Elky breaks the rules - Page 9

stars decision is obviously the right one though, and I honestly have no real opinion on the rule, other than that I understand why it has to be there even if it's retarded in just this one scenario, it just becomes even tougher for stars to discern between "allowed" chat and "not allowed chat" if they allow some forms of flips/chipdump/whatever and not others. the thing is, if wobbly reported a random and didnt post about it, it would be all fine and dandy with all of us. if he reported elky and didnt post about it, we'd just assume it was someone who perceived elky as a random who broke the rules, and it would be all fine and dandy. but now he rats out someone in his own community, someone he himself has benefitted from, and was benefitting from, and brags about it in that very community, and that IS terrible. at least if wobbly was a troll out to piss us off because he's been attacked a lot for his behaviour recently then he could claim some kind of success because well, he succeeded, but he's actually thinking he has done the right thing here and it seems like he wishes to continue posting here..

uh, doesnt elky have barely 100 posts here? seems like he's very loosely associated with the actual forum and posting good advice etc etc

On September 21 2008 00:26 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On September 21 2008 00:23 CamilaPunt wrote: i think your attitude about this is the problem wobbly.. i agree what he did is not right but posting it here almost as a brag and saying "a cheater is a cheater" is a bit over the edge about elky... that being said, i don't think it is incorrect at all for someone in that table to report him in such a high $ tourney... cause even though as a rebuy tourney its implicit that high stakes players are gonna get it in super light, there is a difference between literally knowing that any 2 will go in pf or not every hand ok.. lets pretend its not elky. Lets pretend its RandomJoe918 on stars, i would still make the post because im glad stars care about people reporting collusion.

Something tells me your just glad someone cares about what you say lulz

elky isnt hugely affiliated with the community but he has posted quite some hands here. not contributed so much to hand discussion I guess but if he's part of any community it's this one, and we make threads and newsposts for him all the time..

can some donkament specialist explain why it's a bad rule?

i was at moneymaker's table in this tour and he and another player didn't know about this rule either. Moneymaker asked another player directly to his right if he was willing to flip if it was folded to him when they were in the blinds next hand. Third player asked if that wasn't against the rules and kept open minraising every time they were in the blinds to discourage them from flipping, and the minraising worked. Only one time the minraiser got shoved on by SB w/ Axo rag and moneymaker snap called in BB w/ AQo and original raiser folded.

Elky is the reason alot of us got into poker in the first place. I think its safe to say that this community wouldnt be what it is today if it wasnt for him. He is also the sickest non korean starcraft hero of all time

On September 20 2008 23:57 FrinkX wrote: but fuck you you stupid faggot for calling it colluding...and then making a brag post about it

It definitely EV to go allin every hand in tournaments with a lot of entrants. If it's EV for one player in the field it means the rest of the field loses some EV. A lot of people want to play the rebuys without paying shittons of rebuys so to please the masses, the same masses we all make our money off, stars invented this rule. Of course every good tournament player thinks its a bad rule because they are losing EV from it. Personally I think it's a bad rule as well because if you want to limit your rebuys why not play a freezeout or a rebuy+addon tournament. Anyway at least I can see why stars did it, it's to please 90% of the field which is obviously more important than a few winning players. If fish continue playing on your site the winning players will come too. The rule makes perfect sense for poker as a whole. There's more rules in sport & games created for commercial purposes that might lower the value of the game but in the end are positive for the people who want to make money from it. This rule, by keeping the bad players happy, is thus in essence a good rule for anyone who wants to make money from poker. Stars wouldn't have invented this rule if they didn't think it would attract more bad players to their site. More players is good for us. While I'd rather see this rule removed, once the rule is put in place it is very very important to punish people for breaking it.

Elky broke this rule trying to gain EV. He (likely) did not know about the rule; why would a PS pro break the rules on his own site. But he did gain an advantage by breaking an existing rule , wobbly really is not the only one who reported this, dozens of people emailed stars about it so wobbly played an irrelevant role in this. Someone who reported another player breaking the rules should not receive massive shit for it, nor should he receive praises. In wobblys case I believe he really considers this colluding (which its not - it's simply not knowing the rules) so I don't blame him for reporting it and neither should you. As Elky is not informed about rules, wobbly is not informed about the true effect of going allin every hand. It happens. The post and calling it colluding publically are over the top some shit may be received for this. When you call something colluding you better do some research on it before posting on a forum about it.

It would have been cool if he didn't report him from a community/friends perspective, but this attitude of allowing everything your friends are doing is exactly why so many people do cheat for real, and these people do know the rules usually. This is a minor issue but it happens in a lot of serious cases too such as the multiaccounting tournament regulars. The social checks in the poker community are worthless and this is the lowest level it starts at. The fact that this rule exists simply means it has to be followed and people not following have to be punished, regardless of the rule almost. People should not be given the impression it's ok to break some rules in poker as long as you personally disagree with them. Because this is exactly how people get sucked into believing they can break the rules on all kinds of levels.

Isn't wobby the guy who talked shit about patrick going all in in the last hand of a rebuy with 5/5...calling it stupid and massively -ev? And then...this? I'm so confused.

In either case, fuck the whole ban him from forum thing. That's really too trivial for something like this in the end. I like Milkman's idea. Faggots should have their faggotry beaten out of them imo. And additionally, after reading that last line about telling the parents of a friend smoking weed, I don't see how anyone could disagree.

On September 21 2008 07:33 Nazgul wrote: Personally I think it's a bad rule as well because if you want to limit your rebuys why not play a freezeout or a rebuy+addon tournament.

Can you elaborate on this a bit, why you think it's a bad rule? afaik you can shove all hands you play but planning beforehand with another player is forbidden. "Poker is an individual game, not a team sport. Players may not act as a group in any way, nor may a player even suggest or mention such an idea."

On September 21 2008 03:17 wobbly_au wrote: i posted this knowing EXACTLY how LP would react

Then just an attention whore obv. Makes you wonder if he's just trolling in general on these forums, knowingly saying retarded things for attention, repeating his talking points endlessly while pretending not to understand the replies he receives. I must have taken a wrong turn somewhere... I didn't realize I was on the World of Warcraft forums.

On September 21 2008 06:43 Liquid`Drone wrote: haha oh man.. I mean, if you wanted to punish elky for not following the rules!!! because you think you lost money because he did not follow the rules, (obviously wrong though) this isnt really that bad of a decision. but then you have the fact that elky is one of the most respected and liked and followed members of the community you yourself is part of. this SHOULD grant him leeway in your eyes, even if that is a double standard, guess what, you act nicer towards people you know than people you don't know. he's not your dad or your brother or even your friend, but being part of the same community as him, benefitting from seeing hands he posts etc, should certainly make you think twice about reporting something like this. but ok, so you did. fair enough. but then you make the mindboggingly retarded decision to brag about your awesome ability to be a 6 year old tattletaling bitch in the very same community both you and the person affected by this idiocy happen to be part of. seriously, it's like you're the least popular kid in a group of 30, then the most popular kid writes "COCK" on a streetsign and you tell the police and make him have to replace the streetsign or wash it off or whatever and then you brag about having done that the next time your group is assembled.. your actions here show a complete, utter lack of social skills unlike anything I've ever witnessed through an internet forum, it's up there with faking your own death to see how people would respond.. you're not cool just because you're being attacked by a huge group of people, it doesnt make you tough, nor "an individual able to think outside the box" nor "a person who doesnt conform just to conform", in most cases it actually makes you a humongous retard. you're not jesus and we are not the pharisees.

i was pretty much trying to say this lol but i failed

On September 21 2008 07:50 taqtiX wrote: Show nested quote + On September 21 2008 07:33 Nazgul wrote: Personally I think it's a bad rule as well because if you want to limit your rebuys why not play a freezeout or a rebuy+addon tournament. Can you elaborate on this a bit, why you think it's a bad rule? afaik you can shove all hands you play but planning beforehand with another player is forbidden. "Poker is an individual game, not a team sport. Players may not act as a group in any way, nor may a player even suggest or mention such an idea."

What happens if you go allin every hand and another player takes notice and goes allin every hand as well, without any agreement of some sort, both just looking out for themselves and their own EV. Or a 6 handed situation where the prizepayout is going to go up by a lot, shortstack allins and gets multiple calls, not because they have good hands but to increase the chances of him losing the hand. They are all working together so that the 6th guy loses. Cashgame, 3-handed two good players and 1 fish. The two good players know that if they constantly keep pounding 3-bets and raises on the fish that one of them is going to be taking his money. They work together so that one of them will walk away with the money yet both are looking out for their own EV.

However all these examples are silent agreements. I'm quite sure that if you'd suggest such a thing in the chat you'd receive some sort of punishment for it. It's so hard to define morals within poker. Why do people get flamed for agreeing publically while silent agreements are all over the place. There's an obvious black area, an obvious white area, but the grey area is enormous and I usually try not to judge people for operating within the grey area. So given this, you could choose to allow people to go allin every hand in a rebuy because rebuying is after all what a rebuy is meant for. It's no big deal either way I can see the Pokersite issue with it as well. Within the grey areas rules still have to exist, sometimes sites pull cases into what they believe is the black area sometimes into the white. But that doesn't make it so. Yet breaking rules of things you believe to lay into a grey area still shouldn't be done because it opens the door for people who might have a larger grey area than yourself.

On September 21 2008 01:07 PoorUser wrote: god fuck people who think they are the long arm of the law and have no fucking clue

wobbly should move to america as he would fit right in

On September 21 2008 05:20 wobbly_au wrote: ta, i just have a big thing against weed/smoking/drugs etcetc.. thats just my personal thing. call me a douche w/e but atleast u get my point.

wow this thread is a great read! i still can't stop laughing at this response

i really have a strong hatred for you right now

a hatred i haven't felt in a long time

-rekrul

On September 21 2008 08:06 Nazgul wrote: Show nested quote + On September 21 2008 07:50 taqtiX wrote:   On September 21 2008 07:33 Nazgul wrote: Personally I think it's a bad rule as well because if you want to limit your rebuys why not play a freezeout or a rebuy+addon tournament. Can you elaborate on this a bit, why you think it's a bad rule? afaik you can shove all hands you play but planning beforehand with another player is forbidden. "Poker is an individual game, not a team sport. Players may not act as a group in any way, nor may a player even suggest or mention such an idea." What happens if you go allin every hand and another player takes notice and goes allin every hand as well, without any agreement of some sort, both just looking out for themselves and their own EV. Or a 6 handed situation where the prizepayout is going to go up by a lot, shortstack allins and gets multiple calls, not because they have good hands but to increase the chances of him losing the hand. They are all working together so that the 6th guy loses. Cashgame, 3-handed two good players and 1 fish. The two good players know that if they constantly keep pounding 3-bets and raises on the fish that one of them is going to be taking his money. They work together so that one of them will walk away with the money yet both are looking out for their own EV. However all these examples are silent agreements. I'm quite sure that if you'd suggest such a thing in the chat you'd receive some sort of punishment for it. It's so hard to define morals within poker. Why do people get flamed for agreeing publically while silent agreements are all over the place. There's an obvious black area, an obvious white area, but the grey area is enormous and I usually try not to judge people for operating within the grey area. So given this, you could choose to allow people to go allin every hand in a rebuy because rebuying is after all what a rebuy is meant for. It's no big deal either way I can see the Pokersite issue with it as well. Within the grey areas rules still have to exist, sometimes sites pull cases into what <b>they believe</b> is the black area sometimes into the white. But that doesn't make it so. Yet breaking rules of things you believe to lay into a grey area still shouldn't be done because it opens the door for people who might have a larger grey area than yourself.

Great post. Tbh I haven't really thought this through but I still like the rule. Like I said in a previous post Moneymaker didn't know about this at all and obviously Elky didn't either.

On September 21 2008 08:41 PoorUser wrote: i really have a strong hatred for you right now a hatred i haven't felt in a long time -rekrul

Wobbly, you should go study Law and become a Judge

What i don't understand is why a topic was made about this, it just seems 99% causing drama and 1% informing.

Suici