Re: Absolute Cheating
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ehm skip those kind of religious sounding nonsense please and explain me why 2+2 wants to believe
[/ QUOTE ]
sorry, I just don't know where to start.
OK, lets see. Nobody want to hear that the winning stats is not very suspicious at all. In fact, those stats are expected if we look in a very large dataset (all high stakes poker hands the last couple of years) with very high variance (it has been suggested that this villain plays a style that has a SD of 270PTBB/100 estimated from observed data) Instead, people wants to believe that these stats has a 1:10^20 probability.
why? People wants to believe he cheated.
[/ QUOTE ]
people don't want to believe it, it's just that the evidence is compelling. Why would they want to believe a 80/60 player is cheating? They'd love him to be playing that kind of game straight up!
and sure, there is a chance that is is all a weird coincidence, nobody is denying that, it's just way more unlikely explanation than cheating; especially if all those 'possibly weird coincidences' occurred in a short time frame and involved multiple accounts
|