Re: Cheating at AP, updated cliff notes
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like the email for handhistories idea, because in the NY Times blog he mentions that someone might be a hero at AP and is helping us out by sending the master hand histories. So if you have ever played with any of the suspected accounts, SEND THEM AN EMAIL. We might get lucky again.

[/ QUOTE ]
A confidential source told me that the guy is no longer with the company.

But maybe someone else is willing to send this stuff out.

[/ QUOTE ]
BTW, I was told that by two separate confidential sources, both of whom did not want to post on their names. I trust both of them.

Re: Cheating at AP, updated cliff notes
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like the email for handhistories idea, because in the NY Times blog he mentions that someone might be a hero at AP and is helping us out by sending the master hand histories. So if you have ever played with any of the suspected accounts, SEND THEM AN EMAIL. We might get lucky again.

[/ QUOTE ]
A confidential source told me that the guy is no longer with the company.

But maybe someone else is willing to send this stuff out.

[/ QUOTE ]

To clarify, you are saying the guy is no longer with the company as of very recently? And because of this situation? Feel free to not elaborate, you have divulged plenty.

Re: Cheating at AP, updated cliff notes
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you guys have an account on digg, it wouldn't hurt to digg the blog story on the NYTimes. We need a bunch of diggs for it to make it to the front page.

http://www.digg.com/offbeat_news/Abs...lown_Wide_Open

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT, all you have to do is register a Digg account (free, ez, fast) and then click a button on the site and that will help get this story out to a ton of people. It only has 56 diggs right now when there are clearly way more people than that reading this thread.

Re: Cheating at AP, updated cliff notes
 

[ QUOTE ]
Just skimming through the comments on the Freakonomics blog. I was both depressed by and encouraged by the number of people who are not convinced that cheating occurred. They may never be convinced, since it takes some thought and good poker knowledge to see it. This is depressing as anything that keeps people from seeing the truth is depressing. It's encouraging because I would hate to see a public overreaction that all online poker is rigged.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, a person left this comment on digg. "Most claims that online poker is rigged are ridiculous and have no basis in facts. I don't understand how after looking at the hand histories and other relevant info any poker player could try and dispute the claim that cheating has occurred here."

Utterly ridiculous. This is what you call an argument through ignorance. Very annoying.

Re: Cheating at AP, updated cliff notes
 

[ QUOTE ]
I would include the fact that AP looked into the matter, including the tournament that we now have the complete hand history for, and then released a statement saying that they found no evidence of cheating.

Either they are:

1. Dumber than my eight year old.
2. Assisting in the cover-up.

[/ QUOTE ]

History is littered with criminals who came up with ingenious ways to cheat or steal, and then came up with the most brain dead mistakes to get caught. There is simply no reason to believe this affair is any different. As for the excel file containing evidence against Scott Tom specifically, you have to ask yourself was this simply another AP support blunder, an "I, robot" style breadcrumb sent by an employee with a conscience, or a "Sherlock Holmes" style red herring.

Re: Cheating at AP, updated cliff notes
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's a post by "jacktipper" from P5's. I'll preface it by saying that this user name just registered today:

Wow - how shady is this. Scott Tom isn't the CEO of AP, he's the CEO of the company that owns AP and UB. I for one know he's still involved with the company business of BOTH sites.

Keep in mind, the people that own this site are 20-somethings, who are rich, living in a country with no rules (Costa Rica)... I'm just surprised it's taken so long for someone to get caught.

So - how bad is it in AP's ***official*** release that they lie and try to coverup that Scott hasn't been a part of the company.

Wow...

[/ QUOTE ]

this is very good if it can be proved

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah this seems like the logical next point to investigate. If it can be shown that Scott Tom is currently/or was during the last year year still involved with AP, their latest press release would be a proven lie, and it would implicate Mark Seif who posted said release in his blog. Since he, as a partowner, certainly should know whether Scott Tom still is/was involved with AP.

Re: Cheating at AP, updated cliff notes
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just skimming through the comments on the Freakonomics blog. I was both depressed by and encouraged by the number of people who are not convinced that cheating occurred. They may never be convinced, since it takes some thought and good poker knowledge to see it. This is depressing as anything that keeps people from seeing the truth is depressing. It's encouraging because I would hate to see a public overreaction that all online poker is rigged.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, a person left this comment on digg. "Most claims that online poker is rigged are ridiculous and have no basis in facts. I don't understand how after looking at the hand histories and other relevant info any poker player could try and dispute the claim that cheating has occurred here."

Utterly ridiculous. This is what you call an argument through ignorance. Very annoying.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you misread the comment. He is saying that despite all the bogus claims, this one is incredibly obvious.

Re: Cheating at AP, updated cliff notes
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just skimming through the comments on the Freakonomics blog. I was both depressed by and encouraged by the number of people who are not convinced that cheating occurred. They may never be convinced, since it takes some thought and good poker knowledge to see it. This is depressing as anything that keeps people from seeing the truth is depressing. It's encouraging because I would hate to see a public overreaction that all online poker is rigged.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, a person left this comment on digg. "Most claims that online poker is rigged are ridiculous and have no basis in facts. I don't understand how after looking at the hand histories and other relevant info any poker player could try and dispute the claim that cheating has occurred here."

Utterly ridiculous. This is what you call an argument through ignorance. Very annoying.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wait, the comment you quoted is 100% correct. Maybe you misread the last sentence with it's multiple negatives, but it's not wrong.

Re: Cheating at AP, updated cliff notes
 

Also, everyone please digg the story. It's super easy, I just registered and did it.

Re: Cheating at AP, updated cliff notes
 

[ QUOTE ]
Just skimming through the comments on the Freakonomics blog. I was both depressed by and encouraged by the number of people who are not convinced that cheating occurred. They may never be convinced, since it takes some thought and good poker knowledge to see it. This is depressing as anything that keeps people from seeing the truth is depressing. It's encouraging because I would hate to see a public overreaction that all online poker is rigged.

[/ QUOTE ]

At least one of the "skeptics" is probably an AP shill:

"I hear you - the claims and accusations are serious for all poker players, and so is the concept of someone being able to hack the system to gain some kind of advantage over fellow players - however i still believe having absorbed all the evidence being argued that given Absolute Poker has been audited in the past and is prepared to go through the process again with an apparently legit 3rd party - surely we wait to see if it is possible for someone to hack the system and cheat and allow the media companies they mention to offer all of us a fair explanation? And until this is complete all of the evidence being used by forum posters is purely circumstantial and doesn’t prove beyond reasonable doubt that anyone was able to hack the system and cheat.
I’m sure you know well that poker isn’t just about stats - so if luck and strategy didn’t have anything to do with the game - why would millions of people worldwide have poker as their prime recreation?

— Posted by jeffery smythe"

Sounds like PR script.