new more damning absolute evidence

[N 82 50 24]

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but it is kinda an important point for confirming the relationship between #363 and POTRIPPER.

The first two hands were before #363 opened the table.

13 896525124 2007-09-12 21:01:18 10000 10000 0 START Seat 3 - POTRIPPER ($10000 in chips)
13 896525124 2007-09-12 21:01:22 10000 10000 0 TABLEUSER Dealt to POTRIPPER [5d 7c]
13 896525124 2007-09-12 21:01:35 10000 10000 0 TABLEINFO POTRIPPER - Folds

Then

13 896532629 2007-09-12 21:02:00 10000 10000 0 START Seat 3 - POTRIPPER ($10000 in chips)
13 896532629 2007-09-12 21:02:04 10000 10000 0 TABLEUSER Dealt to POTRIPPER [7d 2s]
13 896532629 2007-09-12 21:02:09 10000 10000 0 TABLEINFO POTRIPPER - Folds

5 seconds after he folded 72o, #363 joined the table and he started playing like a genius maniac.

He didn't fold another hand preflop for 20 minutes

13 896592641 2007-09-12 21:21:33 0 0 0 TABLEINFO Seat 3: POTRIPPER Folded on the POCKET CARDS

[apefish]

Nat- since people will still ask what that could mean...

That gap sounds like just enough time to get a) another comp up and running b) a phone/IM connection going or c) any of the above combined with notifying the inside source/ logging into the other account/ pointing the superuser account towards the correct table.

Also- in the original threads- I think it was Adanthar who posited that when Potripper folded a couple hands after a seat change that it was possible the gap was owing to only being able to "see" one table at a time with the superuser account, and it not being immediately pointed at the correct table when he got switched.

I can't say for certain- but that is how I remember it being theorized when I went thru for the notes.

[Chump Change]

[ QUOTE ]


Given his PF play, it looks like they're not using the same methodology that these guys did (they found a flaw with the RNG) and fortunately, the guys in the article were white hats, but security flaws are a pretty damn serious source of problems for poker sites.



[/ QUOTE ]

I enjoyed this link, i've never read the first-hand account.

From the link:

[ QUOTE ]
Being software professionals who help companies deliver secure, reliable, and robust software, we were curious about the software behind the online game.

[/ QUOTE ]

[benza13]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but it is kinda an important point for confirming the relationship between #363 and POTRIPPER.

The first two hands were before #363 opened the table.

13 896525124 2007-09-12 21:01:18 10000 10000 0 START Seat 3 - POTRIPPER ($10000 in chips)
13 896525124 2007-09-12 21:01:22 10000 10000 0 TABLEUSER Dealt to POTRIPPER [5d 7c]
13 896525124 2007-09-12 21:01:35 10000 10000 0 TABLEINFO POTRIPPER - Folds

Then

13 896532629 2007-09-12 21:02:00 10000 10000 0 START Seat 3 - POTRIPPER ($10000 in chips)
13 896532629 2007-09-12 21:02:04 10000 10000 0 TABLEUSER Dealt to POTRIPPER [7d 2s]
13 896532629 2007-09-12 21:02:09 10000 10000 0 TABLEINFO POTRIPPER - Folds

5 seconds after he folded 72o, #363 joined the table and he started playing like a genius maniac.

He didn't fold another hand preflop for 20 minutes

13 896592641 2007-09-12 21:21:33 0 0 0 TABLEINFO Seat 3: POTRIPPER Folded on the POCKET CARDS

[/ QUOTE ]

This was something I meant to ask and seems pretty damning to me

[N 82 50 24]

Well, I could post examples if people care, but AaronBeen made a good point to me earlier today. And that is that it's very hard to do something like this over the phone. And even harder over AIM. Saying what eight or nine people have plus remember what someone has for the flop, etc makes me think there was no way POTRIPPER could play this fast without having the observer computer next to him so he could glance over. There are many hands where he makes pretty quick decisions that would be hard over the phone (unless #363 is just saying "fold", "raise to 160", "call", etc) and impossible over AIM.

In my mind, that makes me more convinced that the 2nd guy (user #2234890) was actually POTRIPPER and he clicked on table 9 in the middle of the event by accident.

[NoahSD]

Nat,
Great work.

Couldn't potripper just tell the other guy HIS hand and then the other guy could tell him what to do?

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
Nat,
Great work.

Couldn't potripper just tell the other guy HIS hand and then the other guy could tell him what to do?

[/ QUOTE ]

well the other guy would already be able to see potrippers hand, but yeah, it could easily be someone on the inside just telling potripper what to do via phone or IM.

[NoahSD]

[ QUOTE ]

well the other guy would already be able to see potrippers hand

[/ QUOTE ]

Right.. I'm dumb.

[NLfool]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I could post examples if people care, but AaronBeen made a good point to me earlier today. And that is that it's very hard to do something like this over the phone. And even harder over AIM. Saying what eight or nine people have plus remember what someone has for the flop, etc makes me think there was no way POTRIPPER could play this fast without having the observer computer next to him so he could glance over. There are many hands where he makes pretty quick decisions that would be hard over the phone (unless #363 is just saying "fold", "raise to 160", "call", etc) and impossible over AIM.

In my mind, that makes me more convinced that the 2nd guy (user #2234890) was actually POTRIPPER and he clicked on table 9 in the middle of the event by accident.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes from the timing and not multi tabling I said this was the most likely scenario a few weeks back



web page

what user id is potripper? Fairly new? Greycat was a fairly long time fish, wasn't he?

[apefish]

Right- I wasn't implying one method was being used over another- but at this point we don't have any reason to suspect the guy actually hitting the keys for the Potripper account is actually formulating the plays any more than simply taking instructions.

Or... is the same person.