It's mind blowing to know that you're so fixated on believing the point of all this is some ego thing. If there was collusion against him, not just an infinite bankroll against him, then what happened to him was morally wrong no matter how much the person has in his bank account.

If anything this should advise future whales or anyone to avoid those players.

Do not care if some billionaire is butthurt.

Oh, ok, he was going to lose all of his money, anyway! So the FTP pros just made the process more efficient.

Guy is absolutely right, he was screwed.

He knew he was outclassed, but he had a bankroll advantage. He could pressure them with his unlimited bankroll. It was probably that fact that encouraged him to play more than anything else. But they took that away from him without him even knowing. They had unlimited "play chips" and they backed each other without his knowledge. It was cheating.

I'm sure they defended their unethical behavior, as some here are doing, by claiming Guy is rich. But that has nothing to do with it. They cheated him, and he is 100% right to be pissed.

--PP

somewhat legit claims although he was losing anyway. Having that said, i doubt he cares too much about the money, mostly just the principle of feeling scammed.

Not sure if their creative method of "income redistribution" is overall good or bad in ethical terms. He got screwed, and I guess he is allowed to be angry, but I'm also allowed to have no sympathy for him because he basically screwed an entire country out of tons of monies in tax revenue out of personal greed; and I don't even like Canada very much. Frankly, I'm glad they cheated him. Makes me feel all warm inside.

Kind of like how I can't really hate a pickpocket who works the investment banker circuit on Wall Street.

Benyamine lived online, Patrik was often in those games too. Gus was in the PLO games pretty often. But those 3 you mentioned were almost always in the game and benefited most.

Except there isn't much reason to believe that Guy wouldn't have been able to cash out any of his winnings, so no one was playing with play chips against him.

There's also nothing unethical about being backed and no obligation for anyone to disclose that information to other players.

Guy would have also never had any edge by virtue of other players not being rolled to play against him. He would have still been crushed just the same since he was playing versus extremely strong players, all of which would still have been extremely strong short banked. The only difference is some of them may have had to quit or busto if they ran bad, and then he would have been crushed by whoever was left or others.

Obv if there was in-game collusion or Guy was getting free rolled, then he got cheated. Is there evidence of that?

20th level Ranger is crushing this thread, but I gotta ask since your quest in this thread seems a bit vendettaish - your father was not an aspiring magician back in the days that died because of cheap equipment provided by a circus-owner, or perhaps sabotaged by a fellow magician/street performer?

Did they actively collude/cheat guy? Very probably not.

Does it look and feel to guy like they did? Almost certainly.

I say this to people all the time in high(ish) stakes games online, all the sitting in/sitting out, table jumping etc, I know from playing these games that there is no collusion at alll occuring, but I also have spoken to recreational players who've played these games online and they say it feels like are being colluded against because of it.

Protecting the integrity of the game also means ensuring that things that LOOK shady (even if they aren't) don't happen. If stuff like in the original equity-chop thread ever comes out then it's obviously going to look really bad, whereas actually in reality it might have been to Guy's advantage (not financially ofc) that they were doing that, as it means the longevity of the games+stakes HE wants to play online is increased - as lets face it guy the only one legitimately rolled for those games, and if somehow 3/4 of the pool went busto he'd have to play lower which I doubt he'd want to do.

obviously if everyone is playing with unlimited fake money then no-one will go busto lol

If they agreed to cover each other's losses, or some variant thereof, then Guy was playing against the entire table, or at least against a team of players sitting at the table.

I suppose a key question is whether they told him in advance. If it's not unethical, then I'm sure they had no problem explaining the situation to Guy before the cards were dealt. Did they? Or did they keep it a secret? Why?

As to not impacting their play since they are top pros and fully backed, I completely disagree. At those high stakes huge losses hurt. That's why they play them, they need that rush. Losing a couple of all-in pots versus Guy would have had a significant impact on their game. Perhaps they would have quit, perhaps they would have gambled it up more to get it back, etc. Who knows? But knowing they had a huge insurance policy in effect must have been a psychological relief.

I am only speaking in general terms. I have no idea what agreements were made when Guy was playing. But if they agreed to cover each other's losses in some form and didn't bother to tell Guy so he could adjust accordingly (or quit), then that is absolutely a form of collusion. And hence, I believe, unethical.

--PP

If two Players go all in v Guy, and then refund the other player some of their loss from that pot, they have cheated.

Definitely agree. Even if you don't intend to play differently, I just don't buy that multiple guys sharing a bankroll at the same table are going to play against each other and the other players the same as they would if they were not sharing a bankroll. I have no problem with traditional backing arrangements, but I would never knowingly play at the same table as a backer and his horse and/or multiple people sharing a bankroll.

Edit: Obviously this only applies to pros. I am more than happy to play against a married couple having a fun night at the casino, but in that case it is very obvious what you are dealing with.

Round two.




EDIT: And I forgot to mention in the above quote that in the first thread (and maybe this one too) that a lot of people also didn't/don't know what equity chopping is and think that it means splitting up profits are refunding losses or has something to do with softplay or collusion.


It is just overall a very messy conversation when everyone is talking about different things, but pretend they aren't, and no one knows what actually happened.

Anyone have HH from back in the day? Lets just review them and see if what he is saying is true. I remember watching some of those games and seeing a lot of multiway all in action which I thought was odd given the stakes.

I agree with Guy that if it was just "play money" and behind the door deals then thats wrong. Andy Beal knew what he was getting into when he came to Vegas to play. He put real money on the table and the corporation out real money on the table. Remember when the corporation was close to being broke? That affects play and they were playing limit. Imagine if it were NL or PLO and the bankroll could be gone in one hand. That changes the way people play.

Any OP that ends the post with discuss.... should be banned.
discuss....

Just like MalACEsia is getting ripped off at the moment. There´s no ****** way these guys, that are mostly playing these games arent sharing profits/losses. Well, lets exclude Denoking/Wilhasha...

But sadly, I think Phua is wise enough to know that. Not sure how he ended up playing these bunch of bumhunters...

Players sharing action in the game is something totally different from players being backed by FTP or anyone outside of the game though, which is what a lot of people are complaining about.

I won't keep arguing about how overblown peoples' idea of the effect of top pros playing short banked is because it doesn't even matter. No matter how large or small the advantage of having a proper bankroll is, it's not an unfair advantage and it's not unfair for a player not to share with everyone what their bankroll is. That's completely ridiculous.

still you may want to do so because it creates trust.

Why would a guy who gives a **** about this push for a $1,000,000 buy-in tourney where virtually everyone in the field is going to be backed by people not even in the tournament? Doesn't add up.

It's probably an unfair advantage if you got a bunch of your money by cheating the entire nation of Canada out of large amounts of tax revenue for your personal gain. I mean, we don't all have the opportunity to rob Canada for hundreds of millions of dollars, but we should just accept playing with people who do in such a way as to give them an advantage? No thanks. Will definitely Robin Hood their punk asses.

I think that's something that would apply more to sharing action or having financial interest in other players in the game, not just simply having money. What % of people that are backed or properly bankrolled for the stakes that they are playing make sure to let all of their opponents know that?

Won't name any names but I've heard a number of references from people who feel Guy may have also been colluded against in live games as well.

Step 1 - Invite Guy to a live game
Step 2 -other players in the game agree to subtly softplay each other but also reconcile after the session so no one loses money unless Guy happens to be the big winner.
Step 3 - split Guy's losses among those in the group
Step 4 - profit

I'm sure this type of thing has gone on for years, but I find it really disturbing that it may have happened to a guy who has done a lot for the game/charity and for many players in the poker community(loans, backing etc..)

It's incredibly standard in HS games far and wide and always has been, and this isn't even the worst you have to deal with. For every cheating scandal put on blast at 2+2 over the years, how many more have been missed entirely or swept under the rug? There really aren't many people who make their money at HS poker totally cleanly in a 100% ethical and universally unobjectionable way, and almost anyone who has played in HS games has either been a participant in something shady or the victim of it. Guy just likes to whine about it more I guess.

It is definitely shady if you are playing in a game and all the players are extremely loose getting all in on flips when your not in the pot since they are going to chop anyways. Then when you are in the pot they play differently/nitty

he is a world class player and got cheated by his opponents ganging on him and he didnt know they werenot playing with their ownmoney only, meaning he had less information, and the knew how to gang on him and actually were sort of softplaying each other then, targeting him.