Re: Beat: Absolute is *actually* rigged (serious) (read me)
 

Cardplayer and mark seif are both at the borgata. is there any way someone can contact them to interview him about this [censored]?

Re: Beat: Absolute is *actually* rigged (serious) (read me)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I did a google search for Potripper. I found some interesting links, including this one

http://www.imafia.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=2118

[/ QUOTE ]

So potripper is the name of a cracking tool? Not really damning evidence.

Re: Beat: Absolute is *actually* rigged (serious) (read me)
 

[ QUOTE ]

So potripper is the name of a cracking tool? Not really damning evidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

The damning evidence has already been posted. I just found it interesting that an alleged cheater is named after a cheating tool-don't you?

Re: Beat: Absolute is *actually* rigged (serious) (read me)
 

[ QUOTE ]
33 isnt the only hand he beats, he also beats the board.

maybe he called putting him on complete bluff

[/ QUOTE ]

not that this is relevant to the discussion but could you enumerate some of the hands other than 32 and 33 that 44 beats on a QQ662 board?

Re: Beat: Absolute is *actually* rigged (serious) (read me)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, how many times did he get to the river? We have the DB where he played 500 hands. I want to see how many hands in the 500 did he get to the river, and how often during hands that went to showdown, did he put chips in behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

We have an aggregate of a couple of thousand hands, I think (those are all different DB's).

Of the hand histories I've seen (ike's), he's made a few dumb minbet bluffs with the worse hand, and made a bunch of huge, uncalled overbets, some % of which also must have been bluffs. He also floated (with a hand capable of improvement vs. a better, 'big' hand) two or three times.

What *never* happened, in a ~100 hand stretch of HH's that I reviewed from Ike - in which he played 95% of hands and only ever folded pre-river (in a pot with Ike and, I suspect, anyone else) when Ike had top pair or better - was him *calling* a bet on the river when behind.

Also, in the first two thirds of the HH, he did not raise PF three times. Two of those times, he limp/called 1x and folded 1x PF when ike had aces and queens. The third, someone else was in the hand and made a big raise, to which he also just folded.

That, plus the PT screenshots you've all seen, is the evidence we've got. Well, that, and the 1K donkament HU call with T high, by a guy who had 48K at 120/250 in the toughest regular internet donkament and would have had a 65K stack if his hugely 4-bet A6 had held up vs. T9 on a 762 board.

Re: Beat: Absolute is *actually* rigged (serious) (read me)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
33 isnt the only hand he beats, he also beats the board.

maybe he called putting him on complete bluff

[/ QUOTE ]

not that this is relevant to the discussion but could you enumerate some of the hands other than 32 and 33 that 44 beats on a QQ662 board?

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

Re: Beat: Absolute is *actually* rigged (serious) (read me)
 

Has this thread been shown to one of the major poker areas of influence (ie. cardplayer)? maybe it'd be nice to get some of this info out.

Re: Beat: Absolute is *actually* rigged (serious) (read me)
 

this is very distrubing, and way over my head. I understand the stat's enough to know something bad has happened. I am sorry for those who got their money stolen and hope you have some recourse. I wanted to say thank for the information.

Re: Beat: Absolute is *actually* rigged (serious) (read me)
 

Mods, it's looking like about 90% of the posters in this thread now are saying things which make it perfectly clear they've barely read any of the hundreds of posts already in here. IMHO not worth anyone's time sifting through 50 new posts to find the one with a half-original posted. Maybe time to lock the thread, have people PM you with more PT stats or HH's as they come in, and you post a recap every now and then?

Re: Beat: Absolute is *actually* rigged (serious) (read me)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Mods, it's looking like about 90% of the posters in this thread now are saying things which make it perfectly clear they've barely read any of the hundreds of posts already in here. IMHO not worth anyone's time sifting through 50 new posts to find the one with a half-original posted. Maybe time to lock the thread, have people PM you with more PT stats or HH's as they come in, and you post a recap every now and then?

[/ QUOTE ]

If somebody wants to do this and post a concise one post recap, I'll lock the original thread and link to that one.