With all the recent notoriety of Isildur1 on ftp I wonder what you think of the whole Brian Hastings, Brian Townsend, Cole South bringing their hand histories together to come up with a strategy to play against Isildur1? I wonder if its proven that they all had equal pieces of Hastings could that be considered an unfair advantage?

http://www.highstakesnews.com/2009/12/21/isildur1-will-most-likely-appeal-against-hastings/

hammah

If all they did was discuss a strategy to beat him, that's their right.

If they all got together in a room while isildur was being played on one account, that's more of a gray area. Unfortunately, that sort of "multi-accounting" is hard to prove. Where is the evidence that these three guys cooperated to beat isildur?

Well if they all got together and pulled their money but had someone play Isildur1 that Isildur1 handnt seen before that would seem to give them a distinct advantage. It was SBrugby himself who admitted the pulling of hand histories I think with Cole South.

One step away from them all getting in a room together and playing Isildur1 from Hastings account. Personally I think it just stinks.

Yes, it sucks, but that's the reality of high stakes gambling, especially online. If you are a high-profile player, people are going to analyze your every move and try to figure out how to knock you off your perch.

Getting in a room together is arguably collusion, violating the "One Player to a Hand" rule. Discussing how to beat someone (even with hand histories) isn't.

thehammah = Druff's cabin mate?

Regardless Druff, it's still against Full Tilt TOS to share hand histories with other people and Hastings openly admitted he did just that on his blog at CardRunners a few days ago. It's on a lot of forums and news places like the OP posted, and if he appeals it he has every right to do so. The case could definitely be interesting given the admission of collusion and it clearly being a violation of FTP's rules. Would love to hear more on this and Silence's take on it if she reads the thread.

This is nothing new.

Full Tilt has been allowing their red pros to skirt the rules for a long time. Notice that people like "pokergirl z" got their accounts closed and money confiscated for multi-accounting, yet red pros seem to be allowed to do that with Full Tilt's blessing.

And Marc, I don't know who hammah is.

Guess they are acknowledging some wrongdoing.

Personally I don't see a big deal about this. Players have a right to discuss with each other how to beat another player.

BTW, lol @ 1-month suspension. Totally meaningless, especially since Townsend has been suspended before.

=================================================================================

Full Tilt Suspends Townsend Due To Isildur1 Scandal

2009 December, 22
Full Tilt Poker, an online poker site known for its large stable of pros, recently suspended one of them due to evidence suggesting he may have violated their terms of service.

Full Tilt “red pro” Brian Townsend, has been suspended for one month according to his popular blog at CardRunners.com, for compiling hand histories in preparation for heads-up matches with online high stakes monster Isildur1; a rules violation that became public after Townsend’s friend and associate Brian Hastings, credited Townsend during an interview on ESPN’s The Poker Edge, for his help in beating Isildur1 for over $4 million.

In his blog, Townsend admits he violated Full Tilt’s T&C (Terms and Conditions), but was quick to claim Hastings did not, stating instead that all he and Cole South did to help Hastings prepare for his match, was chat about the hand analysis Townsend did, an activity which according to Townsend, does not violate any of Full Tilt’s rules.

As for Isildur1- most likely still smarting from the significant loss- he* will now, according to a recent interview from PokerNews.com, “put through a formal complaint” with Full Tilt Poker, as he now believes there was at least some sharing of hand histories that directly affected his match with Hastings.

To read more about this story check out the Isildur1 interview at PokerNews.com and/or the Townsend blog at CardRunners.com.

I can only dream if they throw the book at SBRugby.. This I think is so typical of why playing online is a bad idea as compared to live where someone can sit behind you but they cant tell you "this guys hand range in this situation is...."

oh and I have never met Druff.. I have posted on poker for years at another forum and recently joined donk down...

h

According to the TOS, as you stated, it's wrong. However John and I have discussed this and we have 2 thoughts on which we both agree. I'll preface it with this statement. When I learned how to play Hold'em and Omaha H/L (prior to online poker) my 2 roommates and I used to discuss hands all of the time and various strategies. Was this wrong? No. It's how we got better. We didn't play together, or pool our money (unless one of us was playing higher, then we might sell a percentage), but we used to buy $200 in one dollar chips and take them home with us to play tournaments. We obviously learned a lot about each other, but we also shared a lot of important information. I DON'T (nor does John) think that this is wrong. But there is a significant difference.

Here is the problem...no matter how much we would play live games in our life time, we could never compile the type of data base that these 3 had access to, or play that number of hands. We are forced to simply recall what took place during the hand from memory.

They have pictures and play back capability (thank you, Poker Tracker), and saved information that they can study again and again. It's not like they're saying "Well he might do 'this' in this situation, or he might do 'that'...blah,blah, blah, you get the idea. They have knowledge of over 50K hands. They see hole cards, they see flops, they see betting patterns. Their information is absolute because it's ONLY heads up play. It's not like it could be skewed because if the game was 4 handed 'this' or 'that' might not apply, or he might do something differently. The range of hands that he could have with this texture flop and that texture flop is definitive, and for that reason, whether or not his intention was malicious, it's flat out wrong.

Brian is a genius at poker. If you read his blog, you'll learn a plethora of information. John feels that he has singlehandedly made online poker as difficult as it is today with the information that he gives away. My opinion is that with his information and the proper use of poker tracker, I cannot imagine why anyone would want to play online NL Holdem, especially.

Just as a note, they didn't beat him at NL, a game in which he is regarded as the best player (yes, even better than Durrr). They had to beat him at PLO, because no one would play him anymore. Isildur1, being a gambler and needing that action, went to PLO. He was doing OK for a while not really losing much, until this database analysis occurred. I think it's very fucked up.

/opinion

^^^ exactly why we all love you hun.

So whats your thought on the slap on the wrist punishment? And why was Brian the only one punished. Seems like Cardrunners pros are getting a bit of a second chance that maybe John wouldnt get, right? Is that fair? Cardrunners are not only pros on the site, but they also bring in business and I think this is a bit of a conflict of interest for FTP. If they punish all of them, maybe cardrunners leaves and goes to Pokerstars or something.

You are so correct LAKingsfan... Cardrunners represents the sizzle in online poker with so many young action players. If these guys went to say Pokerstars then the railbirds would follow them there too. Since so many people cant simply just watch that would indeed increase stars' traffic.

What I find apalling in all of this is the notion that all they did was just share hand histories. You can get this stuff on PTR for sure.. but what they choose to do is compare and discuss there own hands and Brain T went even further to come up with it seemed on his own hand ranges and then provided a business partner (not just a friend but someone who admitted had sold pieces of himself and has a business relationship elsewhere with Brian T) with this inside information.

I may discuss hands with friends and even share a few hh to discuss ranges etc.. but I dont come up with hand ranges on players and then passing them out. Thats just like if I had someone telling me in my ear in a live game since I cant have say a book and tell everyone "oh sorry time.. as I look up what my buddy told me your hand range is on this hand" you arent even allowed to have a poker ranking card at some casinos..

I hope Isildur gets at least some of his money back and never plays on ftp again..

My thought is that it's bullshit, obviously. However, let's pretend for the sake of argument that FT wanted to grant him leniency due to the fact that he is cardrunners and does bring in some business, and perhaps they talked with him and really feel deep down that his intentions weren't malicious. The problem is that this is not his first offense at breaking the rules. So, it's bullshit. I highly doubt that anyone else in mid-limit games, who shared this type of information that resulted in such detriment, would be granted this same punishment. I hope Isildur1 gets to recover at least some of those losses through FT compensation.

Also, at this point in time, using the excuse that he is "Cardrunners" is not valid. Until you can come up with a definitive amount of how much rake they bring in, then this point cannot be used in the argument. They are not the only high limit players on the site. All of the other players, including Zigmund, Chufty, Gus, DB, Durr, Antonias, and of course Ivey, etc., will generate enough business. If card runners were to leave, the players who they've brought over thus far won't leave, especially if they're winning. And as I stated, until you know how many new, ACTIVE players per month can be attributed to them, then the point isn't valid.

As much as I hate some of their practices behind the scenes, I think FT tries to be fair to everyone. I know that I have been forgiven on several occasions, once purely because I had no knowledge of what was happening. In that instance they could have closed my account, but they chose to give me the benefit of the doubt (and rightfully so!) However, if I wasn't who I am and if I didn't know the execs. of the site so well, I doubt I would have been given the preferential treatment on the other occasion.

There is, IMO, NO CHANCE of FTP giving Isildur1 back his money. Or, if they do, it will not be made public. They definitely cant take the money from the cardrunner scammers because they will put up a stink about it. So, hes just fucked.

I also doubt it will be made public. But, I do not doubt that he will be compensated in some way. It's a very delicate situation on FT's part because the last thing they want driving prospective players away is bad publicity, which cardrunners could no doubt distribute. However, on the other side of things, there are a lot of "no-name" mid to high limit players out there that WILL take their business elsewhere if they feel like they aren't getting a fair shake from the site. And THIS is probably an even more important issue than the bad publicity, because this will lose the current business of the type of players who generate the majority of the site's rake.

I can tell you that in my opinion the more intelligent side of the poker community, both high and low limit players alike, are not happy with the cardrunners crew and what they have done in this situation. I doubt that they would side with them if BT and crew were to make a big deal about having to reimburse some of the funds. Once people realize that they would not be given this same treatment under these same circumstances, it makes it very difficult for them to support BT and friends regarding this issue. In fact, if they were to give him back some of the money (Cardrunners crew) it might even help repair their damaged images with future prospective members.

and if this ever happens in the near future, the guys who conspire will be smart enough to never state so publically.

Much like that guy who said he was multitabling or whatever and was busted on some forum.. (hope i have my memory straight..) How much has that happened since then? .. the busting.. not the multitabling ?? lol

All this does is basically wise people up so they won't publicly speak about it from here on.

I got the impression that this sort of thing was common at low stakes. At what level does this go from expected behavior to a violation of poker etiquette?