Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="RoyalFish, post: 1366303, member: 49792"] It seems like there's precedent. I've heard others post stories where they get refunds if the site they play on finds they were victimized by a cheater. How much do you give back is an interesting question, though. I -usually- hold back from the "fire 'em!" mentality. So many rush to that judgement, but tossing somebody on the street because they pissed you off (dealer screwed up, fire 'em! type threads...) is really way overboard, but right now I'm thinking about some of the stuff I read in "The Professor, the Banker, and the Suicide King". It's in EVERYONE's interest that these games be clean. I only play because I believe I have a fair shot at winning. When I think I don't, whether because I'm just not good enough, sites are overrun by bots, or people are cheating, I'm taking my money and going home. So, just like the Vegas pros had an interest in making sure the nosebleed games there are fair, so the online sites have an interest in making their games fair. No cheaters, no bots, no superusers. If they fail to do so, people -will- quit playing, or they'll open up a nice hole in the market for a new site to step into. Hmm...RoyalFish Poker. One strike and you're gone. Maybe I'll team up with one of those gold buyers. No deposit hassles, just ship me your old jewelry. ;-) Now, as for Izzy, it was one hell of a ride and a lot of fun to watch. Day to day I would slip from pulling for "our" pros, or for the upstart. Some have raised the objection that he obviously analyzed the pros and found a strategy to beat them. Assuming -he- didn't cheat to do that, that's a really awesome achievement. It was inevitable the pros were going to learn to adapt to his style (which is the sad and stupid thing about the cheating biz...it wasn't necessary), the only question was whether he would adapt as well, becoming a moving target. If he was really better than they were, he'd keep at least some edge and perhaps we'd have a new reigning champ. It looks like he failed at that. Rather than stepping back to figure out why he was bleeding money so badly and what to do to turn that around, he blew through it quite a lot of it. Maybe that's just the nature of playing that high. I think PA said something about needing a $300 million roll to play that high--something I serously doubt any of the current pros have. Maybe they're always on the edge of ruin. I calculated my risk of ruin a few months back and it was around 0.01%. I play a very different game. :) So yea, awesome fun to watch then sad in its final train wreck. I hope he's off now, licking his wounds, analyzing how he lost, and planning to come back later. RF [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us