Pete, you're assuming things that maybe the rest of us don't -- you believe that following speed limits is universal and any speeding is clearly a safety issue. If you can prove the second one, then Adam is endangering people's lives. I'm with Howard
I'd go a little further on this and say that speed discrepancy has been shown to cause accidents. When they raised the highway limits here from 55MPH (88/km/h) to finally 75MPH (120km/h), the difference from the fastest drivers to the slowest actually decreased -- this meant fewer accidents and raising the limits made the highway safer. As I understand it, most speed limits are more about making people in neighborhoods feel better (people don't like cars going by quickly), and there isn't a lot of good evidence that lowering limits save lives.

The upshot of this is that if nearly everyone drives 100 in an 88 zone, you driving 88 is actually dangerous for everyone. I assume the custom varies from country to country. Maybe in Germany or AU everyone just follows the posted limit, and speeders are evil criminals. You'd be suicidal to drive exactly the limit in Dallas.

http://www.npr.org/2016/08/31/492133...causes-traffic

"One of the best predictors of an accident isn't necessarily whether someone's speeding or not, but the difference between the average speed of traffic surrounding them and how fast they're going. And it turns out that going 5 miles per hour slower than the surrounding speed of traffic puts you at a greater risk of accident than going 5 miles per hour faster."

Howard, why is multi accounting fraud but VPNing not? Random internet dictionary definition says fraud is "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain", which we can work with. Multi accounting clearly uses deception to gain an advantage (disguising your id). But doesn't vpning do the same? You disguise your location in order to be able to play from home. I'm pretty sure Brian Hastings said he VPN/MAed because he tried playing in not-USA and ended up feeling down and not able to play well. Maybe it's less direct an advantage then disguising your identity, but poker is a game of small edges. So I still feel there's merit to Adam's instinct about VPNing.

Australia, SA. I guess we put a lot of money into traffic cameras so far less people speed here. Even on an expressway most people go the speed or under.

This reasoning still doesn't make it ok. "the everyone else is doing it" defense. Screw it, why even have speed limits?

Well, there are a couple of types of multi-accounting. One would be playing multiple simultaneous seats in either a cash game or a tourney; those seem to me to be obvious fraud.

You're going at a slightly different one, though, which is playing on an account that others don't think is you. The usual paradigm for this is that a well-known talented player who others don't want to play plays on a dummy account to bait players into playing them. That's a deception that induces others to rely on it to their detriment, which is common-law fraud. It's certainly possible that a complete donkfish plays on the account of some uber-talented grinder -- and that isn't likely to hurt anyone -- but I think that's probably pretty rare.

At its most benign, multi-accounting gets close to VPNning -- I agree with you. But I think most multi-accounting has the potential to be much worse than VPNning most of the time. All of this is a question of drawing lines. As Pete suggests, speeding at a certain level and in a certain place becomes reckless, moving it from malum prohibitum to malum in se. But for the most part, speeding is no big deal, and I think the same of VPNning.

I'm a little dubious about VPNning creating a play/skill edge, Hastings's observation aside. I would think most players could play as well in Montreal as they could in upstate New York; that just doesn't seem like a huge deal to me.

It will likely not shock you that I reserve my fury for the government here in USA#1 that passed the dumb-ass UIGEA, and encourages very aggressive prosecutors like Elliot Spitzer or Preet Bhahara.

If you lived in Dallas, it wouldn't be controversial to drive 70 in a 55 on I35 -- it would just be normal. Nobody would consider it wrong or a crime. Think community standards. I assume the reason they have speed limits is that by putting up 55, they keep people from driving 100. Not sure, actually. Never lived there. However, it was remarkable as a US city where people drove way over the limit. Here in Denver, slightly less so. However, if you came into US cities with a moralistic view of driving 5 or 10 over the limit, you'd get a lot of confused looks.

Don't you think this is by far the biggest factor for compliance with the posted limit, not some superior moral compass?

The worst thing about this forum is that your posts are locked after a half an hour and you are forced to see your mistakes forever. absence.

This hasn't worked for a long time.

PRIDE used to run tournaments in the early to mid 2000s, spread out across 3 events, each a couple of months apart (1 fight each at an opening event, 1 fight each (winners only obv) in the next event, then semi-finals and finals in the same night) and they worked out pretty well, but recent attempts at tournaments, like Strikeforce's HW Grand Prix, have been plagued by injuries. IIRC most athletic commissions don't allow more than one fight in a night, anyway.

Well i don't know what other people are thinking but i do have a pretty solid moral compass.

I didn't want to mention this but here goes...

I patrol schools as a security officer for my job. Someone on a different patrol thought it would be ok to go 120Km/h to a multiple alarms job. He was workin a night shift, so yeh, far more likely it's going to be a break in.

It's a Saturday night, 1 or 2 in the morning and he's flying down the main road to his school. Next thing he knows it, a kid that turned out to be drunk (it's a Saturday night), stumbles out into the cars path. Guy slammed on the brakes, but after the fact police figured he hit the kid going around 100. Kid was instantly killed.

Security guy went to jail for 5 years. He was a nice guy, but pretty fkn stupid. Turned out the alarm job he was going to was a false alarm as well.

This is probably why i don't speed and don't understand people who do it.

120km/h, what was the speed limit?

So again, context matters. A road with people walking around it is different than one without pedestrians

Pete,

That guy goes to jail everywhere, including USA #1. And he should -- that's a no-brainer. But a one-off event like that shouldn't control your thinking about highway speeding. Do you have an objection to the autobahns?

Maple Ridge traffic cam link

Your argument by anecdote aside (intended to inject the emotional response of sympathy for the kid and his family), going 120 kph in a 45 kph zone (or whatever it was) on a surface street and going 100 kph in a 90 kph zone on a divided highway are both speeding, but are not morally equivalent. Do you see why? If not, then you will not comprehend why someone might do the latter routinely yet never even conceive of doing the former.

And anticipating the response, yes, it is a slippery slope and I don't know where between 46 kph and 120 kph it becomes morally reprehensible (or malum per se to borrow HT's framework). In some jurisdictions any violation of the posted limit is considered negligence per se in court, but not all negligence is recklessness.

Yes, you never have to figure that out if you stick to the posted limit, but applying a simplistic black/white rule describing everything above it does not seem appropriate.

Lol, don't patronize me (you should've abbreviated it to dycy if you're gonna use it). Yes i understand what you're saying.

But back to the original material, Adam has admitted to being reckless in both situations. He is clearly a lead foot. In one of the eps. he said he was ticketed by a cop in a 25 zone, so clearly he speeds in both situations regularly.

Adam is wrong about the chick at the casino, but not for the reasons you think.

---

If you are on a hot streak at blackjack it is most likely, because a lot of Aces and Tens are coming out and that is advantageous for the player. Meanwhile the count is going down and down and suddenly you are facing splitting Aces versus a 6. At a very low count, you should have not bet the maximum. In fact, at some point the count could have been so low that it would have been correct NOT to split the Aces.

Did you ever think about that, huh? Girl probably was just angry the dude didn't know anything beyond basic strategy :P

---

There's a joke for math nerds about you two dudes discussing "normal" people gambling that I was thinking about.
There were two math professors in a restaurant arguing about their students.
One goes: "The situation is horrible. The students that are coming in are math illiterate. The don't know anything about math"
The second: "I am sure it's not that bad!
The first: "No, it's like an epidemic. The population doesn't know anything about math anymore. It's such a shame!"
The second professor shakes his head and on the way to the bathroom talks to the waitress:
"Listen, I'm gonna ask you a question and no matter what you answer 'One third times x to the 3', deal?"
"Sure" goes the waitress.
The second professor returns to the table and says: "I'm pretty sure you are being pessimistic. Look I'm gonna ask that waitress, a normal citizen of the world, one that you think doesn't know anything about math."
He calls her over: "Say, what is the integral of x squared"
The waitress dutifully answers: "One third times x to the 3."
The first professor is impressed, but before he can say anything the waitress goes:
"plus c" and leaves the table.

Heh maybe my next tattoo should say "...plus a constant" (which is how I heard the joke originally).

That's the first time I heard that one and I did actually laugh out loud. Partly because I have a former roommate who is a physics prof and has recently been bitching on Facebook about how unprepared his *PhD candidates* are, let alone the undergrads.

For the $1 million bankroll. Couldn't you put like $500,000 in Amazon stock or something and the rest for poker.