I think this is kind of ridiculous.

If someone is bumhunting high stakes poker and he snags someone who he thinks a fish, he should know to be weary. This guy basically wanted to play a no-name person for large amount of money online, and is extremely upset that he got jungleman. Yes, obviously jungleman lacks certain ethics and broke the terms of service, and the poker site (and whatever sponsors he has, deals he has, etc, etc) should act accordingly. But the idea that this guy who lost his money gets anything back seems pretty outrageous to me... If he had won he wouldn't have said anything. It is an inherent risk that when you sit against someone online (especially high stakes), you might not know who exactly you're playing against. That is just sort of the nature of it, like it or not. The poker sites try to enforce rules against multi-accounting, and they do a good job of it. Unfortunately, they can only do so much, and everyone knows this. Also, it shouldn't take long for you to figure out that your opponent is a competent and a good player.

and for the record, i'm not necessarily convinced jungleman should pay him anything, for various reasons. i'm just pointing out that the whole EV discussion is loltarded.

if jungleman really feels like his multiaccounting was wrong and wants to make things right, there's an obvious solution.

JM didn't play as poker69her or whatever, he played as girahh who was a known (thanks to JM and HQ) hsnl player and site pro.

bet a ton DIG and DC did more of MAing that is writing here, if u keep looking ull keep finding for sure....

Given that I assisted Tyler in helping post the screenshots, I feel as if my impressions are relevant.

First, I had never spoken until Tyler until today. He PMed me asking for help, which a couple of people have done since this scandal started due to my active participation in the NVG thread.

Second, I'm probably one of the least competent computer people I know, but every time I suggested he might want to talk to someone else, he thought things were going fine, which is why it took so long to get the photos up.

Third, during the Skype conversation he seemed extremely genuine and legitimately hurt by the JM MAing. He said he knew JMs SN on Merge (which he did not tell me, BTW) because of a site swap they had done in the past, and that he also knew that JM knew he would never play JM.

Fourth, he also stated he had no idea who Girah was, so he believed he was sitting against a random, but not necessarily a pro. I personally find this believable since I barely knew who he was prior to this whole situation, and he sounded sincere, but obviously that's my opinion.

Fifth, he believes he is entitled to full compensation of what he lost, since he would never have sat down for the match if he knew it was JM, and he doesn't understand why everyone doesn't think this as well.

Right, but didn't the individual state he had no idea who girahh was? That is, he figured him for a weaker player, which is the only reason he played him (I assume).

tyler claimed he didnt know who girah was at the time, so girah could've been jungleman for all he knew.

Except that Tyler knows JMs SN on that network. Which almost nobody does, apparently.

Yeah except that on merge you can have multiple accounts so his claim is stupid.

Not going to clog up this thread with a lot of my opinions besides this one...

Why are some people saying that tyler is freerolling JM by asking for his money back? I understand that he wouldn't give it back if he had won but thats completely irrelevant because JM has admitted to breaking terms of service and in most opinions, cheating.

If someone cheats against you in a game and beats you for money, that money is owed back to the victim. If you beat the cheater, thats his own problem.

Edit: Especially when it seems clear that tyler would have refused action from jungleman under his real name.

I think paying back the EV he gained is the fairest way. I do think there should be an extra penalty though in addition, not sure how much, because mainly there could've been other damage caused. I.e. Maybe Tyler took a shot and him losing this money will adversely effect his EV in the future if he can't take as many shots or play as high etc.

Maybe he knew his Lock specific SN? IDK, I get skins and networks confused sometimes (I haven't played since BF and never played on anything other than PS) so I might have inadvertently mixed them up. He seemed convinced he knew JMs SN within that site and would never have played him.

there's also the possibility the transfer he did with jungle also was not jungle's sn, i.e it could be from a stakee, or somebody who had a debt to jungle, etc. I don't know their specific conversation, but that scenario happens all the time. Either way it's a moot point if you can have multiple accounts on merge (which I'm not familiar with.)

This makes no sense whatsoever (as far as justification for getting specifically 100% back).
What does he think he should get as compensation if he'd been superused?

He knew his Overbet specific skin. Therefore since Tyler didn't know the "prodigy" and therefore wouldn't know whether Girah was you, me or Jungleman - it can be concluded he's using this situation to get a reimbursement from Jungleman i.e. "freerolling".

yes, and this is obviously scummy on its own.

Havent thought about that part. If JM had an additional merge acct with a random name (that tyler didnt know about) would it still be cheating because jm knew who he was playing? Tyler said he had no reads and didnt even know who girah was.

I would never play Phil Ivey HU. Lets say I got on some random site (pre Black Friday obv) and played some random who takes me for $20k. I learn later that said person is a Phil Ivey secret sn. Should I expect to get paid back?

Personally I'd say no, and while this incident is slightly different, I think a similar conclusion should be made.

are people really worried about the guy who admitted cheating getting freerolled here? Seems absurd.

Just guessing but prob 100% back plus stiffer penalties for perpetrator (permaban, legal action, etc?). I'm still not certain what I think is appropriate compensation, but it's clear he deserves something, and I don't think 100% back 'makes no sense whatsoever'.

it's Ludacris to think that it'd be cheating, esp when both parties have the option to play on different names. I guess the person who sits first originally is at a disadvantage in that regard, but in the end the other guy should have no obligation to reveal the rest of his sn's across all the other sites.

If this is the way that network operates, I'll take your word for it. I have zero knowledge about how networks/skins operate, I was only giving my impressions from the conversation we had, and they are my impressions only.

People itt do not understand eurosites and the concept of skins. You play on one network and can play vs villains across skins and can have an account on each skin. So just because he knew his sn on one skin, it doesnt mean he is not playing jungle on another skin's sn.

[QUOTE=If someone cheats against you in a game and beats you for money, that money is owed back to the victim. If you beat the cheater, thats his own problem.[/QUOTE]

Tyler did not get cheated. If you really believe he was cheated because he didn't know who he was playing, it is extremely naive. He broke the terms of service, and the poker site should and probably will take extensive action. His rep is tarnished (could affect future sponsorships, etc). There are many good high stakes poker players out there, and you often don't know who you are playing. Your argument would imply that Tyler said to himself "I'm going to take a shot at high stakes and I will play anyone EXCEPT jungleman." No way this is the case, he got a fish who actually turned out to be a great player. That's the risk of playing online.

When top high stakes pros register on a new site, no one knows their screen name. You can't make the argument that the first few people playing them should be compensated in some way because they have no idea who they are playing. The only reason you can even tell who is good these days is because of sites like tableratings, which never existed a few years ago. To argue anyone should get money back because they didn't know who their opponent was by either fame or tableratings.com is pretty weak. This 2nd paragraph is to just enforce the point that part of internet poker is anonymity. In the past few years it has become less this way because of tracking sites, sponsorships, etc, but online poker is still like this at its core.

The difference is that this wasn't a random unknown account that could have been JM's secret account. It was hyped as Jose's, in his name, and used by JM.