Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

News, Views, and Gossip For poker news, views, and gossip

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-18-2009, 03:01 AM   #1
doublejoker
Old News
 
doublejoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,879
Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Im glad he wasn't at my table....

Got this from Hard Boiled Poker ......

Monday, April 06, 2009
The Waiting Game

Last edited by Kevmath; 04-18-2009 at 08:24 AM. Reason: removed cut and paste of someone else's blog/put in link
doublejoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:06 AM   #2
ArcadianSky
veteran
 
ArcadianSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,386
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublejoker View Post
I found the whole exchange interesting to follow for a few reasons. One was just the spectacle of seeing Negreanu become so animated. Was perhaps a little untoward of him as a PokerStars representative to be getting into it with another player like that, but with Phil Hellmuth setting the standard for conduct with his poorly-typed screeds over on UltimateBet I think it is probably acceptable to allow KidPoker to blow off a little steam like this once in a while.
Are you REALLY comparing DN's conduct here to PH's in the UB scandal?

Every time I read your threads, a little piece of me dies inside.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJoseph View Post
Don't be even more tilting than Chainsaw. I'm pretty sure he's referencing Phil's various chat blow-ups vs other players (see HossTBF).
Ahhh...I mis-read. My bad Chainsaw.

Last edited by ArcadianSky; 04-18-2009 at 03:12 AM.
ArcadianSky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:10 AM   #3
JJoseph
journeyman
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 385
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcadianSky View Post
Are you REALLY comparing DN's conduct here to PH's in the UB scandal?

Every time I read your threads, a little piece of me dies inside.
Don't be even more tilting than Chainsaw. I'm pretty sure he's referencing Phil's various chat blow-ups vs other players (see HossTBF).
JJoseph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:12 AM   #4
ArcadianSky
veteran
 
ArcadianSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,386
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJoseph View Post
Don't be even more tilting than Chainsaw. I'm pretty sure he's referencing Phil's various chat blow-ups vs other players (see HossTBF).
ahh, i mis-read. I fixed my post. thx
ArcadianSky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:12 AM   #5
KSOT
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
KSOT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Board pairing is a myth
Posts: 8,106
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

We definitely DEFINITELY need one big Negreanu thread to contain all this crap.
KSOT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:13 AM   #6
mmfb87
banned
 
mmfb87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 626
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

used to like negreanu a lot but now im starting to slowly change my mind about him
mmfb87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:17 AM   #7
DCHI194
journeyman
 
DCHI194's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 267
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

I've only stalled once...in a freeroll satellite where the chip leader at the table was betting 8x big blinds despite his obvious security.

It is in the rules, and frankly, what Daniel thinks is irrelevant to the discussion. If people need to employ those tactics to be profitable in a given tourney then I'm fine with it. Maybe its not the most honorable tactic but no player owes Daniel a duty of convenience regardless of his influence on a given site.

I may not like the stalling tactic but I think its fine.
DCHI194 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:26 AM   #8
ArcadianSky
veteran
 
ArcadianSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,386
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHI194 View Post
I've only stalled once...in a freeroll satellite where the chip leader at the table was betting 8x big blinds despite his obvious security.

It is in the rules, and frankly, what Daniel thinks is irrelevant to the discussion. If people need to employ those tactics to be profitable in a given tourney then I'm fine with it. Maybe its not the most honorable tactic but no player owes Daniel a duty of convenience regardless of his influence on a given site.

I may not like the stalling tactic but I think its fine.
I think using the line "well, it's not against the rules" is an invalid and base-less statement when discussing the integrity and morality of a given situation or circumstance. A rulebook should be completely irrelevant when it comes to etiquette (which should be regulated and implemented based on good intentions and elementary social awareness).

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWorm967 View Post
the rules are the rules, i wouldn't mind the break.
Why must rules determine what's morally acceptable? This is an issue, not just in poker, but in every facet of life. In a lot of situations, you shouldn't need rules or laws to tell you how to conduct yourself... you should have the moral awareness to determine on your own. Just because a given action isn't outlawed doesn't make it an acceptable thing to do.

Last edited by ArcadianSky; 04-18-2009 at 03:38 AM.
ArcadianSky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:30 AM   #9
TheWorm967
grinder
 
TheWorm967's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: gettin 19 callers on an 18 man table
Posts: 639
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

the rules are the rules, i wouldn't mind the break.
TheWorm967 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:30 AM   #10
Chris N.
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 231
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

you're a piece of **** to stall. thats it.

Last edited by Kevmath; 04-18-2009 at 08:24 AM.
Chris N. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:32 AM   #11
DCHI194
journeyman
 
DCHI194's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 267
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcadianSky View Post
I think using the line "well, it's not against the rules" is an invalid and base-less statement when discussing the integrity and morality of a given circumstance.

A rulebook should be completely irrelevant when it comes to etiquette (which should be regulated and implemented based on good intentions and elementary social awareness).
If we're going to get into a discussion of morality, then I think it is wholely justifiable.

Whether it satisfies etiquette is another question. But rules and laws are supposed to reflect the morals of a given situation, it being society, sports or games....if it were immoral, it would be against the rules.

Also, on a strictly philosophical basis I can't think of any reason why it would be immoral. From a utilitarian perspective it is the right action to stall...because everyone that is eliminated in the stalling period moves all of the people being stalled up in the money. It isn't robbing them of anything other than time that they would have most likely spent at the table anyway.

From a Kantian perspective I suppose you are using the time of others as a means to an end but again, it seems unclear as to why this would be wrong if they would have spent the same amount of time at the table regardless. By sayng you're morally wrong for stalling you're sort of committing yourself to the view that slower live dealers are morally inferior to faster live dealers....because time is passing with fewer hands being dealt which is the only thing you can fault a staller for...
DCHI194 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:42 AM   #12
ix.spider.uk
adept
 
ix.spider.uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 931
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcadianSky View Post
I think using the line "well, it's not against the rules" is an invalid and base-less statement when discussing the integrity and morality of a given situation or circumstance. A rulebook should be completely irrelevant when it comes to etiquette (which should be regulated and implemented based on good intentions and elementary social awareness).
Morals are subjective. In some cultures people think its totally fine for people who commit adultery to be executed; in others they just put them on day-time tv. To suggest that stalling is morally wrong, and thus should not be permitted, is an invalid and base-less argument, because not everyone would agree that it is morally wrong, whilst others would point out that, as poker is a selfish game of small edges, what place is there for morals in the first place? Tbh, DN really doesn't represent Stars well when he attacks, and labels someone as 'a cheater' for doing something they are perfectly justified to do by the only criteria that matters - whats allowed and what's not -. But I expect he's anger is less to do with the player's actions, and more to do with his own life tilt as per usual.
ix.spider.uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:45 AM   #13
miserablee
old hand
 
miserablee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,909
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Unless poker sites institute rules against it players are going to continue to stall near the bubble in tourneys. It takes equity away from the whole table, staller included, so they should imo. Daniel really shouldn't have to speak up about it though, in this case the onus is on Stars.
miserablee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:49 AM   #14
ArcadianSky
veteran
 
ArcadianSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,386
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHI194 View Post
If we're going to get into a discussion of morality, then I think it is wholely justifiable.

Whether it satisfies etiquette is another question. But rules and laws are supposed to reflect the morals of a given situation, it being society, sports or games....if it were immoral, it would be against the rules.

Also, on a strictly philosophical basis I can't think of any reason why it would be immoral. From a utilitarian perspective it is the right action to stall...because everyone that is eliminated in the stalling period moves all of the people being stalled up in the money. It isn't robbing them of anything other than time that they would have most likely spent at the table anyway.

From a Kantian perspective I suppose you are using the time of others as a means to an end but again, it seems unclear as to why this would be wrong if they would have spent the same amount of time at the table regardless. By sayng you're morally wrong for stalling you're sort of committing yourself to the view that slower live dealers are morally inferior to faster live dealers....because time is passing with fewer hands being dealt which is the only thing you can fault a staller for...
Well, let's discuss it on a more grand scale. The other night I was at a party where someone said "id I don't get pulled over, then who cares", when discussing driving drunk. I think society, as a whole, makes conscious decisions strictly by the letter of the law, or the likelihood of being caught, rather than their own good judgment and qualities. Also, I completely disagree with your line, "if it were immoral, it would be against the rules" - there are more than a handful of unacceptable actions that simply don't translate well in writing. Sometimes, you are forced to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume they are aware enough not to conduct themselves in certain manners or shoot angles.

In addition, there is some serious disconnect in a lot of the philosophical examples you've given, but I think it's an irrelevant perspective and aside from the original point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ix.spider.uk View Post
Morals are subjective. In some cultures people think its totally fine for people who commit adultery to be executed; in others they just put them on day-time tv. To suggest that stalling is morally wrong, and thus should not be permitted, is an invalid and base-less argument, because not everyone would agree that it is morally wrong, whilst others would point out that, as poker is a selfish game of small edges, what place is there for morals in the first place? Tbh, DN really doesn't represent Stars well when he attacks, and labels someone as 'a cheater' for doing something they are perfectly justified to do by the only criteria that matters - whats allowed and what's not -. But I expect he's anger is less to do with the player's actions, and more to do with his own life tilt as per usual.
Well, people would argue that cursing at the table isn't morally wrong (but it's against the rules in most regards @ WSOP). Also, in general, morals themselves aren't "subjective"... the severity and punishments are. It's generally understood and accepted that adultery is wrong, the punishment is where the subjective-ness lies.

However, I do agree that Daniel calling this player a "cheater" is absurd, out of line, and off mark. It would need to be against the rules to label someone a cheater.

Last edited by ArcadianSky; 04-18-2009 at 03:57 AM.
ArcadianSky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 03:57 AM   #15
DCHI194
journeyman
 
DCHI194's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 267
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcadianSky View Post
Well, let's discuss it on a more grand scale. The other night I was at a party where someone said "id I don't get pulled over, then who cares", when discussing driving drunk. I think society, as a whole, makes conscious decisions strictly by the letter of the law, or the likelihood of being caught, rather than their own good judgment and qualities. Also, I completely disagree your line, "if it were immoral, it would be against the rules" - there are more than a handful of unacceptable actions that simply don't translate well in writing. Sometimes, you are forced to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume they are aware enough not to conduct themselves in certain manners or shoot angles.

In addition, there is some serious disconnect in a lot of the philosophical examples you've given, but I think it's sort of an irrelevant perspective and aside from the original point.
You're "if I don't get pulled over" example falls short because that IS illegal conduct. The alternative is that he DOES get pulled over in which case he would be punished by the legal system. If someone were to get "caught" stalling, there would be no punishable offense under the current system.

In regards to your point that there are morally unacceptable actions that are not illegal, I would suggest you clarify. There is a difference between being a prick and being a criminal. So if I were to fart at you and say "how bout that?" It would be a prick thing to do but not necessarily immoral...

As for my disconnect...I don't believe there is. Emannuel Kant and Jeremy Bentham are two of the foremost moral philosophers with probably the two biggest moral philosophies in terms of influence and acceptance....everything I said aligns with what they said.

I do think stalling is sort of a prick move...but saying its immoral is inaccurate IMO. It's not any more immoral than being a jerk to your local supermarket clerk is...
DCHI194 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 04:10 AM   #16
ArcadianSky
veteran
 
ArcadianSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,386
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Duplicate post, by mistake. Delete this mods, ha.
Sorry.

Last edited by ArcadianSky; 04-18-2009 at 04:22 AM.
ArcadianSky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 04:12 AM   #17
ArcadianSky
veteran
 
ArcadianSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,386
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHI194 View Post
You're "if I don't get pulled over" example falls short because that IS illegal conduct. The alternative is that he DOES get pulled over in which case he would be punished by the legal system. If someone were to get "caught" stalling, there would be no punishable offense under the current system.
Fair enough...well, walking up to a random person on the streets and telling them they're "fat and ugly" isn't against the law, but is it proper conduct? Hell no. Do you do this often?

Maybe my choice of words, in calling it "immoral" is off mark, but I think you get my general point. Just because "stalling" isn't written in the rulebook, doesn't make it an acceptable action. The fact that people are justifying it from an etiquette standpoint based on rules and laws is un-parallel in more ways than one (or ten).

Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHI194 View Post
As for my disconnect...I don't believe there is. Emannuel Kant and Jeremy Bentham are two of the foremost moral philosophers with probably the two biggest moral philosophies in terms of influence and acceptance....everything I said aligns with what they said.
I know who Emmanuel Kant and Bentham are. I took a slew of philosophy classes from 2005-2007 (seems like so much more recent than that... ****, haha). But like I said, it's an irrelevant discussion because I feel like a lot of those ideas aren't applicable in artificial or fabricated societies (which is what a 'game' is, in a lot of forms).

I'm going to bed though. Good talk. Have a good night.
ArcadianSky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 04:14 AM   #18
DCHI194
journeyman
 
DCHI194's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 267
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcadianSky View Post
Fair enough...well, walking up to a random person on the streets and telling them they're "fat and ugly" isn't against the law, but is it proper conduct? Hell no. Do you do this often?

Maybe my choice of words, in calling it "immoral" is off mark, but I think you get my general point. Just because "stalling" isn't written in the rulebook, doesn't make it an acceptable action. The fact that people are justifying it from an etiquette standpoint based on rules and laws is un-parallel in more ways than one (or ten).

I know who Emmanuel Kant and Bentham are. I took a slew of philosophy classes from 2005-2007 (seems like so much more recent than that... ****, haha). But like I said, it's an irrelevant discussion because I feel like a lot of those ideas aren't applicable in artificial or fabricated societies (which is what a 'game' is, in a lot of forms).

I'm going to bed though. Good talk. Have a good night.
You too man...I certainly wasn't trying to be a prick!

Good discussion. At the very least this issue should be one that gets tossed around. Have a good night!
DCHI194 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 04:36 AM   #19
Takeover
banned
 
Takeover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,236
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Thread is worthless without a Daniel post.
Takeover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 04:50 AM   #20
marlinssmith
veteran
 
marlinssmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Van Gundy!
Posts: 2,081
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

I think it's annoying, but its not against the rules. I wouldn't call it cheating.
marlinssmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 04:56 AM   #21
Crane
old hand
 
Crane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,238
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Negreanu is finally right about something. Stallers are ***********.
Crane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 05:00 AM   #22
HundredsOfStuff
veteran
 
HundredsOfStuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,123
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

The goal of playing poker is to make money. As long as you don't break the rules its fine. If someone determines they need to stall into the cash its the same as if they decide to fold into the cash. As long as he used the time that was given to him, and not collude by having someone else stall for him its fine.

Daniel probably wasn't himself and I wouldn't be either after more than 20 hands of limit razz. Why do you think Scotty Nguyen had to drink so much at the horse championship last year? To keep from going completely insane thats why.
HundredsOfStuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 05:27 AM   #23
rookiepsu
journeyman
 
rookiepsu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 218
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Quote:
“put something in the security software for repeat offenders. they keep stalling, they get dealt out for a level.”
Yeah, that'll stop em!
rookiepsu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 05:58 AM   #24
1outter
veteran
 
1outter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Fence
Posts: 3,066
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

Am I the only one here that finds it ironic that the OP of a thread AGAINST stalling is Chainsaw?
1outter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2009, 06:22 AM   #25
Jofeljoh!
journeyman
 
Jofeljoh!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 231
Re: Negreanu goes after online stallers .....

The purpose of a timebank (at least, that's what I assume is a reasonable guess) is that you can take your time with tough decisions. Now with limit poker the decisions are generally probably a little less tough compared with pot or no-limit poker, facing huge reraises and/or allin-in decisions.

That aside, if it's clear that people are stalling instead of using it for its purpose, namely taking your time thinking about tough decisions, you're clearly abusing the rule.

Now atm the rules are so that people CAN bend the rules in their favor without consequences, without being punished. Immoral or not, it's just the way it is. I would have no problem changing it that the stalling won't happen again and the timebank is only used again with tough decisions. Why not an option to call the clock? If you take this long in a live tournament, they would probably call the clock on you too? If it happens multiple times, you would get a warning too... would have no problem to create somthing similar online. Dealing out a level is one thing, shorten the timebank to something ridiculously short would be something else...

Stalling is just poor etiquette and it ruins others fun and chances to continue with the game. I'm with ArcadianSky here:

Quote:
Fair enough...well, walking up to a random person on the streets and telling them they're "fat and ugly" isn't against the law, but is it proper conduct? Hell no. Do you do this often?

Maybe my choice of words, in calling it "immoral" is off mark, but I think you get my general point. Just because "stalling" isn't written in the rulebook, doesn't make it an acceptable action. The fact that people are justifying it from an etiquette standpoint based on rules and laws is un-parallel in more ways than one (or ten).
Jofeljoh! is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online