline
 

[ QUOTE ]
You are wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

No Steve, I'm right about the distinction existing. You've plainly stated there's 2 sets of rules about the one player to a hand rule. Online doesn't hold itself to the same level of integrity live play does. You won't like the phrasing of that but, based on everything you said, that is a true statement. You clarified that.

I never thought it was okay and get pissed when I know guys are obviously IM'ing in the middle of a hand. I got it now. It's not okay live, but is online. I'm surprised and disappointed of the attitude and acceptance of it, but have no desire to swim against the tide here. No problem.

Re: 100-200 Lifeline
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You are wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

No Steve, I'm right about the distinction existing. You've plainly stated there's 2 sets of rules about the one player to a hand rule. Online doesn't hold itself to the same level of integrity live play does. You won't like the phrasing of that but, based on everything you said, that is a true statement. You clarified that.

I never thought it was okay and get pissed when I know guys are obviously IM'ing in the middle of a hand. I got it now. It's not okay live, but is online. I'm surprised and disappointed of the attitude and acceptance of it, but have no desire to swim against the tide here. No problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are your thoughts on people sharing their PT databases then?

Re: 100-200 Lifeline
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You are wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

No Steve, I'm right about the distinction existing. You've plainly stated there's 2 sets of rules about the one player to a hand rule. Online doesn't hold itself to the same level of integrity live play does. You won't like the phrasing of that but, based on everything you said, that is a true statement. You clarified that.

I never thought it was okay and get pissed when I know guys are obviously IM'ing in the middle of a hand. I got it now. It's not okay live, but is online. I'm surprised and disappointed of the attitude and acceptance of it, but have no desire to swim against the tide here. No problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I cant argue with any of that. I guess there is a lower standard to a point, and defintely a different set of rules.

Re: 100-200 Lifeline
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm fine with your line, A pre-flop fold is also ok, flame away on that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hasnt the math been done on this many times? Getting like 5.1/1 to flop a set alone?

[/ QUOTE ]

I should have said a flop fold was fine. here is the math on pre-flop:

not sure if it has been done many times or not. You are approximately 7.5:1 against flopping a set. You are getting 11.5:2 (5.75:1) when it gets back to you assuming the 3 better calls the cap and it's 3 of you to the flop.

You will need to average a profit of an additional 3.5SB post-flop when you hit your set in order to breakeven, which seems reasaonable to assume even given the fact that you are against only two players, out of position and its possible 1 or both have overpairs and set over set is a concern. I still agree the pre-flop call is pretty easy and a fold would be bad. sorry about that.

Re: 100-200 Lifeline
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to see your reaction when the guy sitting next to you at the table asks the buddy next to him what he knows about you. I'm guessing you'd have a problem with it. Hypocritical.

[/ QUOTE ]

I fully expect someone to ask questions about me. I don't care if its at lunch or during the hand. It really wouldn't even get me to flinch.

The one person to hand rule is a joke online. We need to be more worried about more than one person to an account, but apparently that is legal too.

I did read your post, I read all your posts and usually agree with them. I disagree with this one, but since it says about the same thing to roy miami's I didn't think responding twice would be prudent.