ULTIMATE BET CHEATS?

[JayLeno]

A friend of mine played in a tourney at UB and was on 12 th place.
They payed 10 first.
He was shortstacked and whent all in with A2.
2 guys called him. And on the flop the first one wrote in the chat before he acted: Dont be stupid.
Then he checked, and the other guy checked - and they checked it out.
My friend emailed UB but they didnt care about it.
The question following is about the guy who said dont be stupid:

[sfwusc]

Cheating no?

Stupid, yes.

Anyone knows that close to the money you are going to check it down unless you have something good. The equity of the pot is less than the equity of removing the all in from the tournment.

-SFWUSC

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]

Anyone knows that close to the money you are going to check it down unless you have something good. The equity of the pot is less than the equity of removing the all in from the tournment.


[/ QUOTE ]
No, that is just a common misconception. (So common, it is in the rgp FAQ.) Do the math, or trust Mike Caro's or my analysis. Unless you are very short-stacked or at the final table, you don't benefit much from knocking someone out.

[GrannyMae]

the first one wrote in the chat before he acted: Dont be stupid.


had he said "let's check it down", or someone said "don't bet", then it would be inducing action via chat and that is cheating at all sites.

since he said "don't be stupid", then he is just a dick with no ethics. it has to be black and white

[RevAgain]

[ QUOTE ]

had he said "let's check it down", or someone said "don't bet", then it would be inducing action via chat and that is cheating at all sites.

since he said "don't be stupid", then he is just a dick with no ethics. it has to be black and white

[/ QUOTE ]

What a bizarre statement, what on earth is he doing other than attempting to 'induce (or more accurately here prevent) action', by saying that!? Is he giving some general advice for life here? It couldn't be more black and white, even if it probably wouldn't have made much of a difference if he never said it.

[JayLeno]

I agree totally with you Rev - if it was to be black and white(like asking specific to check) people would just find a way to get arround it - like in this example.
So of course it cant all be black and white!

[GrannyMae]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

had he said "let's check it down", or someone said "don't bet", then it would be inducing action via chat and that is cheating at all sites.

since he said "don't be stupid", then he is just a dick with no ethics. it has to be black and white

[/ QUOTE ]

What a bizarre statement, what on earth is he doing other than attempting to 'induce (or more accurately here prevent) action', by saying that!? Is he giving some general advice for life here? It couldn't be more black and white, even if it probably wouldn't have made much of a difference if he never said it.

[/ QUOTE ]

you missed my point.

the site won't act unless the language is specific. they will not act on this because they are not going to start interpreting remarks that may or may NOT mean he should check.

fwiw, you are yelling at the choir.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
you missed my point.

the site won't act unless the language is specific. they will not act on this because they are not going to start interpreting remarks that may or may NOT mean he should check.

[/ QUOTE ]
I cannot argue with this since it is obviously true, at least at UB.

I do think it's wrong on their part. If I were a juror in a criminal trial I'd probably let him off. But I don't think UB should require proof beyond a reasonable doubt to issue an educational warning.

That's all UB needs to do. Send a nice email explaining the rules and asking the player not to make remarks that could be misinterpreted in the future.

[sfwusc]

Disable chat when someone is all in... problem solved.

-SFWUSC

[Thor]

-but they DID infact act when my friend send another email telling them he didnt like the answer.
They have now issued the cheating player a warning.