|
|
#71
12-22-2006, 06:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: suspicious pokerstars shortstackers data
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] You coldcall an allin PF raise to over 3x the BB with T773 single suited, and you wonder why you lose? [/ QUOTE ] Awesome. Not only are you criticising someone you play with when your shortstack style requires that people make these fundamental mistakes, you also start talking crap to someone that was actually providing evidence that you aren't using a bot. It's incredible to see the intelligence required to 6 table PLO and not ever have to make a decision beyond the flop. [/ QUOTE ] I actually thought tedkgb was saying to the contrary. In his first post he said they 'ran him out of the pot' and then his second post called into question the 'suspicious' actions of the short stack crew 
|
|
#72
12-22-2006, 07:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: suspicious pokerstars shortstackers data
Well if they do all sit down within seconds of each other on a regular basis that is pretty suspicious and should be enough for pokerstars to investigate.
As to what tedkgb's intentions were, I thought he was refuting the claim that they never play pots together, not trying to say that they were colluding.
|
|
#73
12-22-2006, 07:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: suspicious pokerstars shortstackers data
[ QUOTE ]
Well if they do all sit down within seconds of each other on a regular basis that is pretty suspicious and should be enough for pokerstars to investigate. [/ QUOTE ] Maybe they are friends and only like to run their bots when they are both online at the same time?
|
|
#76
12-27-2006, 11:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: suspicious pokerstars shortstackers data
This data is *incredibly* damning. I've mined enough (hold em) back in the Party days to *know* that regularities like this simply do *not* show up. The few cases I'd seen of even two players with very similar PokerTracker data generally turned out to be the same guy running two accounts (at once, just to play more tables when they limited to 4 tables).
I like Joel from his responses here, so I hate to say it...but there must be way more connection among these accounts than he admits. I can't believe there isn't botting or very formulaic humaning going on here for the whole set of accounts. Wow.
|
|
#77
12-27-2006, 11:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: suspicious pokerstars shortstackers data
So you don't think that the formula that rolf laid down would just happen to produce these numbers?
I think if you run any AA, and the amount of hands that are 2 suited 1 or two gappers (eg 4568DS, 5679ds), 1 gap or less suited 1 way (4d5d7x8x), throw in miniraises in position, pushes after aggession, folds out of position, basically exactly as ROLF discribed it, and to a disciplined and patient person it is a very specific formula. I looked at those stats and thought, yep, when I do shortstack my #'s are probably very close to that.
|
|
#78
12-27-2006, 11:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: suspicious pokerstars shortstackers data
Nope!
1) I myself run at 15/7 at Stars when I shortstack PLO. I don't do it often, but often enough to know that I'm not 17/8. 2) I've read & obsessively understood Rolf's book. He ain't nearly specific enough -- really can't be, in Omaha, too many possibilities -- to generate an exact 17/8 in the disciplined reader. Rolf is way more about principles & situational reasoning than formulaicism. 3) The numbers of hands over the mined month. It's almost insane that these shortstackers appear together in the clump around 9000 hands. 4) The OP said that their *other* PT numbers are similarly similar. As a big PT geek, I know what fields he probably means. That's way more layered formulaicism than Rolf or "obvious best play" could produce. 5) Anecdotally, the accounts play at similar times & appear at tables at once. Fun fun fun!
|
|
#79
12-27-2006, 11:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: suspicious pokerstars shortstackers data
6) Also anecdotally, these guys don't play other games or any other way mix up what they do shortstacking the PLO.
|
|
#80
12-27-2006, 12:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: suspicious pokerstars shortstackers data
I guess i'm not enough of a PT geek. 15/7 = 17/8 in my opinon, unless you have a 100k sample. Even then.
If poster brought more stats to bear, then probably. Still, not too many important stats with shortstacking aside from vpip and pfr. Possibly hands showndown, but even then. and yes rolf is not formulaic, but the human mind is. I guess I've always thought these sites could catch bots and collaberators over a month or so pretty easily. PS: perhaps i'm nieve; can anyone show me something specific involving a site catching a bot. How about someone getting away with it.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
