A semi-interesting thread popped up this week on 2+2. Kind of reinforces something I mentioned a few weeks ago in a post titled “In the Fishbowl.” If yr a pro and/or high stakes player online, people are watching you. You can count on it.
The thread starts with a long cut-and-paste of some chat that recently took place at a $1,000/$2,000 H.O.R.S.E. table on Full Tilt Poker. The chat involves two Full Tilt pros -- Mike Matusow and David Singer -- and a couple of other non-pros, one of whom is named “Sassi.”
Near the beginning of the chat, Singer asks Matusow who Sassi is. Matusow knows, but won’t reveal his identity to the table. When Singer asks why, Matusow replies “ijust catn,” then adds “hes a idiot thouigh.” Shortly after that, Matusow reveals that apparently two different players use the Sassi account: “ther is sassai a and sassi b,” he explains. Then the Mouth says it “would not be fair tohim” (or them, I suppose) for Matusow to say anything more.
The reference to fairness inspires Singer to make a couple of observations. First of all, says Singer, “its a big disadvantage and sort of not fair to me, if everyone knows [who “Sassi” is] except me.” “Not really,” Matusow replies. “Hes an idiot.” Then Singer points out “its really supposed to be one player to an account.”
Looking at it from the outside, it would seem Singer’s second objection (about multiple players playing on a single account) should be the more meaningful one. However, Singer’s subsequent chat reveals he’s much more concerned with the former complaint that in playing Sassi he must play against an unknown:
David Singer: I am tired of all this mystery. Its hard enough to
try to win on a lever playing field. I guess I should just stop
playing these high limit games
David Singer: Seems unfair that everyone know who i am, and
then I am playing against mystery players sharing accounts
Sassi: my name is arthur
David Singer: How can you win like that, Mike. It seems
impossible to beat a game given that kind of disadvantage
Mike Matusow: figured idiot alwasy got a bad on e in whole
Mike Matusow: blame howard
David Singer: y?
Sassi: sound like david is being a poor sport
Mike Matusow: ive told the idot 10000 times anyone playing
high stakes on her eshoudl play under ther own name
Mike Matusow: he told me if i dont lik it dont play
David Singer: How Am I being a poor sport?
David Singer: I am just being realistic
Sassi: you just are you think phil ivey would ever say those
Mike Matusow: well its even better whenther are like 50 of the
Sassi: if you want to be a champ
Sassi: act like a champ
Mike Matusow: lol
Sassi: not a chump
A little bit later, Matusow tells Singer, essentially, that such a situation comes with the territory for Full Tilt pros.
Mike Matusow: dont blame anyone but yoru boss
Mike Matusow: know one
David Singer: what boss?
Mike Matusow: the one that sends u apay check
David Singer: i don't have a boss
David Singer: u mean howard
David Singer: ?
Mike Matusow: hmm i do
Sassi: im you boss
Mike Matusow: and he tells me if i dont like it dont play
David Singer: i am not blaming anyone
David Singer: i am just saying i think i am at a disadvantage
in this situation
Those responding in thread mostly criticize Singer for complaining about the disadvantage of having to play under his real name as a Full Tilt pro. They also almost unanimously congratulate Sassi for his inspired . . . well . . . sass.
While the account-sharing issue is a valid concern of Singer’s, it certainly appears odd for a Full Tilt pro to complain this way about the “playing field” not being level between himself and an anonymous competitor. As Sassi puts it later on (echoing Matusow), “if you want annonymity, dont get paid by full tilt.”
Matusow’s comment about the need for all high stakes players to play under their own accounts is an interesting one, I think, though practically speaking it doesn’t really seem like that would be a realistic idea.
What do you think about Singer’s complaints and/or Matusow’s idea?