Quote:
Originally Posted by dude45
so if neither player said no RTA that means its ok to use RTA
Ideally there would have been a list of rules including no RTA
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude45
Even the best player in the world isn't going to know how to exploit your game right from the start.
You're taking arbiters at their word that Paint was exploiting Brandon based on on the HU hands from 2 years ago. I get that since Brandon lost a lot of money pretty quickly and the TP/Paint collaboration was discovered after the fact, its easy to have the results oriented reaction that Paint must have been owning Brandon based on those hands. The reality is way less clear. 2 years is an eon in online poker. Players can go into a match with exploitative plans based on population tendencies or other reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude45
Also don't most sites have strong rules against datamining or buying hand histories? Which is essentially what paint did.
They both datamined dude
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude45
Anyway by your logic i should be able to challenge someone to a boxing match and spray pepper spray on my gloves and it would be their fault for not specifying that was against the rules
Not a reasonable analogy at all. There is a lot of grey area and disagreement about what types of information gathering should be allowed in online poker, both live (HUDs) and after the fact (data mining). You may be right that sites have banned data mining but that doesn't mean it isn't widespread.
Anyway, I'm not gonna argue that Paint and TP's collaboration was ok. My position is just that the arbitration decision was extremely one sided and the amount of EV lost by Brandon to the unethical behavior was much less than the total winnings in the challenge.
That's prob my last post on this, can't take the time and have said everything I have to say
Last edited by RalphWaldoEmerson; 06-15-2023 at 09:52 PM.