Well here's the 1st dictionary definition of cheating which turned up on Google:

'act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage' and the example?
"she always cheats at cards"

What I am saying is that Torelli cheated by this definition, which is how I would define it in gambling or any other sport (with obvious additions for specific games/possibilities).

If everyone were to accept that, there's more chance for it to be made a very specific rule rather than a 'grey area' or an 'angleshoot' - we could also penalise angle-shooting properly of course.

Marcel Luske's FIDPA rules or similar should be adopted and enforced by every tournament or event, and advertised as such.

Oh really? So when someone drives recklessly and kills school children, is it the fault of the police or the school district? Insipid stupidity.

The above is plainly a ridiculous statement in the context of us discussing a game of cards.

It's ridiculous because your statement is ridiculous.

Oh why am I even replying and why don't I have you on ignore yet.

Amen. +1000.

Until the community as a whole decides to band together and do something about this sort of thing, it will continue. This is the best result we can hope for:

Sagedonkey is the best pr Alec could have hired. I dont even try to catch up on this thread anymore bc i see its all encyclopedic posts from him and just move on.

Yes, by the general definition that the regular world uses it could called cheating. But some words mean different things to gamblers than they do the regular world. Sort of like a 'bet' between friends can mean very different things between gamblers and normies. We have different words for trips and set.

You said we should call this cheating and I disagree. This is the top end of angling. Doesn't mean I think it be should punished or treated any differently.

Calling him an angler more accurately describes his actions and what he's likely to do.

I'm not totally disagreeing with you on this zomg, I'd be happy if it became a semantic argument because all cheating and angleshooting had become punishable by death (...I mean some sensible punishment).

Has it been verified that not announcing his add-on is against PNiA rules? That makes it clear cheating (deliberately breaking the rules), not angle-shooting. Well, I guess he claims he DID announce it (in a whisper when no-one was paying attention).

Whatever, he's a cheat as far as I am concerned AND an angle-shooter!

I have no clue. I was late to the party and didn't see an answer but I almost asked this earlier. Smaller rules are often ignored in bigger stakes games if no one at the tables cares. I've never seen in anyone who played the say either way. If the guy is stuck and steaming people will often look the other way and only it looks really bad to the outside. And just so I'm clear I'm not defending him. He deserves everything he's gotten and even going to north was originally harmless, he didn't fix things when he had a chance.

I still personally think the added the chips with no malicious purpose originally but then got 'caught' before he had time to work them in to play and the whole thing snowballed out of control as he just compounded mistake after mistake.

Secretly adding on over the max is inherently malicious.

Casinos established the max buy-in rule to protect weaker players from getting stacked in a single hand by sharks that buy in to cover everyone. Whether this rule is fair or not is a different debate.

When Alec sits down at the game, he has agreed to play by the rules. When he knowingly breaks the rules, he is cheating.

Also, if you watch ssSupersoak's YouTube video analysis, you will see that Alec craftily and intentionally snuck on the 5k chips and hid them. There is definitely "malicious intent" behind it. He wanted to be able to win the maximum from his weaker opponents, and he had planned to do it through dishonest means. It was all premeditated.

You have to wonder what kind of dirt SageDonkey has on the mods.

Whew. I was worried no one was protecting all those weak naive players who agreed to play televised poker. Trivial rules are often broken in some high stakes games simply because no one cares and the adults can protect themselves. They just do whatever is the most fun and creates the most action.

I'm not saying that was the case I'm here. I'm just pointing that before everyone gets all butt hurt about the going north part, some one should have checked if anyone in the game cared

Right, I'm sure that's why Alec secretly went north; he wants the table to be more fun. ::eye roll::

The rule is designed to protect the fish, which protects the casino. The sooner the fish goes broke, the fewer people there will be to pay rake. Like I said, it doesn't matter why the rule exists. When you sit at a table you agree to the rules the casino has established because you are playing on their property. You follow the rule just like everyone else who didn't deem themselves a special snowflake and bought in over the max.

And yes, other players do care if you go north, especially if you're a top player. If you want a bigger stack in a capped game, you're gonna have to gamble more and earn it, just like how the other regs did.

If no one would care, why did Alec make the effort to do it secretly?

Additionally, often times, if you ask the table "Does anyone care if I buy in over the max", no one will want to say anything even if they cared. It makes them look petty and like a poosy. A poker table is full of testosterone and ego; very few people would want to appear petty or like a poosy.

I've seen this many times. A fish gets lucky and triples his buy in. He's just there to have fun. A serious pro will ask "Anyone object if I buy in over the max" or "Let's convert this to a [bigger stake] game, anyone object?" The person who objects is often chastised for being a nit, poosy, or too broke to hang with the big boys.

think it through again but just do it the opposite, numb nuts

Because he didn't want to admit he was losing.

Thought it through, you're excusing Alec going north because you either have the same scumbag tendencies or you don't play live NL cash games to understand the environment. Or you could just be brain-dead.


Confirmed brain-dead.

How dare you send the founder of Dunder-Mifflin out on his ancient butt!

I think I might have asked this before, but were you on PokerRoad back on those days. There was someone there with a loosely similar SN and a striking similar sense of humor. Either way, well done, sir.

Exactly. In the old days, Alec would have needed that extra 10 thousand to pay the medical bills from the busted knee caps he would have gotten in the parking garage that night.

I don't know why I even care, but I was annoyed that a user named Nalasimon tried to delete all the negative (and well-sourced, factually correct) info in Alec's wiki page. So once a day I've been restoring it, and once a day he comes back and deletes it again. This has been going on for a week.

Anyway, I just looked back at one of his edits prior to all this:

lololololol

True wealth is happiness and freedom. And also $10M.

GOLD

Hahaha 99.9% chance nalasimon is Alec. It sounds like a straight up promo for his site.

Time to tell Alec "Hi nalasimon" on social media.

nom is alan

anal simon

animal son

snail moan