Does anybody know what happened to this guy after he got nailed for colluding?

So playing under two separate names is now colluding?

Sorry, multi accounting.....

Actually, he also colluded.

I've never understood why even that is a problem or an issue ( outside of switching players in a tournament). It seems that Internet nancy nits think they should have the right to associate complete hand histories on all their opponents, yet it's probably the most corrosive and damaging aspect of internet poker, and turns it from a game of wits into a data mining contest.

Games would be so much better if players could change their screen names as often as they want. More fish would play, good players would win more, and only 20 tabling nits who can't really play poker would do worse.

Obviously im not in favor of that, how did he collude?

softplayed against another high stakes shortstacker .

Soft playing is collusion? I see it every day live...

What's the difference between that and swapping shares with another reg, or being staked?

If say someone like Noah could prove you altered your play I would guess people would listen to what he had to say about it.

Again, I see people alter their play every day live. Hell I soft play friends occasionally. If it's my EV I'm surrendering, why alert the media?

And I respect Noah enough to be relatively sure I'm missing some important distinction, but so far the cliff notes in this thread stop a bit shy of relating the specific distinction.

Edit: okay, you added link after I wrote that, I've read it, it's convincing, but again I'm not sure I agree that soft play is any egregious ethical crime.

Lol of course it is colluding, obviously swapping shares with another reg in the same game would be unethical too (the degree of which depending on how many people in the game).

If you and another player (that are consistently in the same game) are softplaying each other all the time then you are gaining an unfair advantage. Sure you will see some tourist do it live, or Farha check behind on the river against Gold etc. The difference is it's generally known by other players which is why you are aware of seeing it when it happens. It is also generally just one player giving up EV for the sake of it. If 2/3/4 players are doing it in the same games every day and it becomes obvious they are doing it to win more money from the other players then it's serious and something needs to be done. I don't know much about live but isn't this why they introduced a penalty for checking back the nuts in position?

I can't even remember exactly how stox colluded, but if you have a few players actively softplaying each other over many hands it is collusion.

soft playing, swapping shares (while playing in the same game) and being staked (w the staker being in the game game) are all cheating. not enough people realize this.

all three of those things cause the FTOP to completely break down when the two cheaters enter a pot. this is true regardless of their intentions. this is true even in the other competitors are aware (almost certainly some won't be of course).

What advantage? We will roughly lose money to each other at the same rate whether we soft play or not headsup, assuming roughly equal skill. we may lower variance, but can also do that legally by chopping instead of playing blinds.

If we vary our play in multiway pots, that's not soft play, it's collusion.

And for the record I've never had any agreement to soft play anyone, never asked anyone to do it, always play my blinds hard friend or foe, and have even been called an idiot for waging epic blind battles with a good player I openly staked in a game.

Again, if it's a group playing in the same game that's a prior collusive agreement. If it's two friends declining to play hard headsup, I don't see the issue.

And checking back the nuts is a tourney rule, and clearly there are many more collusive issues in tourney structures. I've never heard of this rule in cash games, and see the nuts checked back regularly for soldiers of dumb reasons.

I heard he moved to China and was training kids is DoN SNGs in Wuhan

This is a complete non sequitur.

Pains me to continue to disagree with people I respect, but I don't buy it. I can see how some of those things can be cheating in certain circumstances, but not how they always must be cheating. It's just not black and white to me.

Jesus christ DesertCat this has already been argued to death- you have 9600 posts I hope not all of them are as big of a waste of time as the 10 or so you have in this thread.

K it seems like we basically just looked at the term 'softplaying' completely differently. Looking back on the thread, noahsd showed that they 3bet each other much less, had session times that correlated highly etc etc bla bla. There were at least 3 accounts doing this so it seems like there was a prior collusive agreement, hence the collusion.

So yeah, this wasn't just two dudes who were like 'oh let's not bluff super hard against each other if we are hu in a pot against each other'. Since they were shortstacking and playing cap as well, most of their play would have been preflop/flop and multiway too, and they probably got extra information all the time from 'softplaying' each other that didn't just amount to losing less against each other.

Also to be a nitpick I think that maybe 'softplaying' could be defined as a type of collusion by default, and it becomes more acceptable when you see it done because that 'collusion' isn't harmful or is done by people who don't know better etc. Doesn't matter though, we're on the same page just meant different things by softplaying.

yea busting out the c-word comes off too harsh sometimes and i am definitely too black and white about things, but the bottom line is anytime you fiddle with the incentive structure players are facing the FTOP weakens. at some point FTOP can weaken to the point where you are not really playing poker anymore.

supposedly in the 70s (based on hearsay from old timers in la) there were lowball games that were so bad with this stuff it just became accepted that the biggest games were team vs team vs team rather than individuals v individuals. at that point the 'poker' part of the game was kind of a secondary strategic consideration.

desert, stop posting on this topic please

Having multi accounts so the data mining muppets don't have the edge on u is fine in my book, data mining is cheating. In every casino the regs feed off the tourists, so that's cheating or not? Hell a perfect example is on rounders (feel sick having to mention that movie).

If u need a hud full of bought hand histories to give u an edge, players should have the option of changing sn to level the playing field. The sites are going to do something about these programs soon cause it's killing the game.

shhhh don't mention that name round here