I have not read this entire thread, so I don't know if this has already been brought up or not...but....

Take into consideration that pokertableratings.com has EVERY single hand history viewable for free online. You can review ENTIRE sessions that anyone has played against any other player. Not a single member of team CR had to share databases to analyze isildur1's play, It's available for anyone to browse.

Do you really think discussing hands and strategies with friends is unethical? Do you really think that Daniel N, John Juanda, Erick Lindgren and Allen Cunningham all didn't discuss strategy against good players together as they were coming up through the ranks as buddies?

I really think that NVG has finally gone too far.

LOL..big difference FYI..go watch whole sessions then and play him see how you do.....you can review whole sessions..but cannot see mucked hands at showdown that are only seen by the 2 involved in the match..the fact that he gets to see every showdown hand of ilisdur is a HUGE advantage

After reading more and more posts, another thing has come to mind....

It seems that a lot of players in this thread think that by analyzing some hand histories is the same has being able to see a player's hole cards or something. High stakes poker is about constantly adjusting to your opponents play. Seeing some hand histories isn't some magic bullet to crush anyone.

Do you think it makes a big difference that the high stakes player pool is so thin though as you said? If there are 10 people playing in the highest stakes and three are showing every showdown hand to eachother that you were involved to try and gain a big edge, do you think that its alot different then middle stakes where there are thousands of people and 3 ppl against you wont really make a big difference? Serious question

THIS. Exact same situation. (If the CR guys did what everyone is assuming they did.)

Howard Lederer did not know of the existence of this thread or its subject matter until I told him in person two hours ago.

The Difference is he knew he was playing against a whole team and the money didnt mean much to him

needs more love

lol

hahahaha awesome

Don't have a job. And I SUCK at poker. But even I can tell that Isildur1 was not on the same level as any of the 3 accused cheaters.

Its not at all the exact same situation

Andy Beal knew exactly what he was getting into. He wanted to take on some of the worlds top pros all at once. He agreed that they could change around as they got tired. He knew that they were sharing information amongst each other.

Bottom line...he consented to the whole process when he took on the corporation.

Isidur1 had every expectation he was taking on Brian Hastings heads-up...not a puppet of Brian Hastings that was actually the combined knowledge of multiple poker players that had played against him before. In this instance he was not actually playing Brian Hastings even if Hastings was manipulating a mouse on the other end.

In the Beal instance...as far as we know...all the parties played by all of the rules that had consented to before the match began. In this case, its quite evident that Hastings&Co violated the terms of use for full tilt. People can call it a stupid rule if they want, but the "fact" is, that its still a rule.

Your also trying to compare a live poker game with an internet poker game...the two have very different characteristics.

It is not certain he played a team. No one is even reading the quote lol. The quote says Townsend did all the research himself and then discussed his findings with the other 2. It never says he gave them hand histories or all huddled around a computer and played him.

Honestly I feel like if anything it's a bigger deal at medium stakes than high stakes. For the reason that high stakes is such a small player pool, where the hands are so high profile, widely posted online, it's unusual to face someone new etc. that there are smaller (relative) gains from sharing a database. Compare this to midstakes where you might get data on someone you'd never heard of before, who has never played with you and would think you probably view him as an unknown. Look at how people love HSDB and think it adds a lot to the community, yet generally hate tableratings. Why do you think that is (serious question I'd love to hear peoples' thoughts)? My guess is that it's for the same reason I posted above.

He is so far above them it's sick. They had to get together to analyze his hands looking for any patterns they could find, and even then failed to squeeze out a win that says they're better once you adjust for AIEV.