[ClaytonN]

[ QUOTE ]
The more you say "this is a good play" the more you encourage everyone to do it and the more inevitable rules about stalling will become.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like a Chinese finger trap. But what assumptions do you make that I correlate this play with stalling in general? I pointed out in one of my earlier replies that I view stalling as less EV than cooperating with the police, did I not?

For simon they do, of course. That's the whole point!

This argument has holes. First off, Simon was frequenting a table with numerous experienced tournament players who would not have gone and "monkey see, monkey do" like the masses who now potentially could thanks to Greenstein bringing the issue up in an exagerrated manner resulting in Trumper's vindication and a higher regard to his tactics.

In assuming the above is true, ie that Simon's actions would have had little effect on his peers in future actions barring the actions would get released to the masses (and how could Simon even assume that), one would have to interpret their actions in this hand as that and that alone. If Trumper's actions cannot corrupt his peers, then he should strive to do what's best for himself.

The question all boils down to how detrimental (or effective) the play is viewed by the public, and the drop in EV in correlation to more players doing this compared to the EV Simon can potentially gain out of this pot.

All that aside, the whole argument should be moot, because Simon's "2 minute slowplay" probably only got through to 5 less experienced players at his table MAX, maybe a handfull more assuming some railbirding from other tables. The "damage" those handful of players could do to the game is but a drop in the ocean, and how often does one have the opportunity to slowplay with the nuts in a spot like that?