A previously "well-respected" MTT cheating team...

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

Just think about what you can and cannot do at a live poker table. Sure, online is different, but there are somethings that should not be, despite the fact that they CAN be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yet from your earlier posts you use PokerTracker, which almost certainly vastly amplifies your ability to observe the play of other players beyond what you can do in live play. How is this different, to your mind? Does it matter that the aid is mechanical rather than human?

[ekky]

"I'm reasonably happy taking Jerrod's word that they do their utmost to prevent softplay or genuine collusion. It would be highly, highly foolish to advertise this kind of behavior if you didn't think you were pretty good about not actually colluding in the rare situations it was relevant because the consequences of being caught are high and it's so easy to just not say anything about it."

would this be similar to Hassan folding his KJ face up to stop people from thinking he and Tuan were in cohoots?

Seriously though, you do make very good and valid points... and I dont really know what my answer is.

I just find it abhorrent that someone of his skill level potentially tag teams with people like Chen and matros to make decisions.

With those people making decisions.. what chance does the average person have!

[scott8]

I thought I would get involved because I have nothing to say either [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[rforman13]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Just think about what you can and cannot do at a live poker table. Sure, online is different, but there are somethings that should not be, despite the fact that they CAN be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yet from your earlier posts you use PokerTracker, which almost certainly vastly amplifies your ability to observe the play of other players beyond what you can do in live play. How is this different, to your mind? Does it matter that the aid is mechanical rather than human?

[/ QUOTE ]

You know what is funny about this...and maybe its just because I am "behind the curve"...but I do own pokertracker....i bought it because I was getting too lazy to track each online session like I do live in a notebook. Trying to play 2 tables, blah blah...I wanted to know what my BB/hr was...thats about all I know from it after 8 months...that I can see how much I make each month, /100 hands, etc.

Am I missing something by not datamining? I don't really understand the concept anyway...other than obviously digging deeper into my data, my opponents etc.

I know...embarassing. The only thing I know about VPIP is that mine is higher than most [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] (lots of short play)...in fact high enough that someone cross posted about me over here....hence my first post here months ago.

I wish I used it for more than just tracking my own play. In all fairness...in B&M, I remember [censored] from years and years back...specific hands, players, even seats players were in. Online, I think the ability to take notes, and track players in a setting where 50k people are on one site, hopping around ever 5 minutes, helps to equalize some of this.

That is a difference that I don't think conflicts with the spirit of the game. I could get the same information if I sat and watched a live table.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

That is a difference that I don't think conflicts with the spirit of the game. I could get the same information if I sat and watched a live table.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay. But PokerTracker makes it so you don't have to do that piece of work. Thus, it potentially removes one more element of skill from the game. If you play stud online, there are programs that record the dead cards for you. You could learn to do this yourself, but it takes substantial effort and practice. Is it okay to use these programs? People debate this in the stud forums.

This doesn't even mention the real power of PokerTracker, as I understand it, which is its ability to observe multiple tables that you aren't playing at and record information about those players. Could you watch four tables simultaneously and keep track of every raise, every time each player entered the pot, and remember every player that all of this was associated with, forever?

[rforman13]

In all fairness...I am probably not as PT dumb as I let on...but I certainly don't get my fair share of mileage out of it.

I still don't think that information that is accessable to all/others and could be gathered from watching the table is really unethical anyway.

I dunno. Personally i doubt they are crossing any lines, but they are surely blurring the line for others who may not be as astute as all of us....and they are putting themselves in a situation which can be questionable...just not worth it, not from guys that goddamn smart. Just have a hand history party after and discuss away....

[rforman13]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

That is a difference that I don't think conflicts with the spirit of the game. I could get the same information if I sat and watched a live table.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay. But PokerTracker makes it so you don't have to do that piece of work. Thus, it potentially removes one more element of skill from the game. If you play stud online, there are programs that record the dead cards for you. You could learn to do this yourself, but it takes substantial effort and practice. Is it okay to use these programs? People debate this in the stud forums.

This doesn't even mention the real power of PokerTracker, as I understand it, which is its ability to observe multiple tables that you aren't playing at and record information about those players. Could you watch four tables simultaneously and keep track of every raise, every time each player entered the pot, and remember every player that all of this was associated with, forever?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey man...I do not disagree with you at all. You are right..and by virtue of the fact that poker is now in a technology accessable arena...technological advantages certainly exist or are created.

The fact of the matter though...live you can gather information, online you can as well. Both equal playing fields as far as access to info. Live...can I calculate odds and/or track dead cards, yes and I can do that online as well. Sure...technology makes this much easier online for some...but we all have access to this.

Live, can I discuss my hand with another player during a hand, no. Can I discuss hands with players at other tables while in a hand, no. Can we get together after and discuss our hands...sure. We all must adhere to these rules and/or ethics. We should adhere to them online as well...in the spirit of the game. I dunno...call me a purist I guess.

My other thought on "tracking other players stats"....personally, I would much rather evaluate a players play right in front of me. I would hate to be mislead by short term innaccurate numbers. If you can't figure a player out across the table from you...I guess maybe PT is better than nothing.

[Jerrod Ankenman]

[ QUOTE ]
I posted this in RGP, but I know there isn't much cross-pollination now:

I was in semi-awe of the "team" and their accomplishments:

http://www.livejournal.com/users/hgfalling/18076.html


Matros, Chen and Jerrod are playing as a team. This is jaw-droppingly amazing to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

[posted to RGP and 2+2]

First, Glantz and Matros are not part of the team, and have never been.
The Matt who is on the team is a non-rgper, as far as I know, and
probably not anyone most of you would know.

Second, I am unaware of any site that has any rule to the effect of
"You may not consult other people or resources in making decisions on
this site." If a site had such a rule, then we would first try to
convince the site that their rule was stupid and unenforceable; if they
persisted in having the rule, we would likely stop playing there or
perhaps play without discussing hands.

The team, because noone apparently seems to understand what's going on
here, started out as just Bill Chen and myself. Then we added one more
player, whose name happens to be Matt (hence the Glantz and Matros
controversy). We share some action on multi-table tournaments and we
participate in a weekly conference call. During the call, we discuss
hands in play at our various tables. Mostly, of course, we just make
the routine plays that are obvious, but when interesting or otherwise
critical hands pop up, we consult with the other team members in making
a decision. When two team members are at the same table (which happens
occasionally, but quite infrequently), no discussion of the hands at
that table takes place. All players play to maximize their own
tournament equity without regard to the equity of other team members.
Normally we bend over backwards to minimize the team equity in close
situations because we are so averse to accidentally colluding or
creating the appearance of collusion.

These actions are not collusion; we never act on shared information or
for mutual benefit other than the mutual benefit that we accrue by
discussing the hands or pointing out situational elements that we might
have missed in the absence of the discussion.

I do not believe we have broken the rules of any site, and I have
always been completely forthright and honest about the activities of
the team. I realize that not all current RGPers know me or Bill; we've
been sorta submerged playing poker and writing our book. If it's
significant to you, we articulated this arrangement to Lee Jones at one
point and he said he thought it was fine.

I'm sorry that I don't get as much chance to read RGP as I used to, nor
comment on posts. I actually plan to do this once the book is complete,
which should be in the next few months. I'm also sorry that individuals
believe that we are somehow cheating. It seems that this line of
comments has ignited somewhat of a firestorm; hence I thought it would
be best to at least state the reality of the situation, rather than
allowing rumors and the like to dominate the discussion.

Also, please, leave Matt Matros out of this. We invited him to play a
Sunday's worth of tournaments with us, but he has so far declined and
has never had any part in this arrangement.

Jerrod Ankenman

[jacksup]

I am not part of this team. The original poster is spreading misinformation and owes me an apology.

Matt Matros

[ekky]

Jerrod

there are RGp'ers like myself that read your historical posts on a day to day basis... and I have had an e-mail from p phillips telling me to read your posts to understand poker.

our disapointment is that you might feel that it is OK to tag team during tournaments

you would not do this live.. so why would you feel it is ok just because it is on the internet?