Giga the hustler???

[[Phill]]

Did he multiaccount - who knows.

Did he lend money and not pay back - who knows.

Did he not pay on that leaderboard prop bet - who knows.

Show me some facts and this thread is worthwhile, but right now its a bunch of theories which bear no relation to reality best i can tell.

Shaniac's post is key imo:
[ QUOTE ]
I know a thing or two about gigabet (probably more than the people you are suggesting I learn from, if that's what you were suggesting), and I don't really care about the rest. I think most of the info you have given in this thread is a least a little innacurate or misleading, but I'm sure some of it is true. I like Darrell and don't feel like particpating in impugning his character at all, so leave me out of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he did anything wrong to anyone, im sure itd be more known to shaniac et al who follow the live MTT circuit and best i can tell his only transgressions were to borrow money and not pay them back straight away.

Again, there is literrally NO evendience of multiaccounting, AND if he hasnt paid up on that TLB prop bet, well one could argue he feels screwed out of the deal because he was facing a team of players who were playing around the clock. Either way that is obviously a personal issue between the two parties involved.

All the other stuff about his theories not making sense, id imagine if they are as advanced as they seem, i wouldnt expect the average 2+2er to understand them.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Again, there is literrally NO evendience of multiaccounting

[/ QUOTE ]


If you're talking about direct proof, that is most likely correct. If you're talking about *reasonable* circumstantial inferences from the set of information available on him, including insinuations from knowledgeable posters who can't/won't share all the details of same, then it's not correct.

The fact is that there was a group of players who all multi-accounted and a subset of that group that apparently discussed same among themselves privately, although only JJProd and ZJ are known in these forums to have been caught.

So the question is given the circle of friends that Giga was known to hang with, a history of dubious plays with an explanation for same that is regarded as both unsound and ridiculous by many/most other knowledeable tourney players, is it reasonable to infer a high probability of his having multi-accounted? I personally wouldn't bet a dime getting high odds against that proposition.

[[Phill]]

Whilst it is a pretty simple logic leap, to simply infer because someone knows a person who is a cheat they are a cheat is quite a problematic thing.

Go read shaniacs reply in this thread. Im 99%+ certain that he hasnt cheated, but he is quite friendly with Giga. By your same logical leap he has to be a cheat?

There is a reason that presumption of innocence is used.

He is suspected of cheating, he is not a cheat. There is a subtle but really important distinction.

Re:
[ QUOTE ]
a history of dubious plays with an explanation for same that is regarded as both unsound and ridiculous by many/most other knowledeable tourney players, is it reasonable to infer a high probability of his having multi-accounted?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it isnt.

As for the 'dubious' plays - couldnt someone just as easily say they are simply over the heads of most players, even the supposed 'knowledgable tourney players'.

Scott Fischman is one of the top half dozen tourney specialists in the world and he refers to Giga as "genius".

I think the greatest flaw giga had is his inability to articulate his advanced theory into terms easily understood.

[BluffTHIS!]

Phil,

Shaniac didn't stop posting on 2+2 immediately after the cheat bomb was dropped on 2+2, but Giga did, although it is true that quitting posting also coincided with El D's thread on his stiffing people.

And re Scott Fischman, since giga can't articulate this supposedly higher theory well, why doesn't he come here and articulate it mathematically/theoretically for his friend Giga?

[creative]

phill sounds like hes blindly believing

the envidence points to a man who has cheated hundreds of people with his theories that, as phil claims "is to advanced" for even the best tourny pros who post here, most of whom vehemntly disagree with them. I mean, look at it logically. IF he multi accounted and needed an excuse, that would be the most flawless alaby..."My plays r just 2 advanced 4 u lol sorry"

yeah, i guess that makes TOTAL sense.

[N 82 50 24]

re: sng multiaccounting

This is one thing that I don't know about Gigabet, so everything I say is just speculation/gossip/should be taken with a grain of salt.

I am assuming that he multi-accounted MTTs because 100s people did that (cue BluffTHIS!'s head exploding again). I also know that I've heard a ton of people say things about Gigabet and I don't really know what to believe -- but I never heard any reference what-so-ever with regards to multi-accounting SNGs. Considering some of the things I've been told, I'm pretty sure that it would have come up if he'd being doing it. So while I can't say for sure, I'm pretty confident that he never multi-accounted in a SNG.

[BluffTHIS!]

N82,

I already assumed large numbers of players, including many regular posters in the tourney forums, did multi-account, and in fact there was a reference to at least one such well-known poster deleting his blog archives after the cheating scandal broke to avoid incrimination of himself.

Re the sng's, you say there is no evidence Giga multi-accounted that, as was said with ZJ. I think a good reason for that might be that the group of friends who were doing the MTTs, wouldn't go for their friends having multiple seats in a sng with them, and wouldn't even think it too profitable to just have 2 or 3 each do it just to screw 1 or 2 guys out of their buyins, with the exception of the highest step tourneys maybe. Plus it would just be more noticeable to the sites and other players I imagine.

[Daddy Warbucks]

The other huge difference is that players of the same IP subnet cannot sit in SNG's(or cash games), while no such real exists for MTTs.

[BluffTHIS!]

That is assuming with no additional software/technical workarounds to spoof the sites' detection abilities. And from reading threads in the zoo, even that apparently isn't necessary at FT, which has no such IP preventative measures.

[BradleyT]

[ QUOTE ]
The other huge difference is that players of the same IP subnet cannot sit in SNG's(or cash games), while no such real exists for MTTs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Road Runner, AT&T DSL, broadband anywhere laptop card - there's 3 unique IPs right there.