Ethics Question

[GTDawg]

How so? I'd like an explanation if you have it.

Poker, and especially online poker, is based on getting every edge you can.

There's sixth sense, there's PAHud, there's PokerTracker, there's a dozen programs that can be used to find the very best poker table to sit at.

Is it ethically or morally wrong to get on a waiting list...but not sit at the table if the table fish leaves or the chip leader/strong player is right next to you?

Is it ethically wrong to play someone heads up if they challenge you during a ring game, when you know you are better than them, and then proceed to take them for all their money?

It's a game built on gaining an edge on the competition in order to make money. You aren't gaining an unfair advantage over the competition (as compared to playing two accounts at the same time or something). And, to my knowledge, it's not illegal to change your screenname.

=========================
For example, poker pros...[although it doesn't work that well because people love to play them no matter the losses they suffer]...

Is it ethically wrong for someone like Phil Ivey to play on an unknown screenname because people won't play against Phil Ivey? Why?

[Boobie Lover]

You are playing HU with a person that you know how he adjusts to certain things like if you 3bet a lot preflop. You already have some knowledge of how this person adjusts to this, and if he 4bets a lot preflop, or if he plays conservatively to this. Villain would have some idea of how you adjust to these things, but you are using a different screen name. That is an advantage to you, and it is more ethically wrong than say check/raising someone on the flop.

[PShabi]

Sites do not advocate using other people's accounts for deceptive purposes.

They allow you to use all of the add-on programs you mentioned. They don't care if you bullshit about your hand in the chat box. Check/raising (perhaps the most absurd comparison of them all) is well within the rules of poker. Game/seat selection is practiced even in live casinos by regular players and is perfectly fine. The "heads-up" challenge question doesn't even warrant a response.

All of the things you mention are "strategic" in nature. I agree, playing under someone else's account is too, but sites do not advocate it. Stars will not allow you to change your screenname just because you want to. Email them and try it. Party Poker allows it once every 6th months. Not sure about the other sites but I'm going to be shooting some emails off here in a second.

[GTDawg]

Advocating the changing of your name is different from making it illegal or forbidden.

To change your screenname is to take advantage of the next logical point in the anonymity of the internet. And that, my friend, is what is so great about the internet.

Is it really any more ethically wrong than the act of gambling or taking the person's money to begin with? Does Phil Ivey owe it to everybody to play as Phil_Ivey?

Where would you start the giant scale of ethics?


Situation 1:
If you don't like the headsup question...What if I told you there was this guy that has a gambling problem...dude gives out money like an ATM. But damnit, he sure does love poker. His screenname is blahblahblah. Is it ethically wrong to take his money if you see him sitting all alone at a table?

What if you take your winnings and provide for your family or donate it to charity? Or you buy new equipment for the kids on your bball team?

Situation 2:
What if the guy doesn't have a gambling problem and is actually just incredibly wealthy and playing with no stresses whatsoever...but, you take your winnings to invest in drug smuggling or gun running?

=============
Which is ethically worse? Situation 1 or situation 2?

Poker in and of itself can be considered ethically and morally wrong. I don't think this situation is any different than the use of extra programs to find stats on players that you may or may not have ever played against.

[PShabi]

<Sigh>

Conversation over.

[Zybomb]

I agree with GTDawg the entire way here

[melioris]

This is an interesting discussion. What I have learned most is that you all suck at making analogies.

Seriously though, while live poker and internet poker are different beast entirely, there is a direct comparison that no one has mentioned yet. Back in the WSOP a couple of years ago there was a famous hand between Howard Lederer and somebody else. The hand had lots of action and the nameless one shoves (on the river I think) and then pulls his shirt over his head. Everyone laughs, but the guy stays that way until Lederer folds. As I remember fuckface’s hiding was not considered unethical, and I would think that hiding during a major hand in a live game a farther deviation from the spirit of the game than using a different account on the internet.

[Dodoubled]

Ha! Surely, you jest.

ETHICS:ONLINE POKER::

A.) WHITE:RICE
B.) STINK:SHIT
C.) POPE:CATHOLIC
D.) DODOUBLED:GETTING LAID TONIGHT

STOP!
PLEASE PUT YOUR NO. 2 PENCIL DOWN, CLOSE YOUR TEST BOOKS AND WAIT FOR FURTHER INSTRUCTION FROM YOUR PROCTOR.

[drewjax]

I remember this vividly. The funny thing is, that NAMELESS guy, (and I think he was basically a nameless guy at the time), has now turned into Cowboy Kenna James. A pretty decent player, and he has even been a commentator on several poker shows.
As for the subject at hand, its tough to say. Like with this Kenna James thing, (pulling jacket over head), or Phil Laak doing the same thing. There are no RULES against it, but many feel its just not right. I know that Negreanu hates this BS. He can often get on his soapbox, but he has a good point. Where do you draw the line? He asks the question that if all this is LEGAL, what would stop someone from literally bringing a box, and sitting in it while playing (maybe with little holes for his arms to push chips etc. lol danger Will Robinson)? Is that cool?
Also, I dont use them, but what about all these programs, like PT, HUDace, etc. TP and others have said they draw the line if the sites allow them (and I basically agree with that premise). But correct me if I'm wrong, but dont some sites TECHNICALLY not allow datamining? I am pretty sure this is the case. That is why some of these other programs/add-ons have popped up, to allow players to datamine when its not SUPPOSED to be happening. Another example is using information from sites like SharkScope. Again, I am pretty sure that Stars (and other sites) say that datamining in this fasion is not allowed. But the info is out there. So is it unethical for someone to buyin to a sng or mtt, and look up someones stats on sharkscope or the pokerdb? Well I think techinically it is not allowed by the site so it should be considered unethical. BUT, if everyone else is doing it, wtf right. You are putting yourself at a disadvantage by not using all the info.

I would love to play in an online world where we all had one ID. I think that is the most ethical way to do it. I think that to switch your ID is a BIT unethical. But again, if everyone else is doing it..............

With all of this babbling I think the answer is clear..There is no right answer either way.

[JDMcNugent7]

agreed. very few of these make good sense. does everyone understand the definition of ethical?

[GTDawg]

I don't understand why that question would signal the end of a conversation. Logically, it is fair to wonder how you view ethical and moral wrongs.

Surely, you do not see the act of taking someone else's money as an ethical wrong. They are doing so at their own free will. And, they are doing it with the knowledge that they may lose it.

However, you are taking someone else's money for your own. Your gain is dependent on someone else's loss.

That is a basic assessment of the ethical and moral implications of such an act.

==============
To add...I figured the whole taking an addicts' money and donating to charity would be the point you ended the conversation. I didn't think the throw away question at the top of the post would do it.