I cant wait to see the entire list of those who have been ghosting in this same manner. Many more with poor judgement and morale to uncover.

I assume part of the mentality of Nick, Viffer and the others defending this practice and suggesting its not so bad is because it gives us less reason to go deep in the wormhole and find out just how many more of these super pros choose money over morale.

I'll never look at Nick, Jungle, Viffer, anyone who justifies why this is acceptable and that it should just be brushed off with much respect moving forward. I'll always have in the back of my mind that you are just a little bit scummy...

Ahhh, the Michael Jackson defense.

Anyone saying this is acceptable in any way is wrong.

Just because we all hear about, we all know it's done, etc, etc, doesnt make it right. In any situation, at any time.

Just because you are numb to it is a bad reason to excuse it.

If Jungle knew all the other players were ghosted by wizards, why would he want to play?

Why not just play in a private game with the wizards on their own accounts?

Playing on someone else's account is unethical, but it isn't "serious cheating" like the thread is titled.

It’s a private club, on cam apparently. Jungle can’t get into the games without deceiving others and using another account while someone else is on cam

And apparently were playing for millions. I can’t think of what is worse other then straight superusing but considering jungleman is a top 5 player in the world I don’t see how this is any different.

Let's assume you have history with someone you are sure is a fish compared to your skill-level and now you get the chance to play him for significant stakes. You then lose a (small) fortune and it turns out you didn't play the fish you wanted to but Jungleman or Linus instead.
Would your judgement be that you got scammed or would their behaviour just be unethical and that's it?


I think there is a reason why Koon denied the offer or why Galfond doesn't advise his wife while she's playing NL20.

Yep, Tom Hayes, who was manipulating LIBOR comes to mind. I actually believe autistic people are wired that way.

Do you think Woody Harrelson hustling black guys on the basketball court is closer to just being unethical or serious cheating? What about Uncle Phil? They were disguising their level of skill. Jungleman and the guy whose account he was using were hustling. imo.

Autistic people are wired to deceive and cheat others while writing blogs on how they consider honesty and integrity important, and then they also wired to just blame on others and not take responsibility?

I don’t know much about autism but i learned a lot from this thread

Me, too ..... I learned that I don't give a f**k about this whole"serious cheating" matter unless someone is paying me as legal counsel to give a f**k about it. ..... in which case it becomes fascinating.

Lol, just realized who posted this.

There we have another philosophy-passionate, virtue-signaling, publicly donating for good causes HS reg who trivialises cheating people for fortunes.

"To be clear, I started playing with Sina" -> Note the use of "with". Minimizing his behaviour, probably even to himself. The correct sentence should be of course "I started playing AS Sina..."

"ultimately played very few sessions" -> So? One is too many. Come on. This is, again, minimization and completely irrelevant. In addition, the reason you probably played very few sessions is that the fish weren't playing at the same time as your scumbag partner was able to sit in front of his webcam for a few hours. I am 100% sure it was nothing to do with your willingness to play. STFU.

"none of which were against Dan Bilzerian as claimed."-> Oh yeah? You sure? And what does that change? Why is this relevant? I'm sure Bilzarian played Sina....I guess it was the times you weren't ghosting his account. I guess Sina should have written in the chat "Hey guys, it's really me this time, not Daniel Cates" so that they wouldn't confuse the two of you huh?

" who sat in a game I understood was rampant with professionals who were ghosting" -> Right. Wow, Perkins was a real chump then huh? I guess it's his fault for not being in the private chat group all you scumbags have discussing this stuff. Wow, fancy that, a private group he's not allowed to join? You are all, however, allowed to sneak into his private thing any time you want. And your excuse is, literally, since everyone was doing it, I thought it'd be ok if I did too.

"Unfortunately Bill got caught in the crossfire and I'm very sorry for that."-> Oh, so you're sorry BILL got caught in the crossfire. But not the others? Someone "getting caught in crossfire" implies something accidental. You were acting completely purposely. Minimization again.

"While I don't think it's fair that I’ve been singled out for something many were much more guilty of" -> Ohhhhh. You got caught, but it's "not fair" that you should be singled out. What a whiney-ass statement. So name some names then.

" I hold myself to a high standard of ethics" -> HAHAHAHAHAHA lol....oh man, THAT is funny. Lucky then only person you have to "hold yourself to" IS yourself then isn't it? Cause obviously you feel the standard of ethics others want to hold you to are completely unrealistic. See your statement above for proof of that. "Unfair". All you need is is to tweet "So unfair. So nasty." a few times, you'd sound like Trump.

"I will do my best to behave better in the future." -> "...but I'm not promising anything."

"Your efforts were vital to mitigating this situation" -> Quick trip to passive-voice-land, the preferred destination of low-lifes and greaseballs everywhere when confronted with proof of their scumminess and actions. "this situation".....as if it just happened out of nowhere. Like the weather or an earthquake. See also: "I'm sorry you feel this way" and "It's a pity things happened as they did."

At no point in this statement does Jungledouche say sorry to the people he was scamming, clearly state exactly what he did, make any mention of restitution to the victims of his scummy actions, state who his victims WERE (just that it wasn't Bilzarian or, purposely, Perkins who "got caught in the crossfire") or rule out the idea that he'd ghost accounts again. In fact, it doesn't at any point even say he WAS ghosting accounts.

Basically it's "I was playing cards with someone, not Bilzarian though, and most of my friends were too. Bill Perkins accidentally showed up and had a bad time, but it's not fair to just blame me for that cause I'm a good guy. Anyway, I'm sorry he had a bad time and I hope it doesn't happen again. Shout out to all my mates, love you guys!"

Yeah come on this isn't just concealing his ability it's more similar to you're chilling with a group of friends at a bar with a pool table and knowing you're all bad at pool but have money you start betting 1k/ball. Then you find out one friend was able to sneak a top pool pro into the bar who was taking all his shots for him while you were chatting with people and having a good time.

I'd say it's more similar to the former. Sneaking in a pro pool player into a bar to take every shot for you is much much more improbable than somebody else clicking buttons for you over a webcam.

So let me get this straight: Bill Perkins lets Dan Douchebag ghost on his account, so they can play against a whale. The Whale lets Jungleman ghost on his account to play against the ghost of Perkins/Blizerian.

Do I have that right?

Who gives a ****? Looks like douchebag-on-douchebag crime to me.

And so what about ghosting? Aren't these supposed to be great players? You'd think after an orbit or two, they'd be able to figure out an account was being ghosted by a top-level pro, and they'd adjust accordingly. Like you're supposed to do. If they can't figure that out, too bad for them. Maybe they shouldn't be playing high stakes poker then.

What a whole bunch of nothing.

This isn’t what happened.

well that what happened? It's impossible to tell for normal people

+1

Private group on app, appearing to be rich whales. Jungle can’t get in the games but someone else offered his account some Sina guy. The Sina guy needs to even be on webcam, jungle plays against whales including dan and bill and others.

Jungle claims no biggie bc others bought accounts as well.

Pretty big meh. Jungle's statement is terrible though. Most statement's are...

Just admit that you misunderstood, it's not a big deal. Kind of weird to act like everyone else is a huge nerd for getting it when you have 70,000 posts here lol

Wtf are you talking about.

Spouting nonsense all over the forum today, for what reason?

He's referencing the movie White Men Can't Jump and an episode of The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air.