Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

[ QUOTE ]
As much as I think that the players should get punitive damages above and beyond what they lost to the superusers because of how atrociously this whole thing was handled, I don't agree with everyone who is arguing they should get extra money because the superusers were effectively "freerolling" them. In fact, the opposite is true, if AP refunds everyone who lost any money to the superuser, those users were, in fact, freerolling the superusers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if the superusers get caught, which never would have happened if the excel file hadn't been leaked.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

Jman- while I get the last point you are making, it's probably not a freeroll if there is almost no chance of winning.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - waiting on the statement ITT
 

I wonder if AP realizes they will need to offer strong incentives to unharmed players if it wants them to continue playing there? Why would anyone play at AP after this disaster when FT and Stars have their doors open?

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As much as I think that the players should get punitive damages above and beyond what they lost to the superusers because of how atrociously this whole thing was handled, I don't agree with everyone who is arguing they should get extra money because the superusers were effectively "freerolling" them. In fact, the opposite is true, if AP refunds everyone who lost any money to the superuser, those users were, in fact, freerolling the superusers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if the superusers get caught, which never would have happened if the excel file hadn't been leaked.

[/ QUOTE ]

Freerolling is just a misleading word to attach to this issue, I think. The cheaters were stealing money, they weren't playing a game.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

[ QUOTE ]
Jman- while I get the last point you are making, it's probably not a freeroll if there is almost no chance of winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll concede that. Was anyone that we know of up against the supers? (Would have to be people who only played a handful of hands and got lucky).

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

I also find it very odd that the BBJ was hit twice in the last week. I don't know if it was used to to overshadow some of the news but this seems very fishy. And as coltranedog said if there ever was a site to cheat a BBJ AP would be it but I just assume every site skims more than the stated share as it's not possible for a regular user to track.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

Wow, I can't believe anyone would think it'd be okay to only refund the entry fee of anyone Potripper knocked out of the tournament. Every single person in that tournament should be refunded their money since they were unknowingly entering a tournament they could not win.

AP - What should happen now
 

(Crossposted just in case the other thread gets deleted. Sorry ... my first post ... lurker for years!)

What an incredible saga ... but is there a way for AP to regain the trust of the poker playing community?

In my view, there are some serious thought lapses among some in the community (flame me if you want, but it's just my opinion)... to wit:

1) Nobody is going to jail. This private company operates in a foreign country - and all of its principals live in foreign countries. The reason they do this is to avoid the law, and they do it successfully. Pleas along the lines of "somebody has to go to jail" are pointless.

2) The principals in the company are playing the site. And, we'll never know which principals are doing so. Because this company is operating outside US law, it's free to have any policy it wants to regarding whether its employees, who clearly have access to inside information and software, can play the site. In all US-based BM casinos, regulations prohibit employees from playing at the casino. This is standard operating procedure. It's also standard operating procedure at ALL online sites that employees, some of whom have access to so-called "superuser" accounts at some sites, are allowed to play on the site.

Every online poker site has superuser accounts. Every. Single. One. Of. Them. You can't run a poker site WITHOUT some supervisory accounts. They are a security risk, easily exploited by trusted users. Evidence so far unearthed indicates that at some sites these are abused by the owners/operators of the sites to boost personal profits, skim from shareholders, etc. Hell, for all we know ... this is how they pay their employees.

3) You'll never know if you're being cheated by one of these employees. The ONLY way that any of this came to light is because of either a stupid policy, or a mistake, or a deliberate leak of the master database file for the Potripper tournament.

This fact is UNPRECEDENTED in the history of online poker. The master database of the tournament results is the HOLY GRAIL of poker. Properly analyzed, even you could become the world's best poker player - as you analyze how the top players play their game.

I can guarantee you that you'll never see another one. I would venture to say that every online card room is RIGHT NOW reassessing who has access to this data and how it might leak.

4) Every tournament in which these accounts played must be strictly scrutinized - and the only way to do that is for the community to have access to the master database files for each and every tournament played by Potripper and the other implicated accounts.

There simply is no other way to have trust. The master database files of all games (tournament or otherwise) must be released as part of the transparency effort. Anything less than that will require that the community trust. And since trust is what got us here in the first place, that seems to me to be a non sequiter.

5) That will not happen. Absolute Poker, its parent company, and sister company Ultimate Bet (home of Phil Helmuth) will just not offer the data up. They could. But they won't. They'll claim that they cannot, because they're prohibited from doing so, but we all know that they are bound by no laws - and so, could release the data to save themselves.

If they did - pouring over IP information would reveal the true extent of the play originating from their own internal workstations.

So, they wont.

6) Online poker is truly threatened by this. There have been many allegations of rigging in one form or another - many of them true. But, they are always laughed off as the bayings of donkeys lamenting their play. Let this be a lesson to the community. Allegations of cheating are to be taken seriously. Are there fish who accuse unjustly? Sure. Is cheating (collusion, card sharing, multi-accounting) occurring? Well, the Poker Stars World Championship of Online Poker doesn't have a world champ because he cheated. I think that answers the question "is there cheating going on."

The answer is it is RAMPANT, and the major sites don't want to do anything about it. For example: At Poker Stars, two accounts playing from the same IP address are allowed to play in the same MTT. There is nothing in the rules at Poker Stars which prevents this. What a stupid, head-in-the-sand policy. It sets the stage for cheating that isn't even thinly veiled and is the reason why the online kids are not getting seats at the adult gaming table in the United States.

Until the online companies start taking allegations of cheating seriously ... until they begin prohibiting their employees from playing their sites ... until they begin limiting IPs to single seats, nobody should take their claims of security seriously.

That's my 2 cents.

Flame on.

Re: AP - What should happen now
 

Releasing a master database publicly is a really bad idea from a breach of privacy perspective. It's not going to happen.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

First, sorry for the long post.

Okay, I just have to de-lurk and post here that this story is truly incredible, and it's truly a statement to the nature of the Internet age that a group of people with no more resources than an Internet message board, a smoking gun Excel file, and a good deal of technical savvy can blow the lid off a story like this as thousands of lurkers can watch it unfold almost in real time. Amazing work.

Back OT, to the topic of restitution, it seems to me that there will be no "fair" way to provide restitution to all players. If I had to guess, I'd say that for tournaments, they'll likely bump everyone up a slot in the money in any tournament where a superuser was involved, meaning in the cases of tournaments won by superusers it will benefit the 2nd place player more than anyone else. This isn't precisely "fair" to, say, the people that POTRIPPER victimized earlier in the tourney that still finish well out of the money even when moved up one slot (who may have gone on to win the tourney had they not been cheated, who knows), but if POTRIPPER's winnings are evenly distributed to all participants, that's hardly fair to the 2nd place player, who, as the tournement actually played out, would have won much more had he not been victimized.

As to cash games, I find it seriously doubtful that AP will dig through the hand histories and find exactly who lost what to POTRIPPER and refund that amount. As pointed out, this doesn't compensate for money lost through "bets saved", and unfortunately there is no way to quantify how much money *would* have been lost by POTRIPPER in each of the hands where "bets saved" were a factor. It's not like we can go back and replay those hands legitimately.

For cash games, I think that estimation of EV lost is probably the only "fair" way to go about recompense. Take the total amount of money that a cheater won, and compensate it to affected cash game players as a percentage of the hands that they played against the cheaters vs. total number of opponent-hands that the cheaters faced off against in affected hands. It's before noon here on Sunday so you're not about to see any equations from me, suffice to say that it should be the most accurate gauge of EV lost due to being at a table with a cheater in a cash game.

Of course this will affect the players that lost at a faster to the cheater than others, which probably has nothing to do with skill (or may in fact have an inverse relation), but unfortunately that's probably going to have to be written off as part of the normal variance of gambling. I don't see a solution to the payout issue that's not going to have that as an issue.

Re: AP - What should happen now
 

Why did my post in the last monster thread get deleted?
It was the one with some biographical info about Oscar Hilt Tatum, IV, all publicly available on the internet. There was nothing scandalous (I even stated as much in the post), no speculation, nothing. It was just a post more or less summarizing things that had been posted in other posts. Then this morning I wake up to "Post deleted by Mat Sklansky". Why? Whose interests do you think were compromised by the post and what is worth "protecting"?

I'm one of the "good guys" in this whole ordeal, and I would have expected at least a PM explaining why something that took me a good deal of time to put together was zapped.

Re: AP - What should happen now
 

[ QUOTE ]
What a stupid, head-in-the-sand policy. It sets the stage for cheating that isn't even thinly veiled and is the reason why the online kids are not getting seats at the adult gaming table in the United States.



[/ QUOTE ]

You don't really believe what you just wrote, do you?

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

[ QUOTE ]
For cash games, I think that estimation of EV lost is probably the only "fair" way to go about recompense. Take the total amount of money that a cheater won, and compensate it to affected cash game players as a percentage of the hands that they played against the cheaters vs. total number of opponent-hands that the cheaters faced off against in affected hands. It's before noon here on Sunday so you're not about to see any equations from me, suffice to say that it should be the most accurate gauge of EV lost due to being at a table with a cheater in a cash game.

Of course this will affect the players that lost at a faster to the cheater than others, which probably has nothing to do with skill (or may in fact have an inverse relation), but unfortunately that's probably going to have to be written off as part of the normal variance of gambling. I don't see a solution to the payout issue that's not going to have that as an issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

AP has all of the hands. Why can't they just upload them to Poker Tracker, and go to the Misc Tab, and then see the won/lost totals against everyone. If they did that, they'd see for instance that I lost just over $7000 to GRAYCAT. There really is no need for a payout on a per/hand basis, unless they are going to award me that $7000+ AND an additional X$/hand played with GRAYCAT.

Re: AP - What should happen now
 

[ QUOTE ]
1) Nobody is going to jail. This private company operates in a foreign country - and all of its principals live in foreign countries. The reason they do this is to avoid the law, and they do it successfully. Pleas along the lines of "somebody has to go to jail" are pointless.

[/ QUOTE ]
They are in a foreign country to avoid the reach of US anti-gambling laws. Costa Rican and Panamanian law may be a joke, who knows, but there is at least some chance that they can be prosecuted in those jurisdictions. Someone pointed out that local authorities may be more than happy to make examples of gringos who try to use their country to commit crimes.

Re: AP - What should happen now
 

I just googled Costa Rica police while looking for a phone number-Just an FYI. The only numbers they list for tourists are in case the police try to confiscate your travel documents or if you want to report corruption. Don't hold your breath on the CR authorities getting involved.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For cash games, I think that estimation of EV lost is probably the only "fair" way to go about recompense. Take the total amount of money that a cheater won, and compensate it to affected cash game players as a percentage of the hands that they played against the cheaters vs. total number of opponent-hands that the cheaters faced off against in affected hands. It's before noon here on Sunday so you're not about to see any equations from me, suffice to say that it should be the most accurate gauge of EV lost due to being at a table with a cheater in a cash game.

Of course this will affect the players that lost at a faster to the cheater than others, which probably has nothing to do with skill (or may in fact have an inverse relation), but unfortunately that's probably going to have to be written off as part of the normal variance of gambling. I don't see a solution to the payout issue that's not going to have that as an issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

AP has all of the hands. Why can't they just upload them to Poker Tracker, and go to the Misc Tab, and then see the won/lost totals against everyone. If they did that, they'd see for instance that I lost just over $7000 to GRAYCAT. There really is no need for a payout on a per/hand basis, unless they are going to award me that $7000+ AND an additional X$/hand played with GRAYCAT.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is what they should do. Refund the amount lost + say 10bb/100 for limit and 25ptbb/100 for nl.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

[ QUOTE ]
AP has all of the hands. Why can't they just upload them to Poker Tracker, and go to the Misc Tab, and then see the won/lost totals against everyone. If they did that, they'd see for instance that I lost just over $7000 to GRAYCAT. There really is no need for a payout on a per/hand basis, unless they are going to award me that $7000+ AND an additional X$/hand played with GRAYCAT.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying they couldn't, I'm saying they probably won't. And I'm saying that it's not necessarily the most fair way of going about it.

Look at it this way. Let's say someone showed up at Greycat's table and played exactly one hand against him. That hand happened to be hypotheticalplayer's set vs. Greycat's overset and played out exactly as it would have had had no cheating occurred, resulting in hypotheticalplayer losing $1k. Does hypotheticalplayer deserve to get that full $1k back when they only played that one hand and, while they were technically "cheated", didn't really lose anything more than the normal variance one expects at a poker table, and weren't affected by the player in question being a cheater any more than they would have been had he been legit?

All I'm saying is that an estimated EV calc, if done right, would probably be closer to fair in this case.

Re: AP - What should happen now
 

[ QUOTE ]

They are in a foreign country to avoid the reach of US anti-gambling laws. Costa Rican and Panamanian law may be a joke, who knows, but there is at least some chance that they can be prosecuted in those jurisdictions. Someone pointed out that local authorities may be more than happy to make examples of gringos who try to use their country to commit crimes.


[/ QUOTE ]

I did. Taxin was not a Thai suspect until he went out and bought man city, that was when thailand saw that the whole world could see how crappy their government was.

They are also well known for not prosecuting pedofiles, but then one was on every newsstation of the world, and in two days he was eating cockroaches in thai jail.

But this is different, because american police has jurisdiction over this.

The international law regarding this was made when a guy, standing in country A, shot someone standing in country B, and got prosecuted for it in country A, despite the fact that country B wanted to do that. It's about the reach of the crime in this case, and this crime has been committed on american soil, because people that were harmed were playing in america (i assume).

Re: AP - What should happen now
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why did my post in the last monster thread get deleted?
It was the one with some biographical info about Oscar Hilt Tatum, IV, all publicly available on the internet. There was nothing scandalous (I even stated as much in the post), no speculation, nothing. It was just a post more or less summarizing things that had been posted in other posts. Then this morning I wake up to "Post deleted by Mat Sklansky". Why? Whose interests do you think were compromised by the post and what is worth "protecting"?

I'm one of the "good guys" in this whole ordeal, and I would have expected at least a PM explaining why something that took me a good deal of time to put together was zapped.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did the post contain photographs?

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For cash games, I think that estimation of EV lost is probably the only "fair" way to go about recompense. Take the total amount of money that a cheater won, and compensate it to affected cash game players as a percentage of the hands that they played against the cheaters vs. total number of opponent-hands that the cheaters faced off against in affected hands. It's before noon here on Sunday so you're not about to see any equations from me, suffice to say that it should be the most accurate gauge of EV lost due to being at a table with a cheater in a cash game.

Of course this will affect the players that lost at a faster to the cheater than others, which probably has nothing to do with skill (or may in fact have an inverse relation), but unfortunately that's probably going to have to be written off as part of the normal variance of gambling. I don't see a solution to the payout issue that's not going to have that as an issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

AP has all of the hands. Why can't they just upload them to Poker Tracker, and go to the Misc Tab, and then see the won/lost totals against everyone. If they did that, they'd see for instance that I lost just over $7000 to GRAYCAT. There really is no need for a payout on a per/hand basis, unless they are going to award me that $7000+ AND an additional X$/hand played with GRAYCAT.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is what they should do. Refund the amount lost + say 10bb/100 for limit and 25ptbb/100 for nl.

[/ QUOTE ]

reasoning for these numbers? or is this just arbitrary?

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I thought about it, and the money awarded back to the players shouldn't be a percentage of losses. It should be a dollar amount that is a function of hands played versus the cheaters and the limits where they played.

[/ QUOTE ]

The counter argument would be that the superuser would not even have been playing had he not been able to see hole cards, so you would have never had the opportunity to win money from him when he made a wrong decision.

The counter counter argument would be that you were also deprived of money you would have won from a third player had the superuser not been in the game. He should have folded most of his hands preflop, leaving you and the others to legitimately fight over the pots.

This could go on forever.

Re: AP - What should happen now
 

The Costa Rican authorities are so reluctant to prosecute because these big companies bring jobs and money to their economy. In this situation I doubt any other gaming company would pack up and leave if CR cracked down on AP. In fact in the long run cleaning up the industry will be good for CR.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
AP has all of the hands. Why can't they just upload them to Poker Tracker, and go to the Misc Tab, and then see the won/lost totals against everyone. If they did that, they'd see for instance that I lost just over $7000 to GRAYCAT. There really is no need for a payout on a per/hand basis, unless they are going to award me that $7000+ AND an additional X$/hand played with GRAYCAT.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying they couldn't, I'm saying they probably won't. And I'm saying that it's not necessarily the most fair way of going about it.

Look at it this way. Let's say someone showed up at Greycat's table and played exactly one hand against him. That hand happened to be hypotheticalplayer's set vs. Greycat's overset and played out exactly as it would have had had no cheating occurred, resulting in hypotheticalplayer losing $1k. Does hypotheticalplayer deserve to get that full $1k back when they only played that one hand and, while they were technically "cheated", didn't really lose anything more than the normal variance one expects at a poker table, and weren't affected by the player in question being a cheater any more than they would have been had he been legit?

All I'm saying is that an estimated EV calc, if done right, would probably be closer to fair in this case.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the flop came AKQ rainbow, turn 8, river 9, and it was 99 vs 88 it could have made a whole lot of difference.

That might not be the best example, but what I am saying is with overcards to both players it changes the dynamics.

Re: AP - What should happen now
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why did my post in the last monster thread get deleted?
It was the one with some biographical info about Oscar Hilt Tatum, IV, all publicly available on the internet. There was nothing scandalous (I even stated as much in the post), no speculation, nothing. It was just a post more or less summarizing things that had been posted in other posts. Then this morning I wake up to "Post deleted by Mat Sklansky". Why? Whose interests do you think were compromised by the post and what is worth "protecting"?

I'm one of the "good guys" in this whole ordeal, and I would have expected at least a PM explaining why something that took me a good deal of time to put together was zapped.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did the post contain photographs?

[/ QUOTE ]

It contained ONE -- and it was a picture that was generously provided by his mother-in-law who thought her daughter's lavish French wedding was worth writing a feature story about for the Dec. 30th, 2006 issue of the St. Petersburg Times newspaper (and including pictures). I'd provide the link here, but now I'm worried about it getting censored.
Fine, let's agree that posting links to personal wedding albums might be a tad inappropriate (even though the pic from MY post was NOT from a private wedding album, but rather on a newspaper's website), but I can't see what the objection would be to merely posting pictures of the fine gentlemen who are the head honchos at the online poker room so near and dear to us:

http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/3742/culbg2.jpg

EDIT: I just read the first post in this thread, stating that pictures of Oscar Tatum Hilt are not allowed, even while they may be accessible on the St. Petersburg Times' website. Fine. Google him if you care all that much. I removed his picture but have left up that of Scott "ban-stick" Tom.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

[ QUOTE ]

If the flop came AKQ rainbow, turn 8, river 9, and it was 99 vs 88 it could have made a whole lot of difference.

[/ QUOTE ]
And if the flop came 27K rainbow, turn 2, river A, with 77 against KK it wouldn't have. The point is that there's no way to go back and play the hands legitimately with all the hole cards involved, so there's no way to get an accurate estimate of how much was lost to a cheater due to that player's cheating, and that payouts based on individual players losses to the cheaters may not be an accurate representation of who was most affected by the cheating.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

Well, with respect to the POTRIPPER tournament you have to start with a refund of entry fees. No one had a chance. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that a lot of the players he KO'd were just the type who stood a very good chance of winning the tourney. an intelligent person who played with this guy for 10 minutes would have been under the impression that he was making huge bluffs, and played very aggressively against him. Of course, those are the guys who got knocked out. In fact, the best way to play this guy was to get lucky and have a lucky table assignment, and then just get lucky enough to not have run ins with him.

It wasn't a tourney at all. I'm not suggesting any winners should be returning money, at all. But no one should be out one nickel.

The cash games are more complicated. Obviously, first off everyone who lost a dime to these accounts should have that money returned, dollar for dollar. Beyond that, it does get difficult to determine true losses as a "bet saved is a bet won."

Re: AP - What should happen now
 

These are not the droids you're looking for. Move along.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

I'm not sure about why Mat deleted the last post, but I went over the last thread and deleted all the Hilt pictures because, after looking at the evidence (both public and not so public), I'm relatively convinced at this point that Hilt's got nothing to do with it. You'll notice I left the Tom pic up.

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

Cmon people this is ridiculous. If the cheating hadn't been going on, the superaccounts wouldn't even have been playing those limits. If you want your money back plus ten percent "being cheated" fee, or some standard amount, great. But please don't try to justify it in terms of the EV you would have won if graycat had been controlled by a drooling retard. Some of the players cheated probably weren't even winning players - should AP return their money minus the amount they would have lost even if the superusers were on the level? When a tournament crashes, do people generally receive restitution for the time they spent playing?

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure about why Mat deleted the last post, but I went over the last thread and deleted all the Hilt pictures because, after looking at the evidence (both public and not so public), I'm relatively convinced at this point that Hilt's got nothing to do with it. You'll notice I left the Tom pic up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's see. You deleted the innocent guy's pic, but left the other guy's pic. Darn, where is Mr. Spock with his logic when you need him?

Re: AP thread 87.1 - AP and UB ownership puzzle
 

thread locked, new thread with statement incoming

Re: AP thread 87.1 - waiting on the statement ITT
 

[ QUOTE ]
OK this is gonna be kind of a long post but this is what I have on OSCAR133... I was playing the 500 on absolute on a friends account because he wasnt available to play that afternoon and he agreed to split with me 50-50... anyways I had about 38k at 600-1200 blinds and OSCAR133 shows up at my table... the first hand he is there, I give him a walk since I am in the SB and he is to my left in the BB.... the second hand a short stack shoves and everyone folds including him...and the THIRD HAND AT THE TABLE WHEN HE HAS NO READS ON ANYONE, THIS IS WHAT FOLLOWS:

Stage #933700557 Tourney ID 1891776 Holdem Multi Normal Tournament No Limit $1200 - 2007-10-06 19:25:31 (ET)
Table: 22 (Real Money) Seat #5 is the dealer
Seat 1 - BN4270 ($21363 in chips)
Seat 3 - POCKET PUKE ($88801.50 in chips)
Seat 4 - CRAZYCHRIS45 ($39543 in chips)
Seat 5 - OSCAR133 ($38453 in chips)
Seat 6 - DOMVA ($33255 in chips)
Seat 7 - PHOINIX ($7849 in chips)
Seat 8 - IGOR211 ($16606 in chips)
Seat 9 - ADOMIP ($18644 in chips)
BN4270 - Ante $100
POCKET PUKE - Ante $100
CRAZYCHRIS45 - Ante $100
OSCAR133 - Ante $100
DOMVA - Ante $100
PHOINIX - Ante $100
IGOR211 - Ante $100
ADOMIP - Ante $100
DOMVA - Posts small blind $600
PHOINIX - Posts big blind $1200
*** POCKET CARDS ***
Dealt to CRAZYCHRIS45 [8h 8c]
IGOR211 - Folds
ADOMIP - Folds
BN4270 - Folds
POCKET PUKE - Folds
CRAZYCHRIS45 - Raises $2999 to $2999
OSCAR133 - Calls $2999 <---- flat calls pre to see if he hits a good flop, the usual style of potripper
DOMVA - Folds
PHOINIX - Folds
*** FLOP *** [5s 10c 4c]
CRAZYCHRIS45 - Checks
OSCAR133 - Bets $4800 <--- knows hes good and bets for value
CRAZYCHRIS45 - Calls $4800
*** TURN *** [5s 10c 4c] [Js]
CRAZYCHRIS45 - Checks
OSCAR133 - Bets $3600 <--- knows I have one out and makes his bet smaller, very similar to potripper's style also
CRAZYCHRIS45 - Calls $3600
*** RIVER *** [5s 10c 4c Js] [Kd]
CRAZYCHRIS45 - Bets $24000
OSCAR133 - Calls $24000 <---- (SNAPP, AND I MEAN SNAPPPPPPPPPPPPPP CALLED HERE, when he is losing to AK AQ AJ KQ KJ KT QJ QT TT JJ QQ KK and AA, without a moments hesitation with 0 reads on the table...)
*** SHOW DOWN ***
CRAZYCHRIS45 - Shows [8h 8c] (One pair, eights)
OSCAR133 - Shows [As 10s] (One pair, tens)
OSCAR133 Collects $73398 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total Pot($73398)
Board [5s 10c 4c Js Kd]
Seat 1: BN4270 Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 3: POCKET PUKE Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 4: CRAZYCHRIS45 HI:lost with One pair, eights [8h 8c - P:8h,P:8c,B:Kd,B:Js,B:10c]
Seat 5: OSCAR133 (dealer) won Total ($73398) HI:($73398) with One pair, tens [As 10s - P:10s,B:10c,P:As,B:Kd,B:Js]
Seat 6: DOMVA (small blind) Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 7: PHOINIX (big blind) Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 8: IGOR211 Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 9: ADOMIP Folded on the POCKET CARDS


very next hand, it seems like he is trying to finish us off as quickly as possible knowing he has live cards... its all so fishy I wish we had more hands from someone but here is the last and final hand I played with OSCAR who makes a sketchy call for 29k more for no reason:


Stage #933701725 Tourney ID 1891776 Holdem Multi Normal Tournament No Limit $1200 - 2007-10-06 19:26:43 (ET)
Table: 22 (Real Money) Seat #6 is the dealer
Seat 1 - BN4270 ($21263 in chips)
Seat 3 - POCKET PUKE ($88701.50 in chips)
Seat 4 - CRAZYCHRIS45 ($4044 in chips)
Seat 5 - OSCAR133 ($76352 in chips)
Seat 6 - DOMVA ($32555 in chips)
Seat 7 - PHOINIX ($6549 in chips)
Seat 8 - IGOR211 ($16506 in chips)
Seat 9 - ADOMIP ($18544 in chips)
BN4270 - Ante $100
POCKET PUKE - Ante $100
CRAZYCHRIS45 - Ante $100
OSCAR133 - Ante $100
DOMVA - Ante $100
PHOINIX - Ante $100
IGOR211 - Ante $100
ADOMIP - Ante $100
PHOINIX - Posts small blind $600
IGOR211 - Posts big blind $1200
*** POCKET CARDS ***
Dealt to CRAZYCHRIS45 [6d 6s]
ADOMIP - Folds
BN4270 - Folds
POCKET PUKE - Raises $3600 to $3600
CRAZYCHRIS45 - All-In(Raise) $3944 to $3944
OSCAR133 - Calls $3944
DOMVA - All-In(Raise) $32455 to $32455
PHOINIX - Folds
IGOR211 - Folds
POCKET PUKE - Folds
OSCAR133 - Calls $28511
*** FLOP *** [8d 4h 8s]
*** TURN *** [8d 4h 8s] [2h]
*** RIVER *** [8d 4h 8s 2h] [10c]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
CRAZYCHRIS45 - Shows [6d 6s] (Two Pair, eights and sixes)
OSCAR133 - Shows [7c Ac] (One pair, eights)
DOMVA - Shows [Kh Kd] (Two Pair, kings and eights)
DOMVA Collects $57022 from side pot-1
DOMVA Collects $18032 from main pot



discuss...I was very upset when he snap called that river and I remember not understanding how anyone could call so quikcly and could a player like this really dominate a tournament and a satellite without messing up? It seems unlikely..

[/ QUOTE ]

If u were cheating and had the best hand wouldnt u push that river??!