Absolute Poker Scandal: An Inside Job

[tereg]

[ QUOTE ]

So we're trying to narrow down reasons for this guy to be interested in those tables, particularly 13. Note that he checks back on it, etc, so it wasn't a mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet (I've gone though about 80% of this thread). This is just a thought, I don't know if this has any merit.

But, if someone was playing in this tournament and periodically checked chip counts, would there be a possibility that people notice that POTRIPPER had a large chip lead and wanted to kibitz the table to see what this guy was doing to get that lead? Would that explain maybe the table opens for 2 seconds, 30 seconds, etc?

In your data, is there any kind of correlation between when the tables were open and what his chip count was (not including #363) such that people were going in and out of Table 13 more often when he had a very large chip lead?

Also, people might open Mark Seif's table just because it's Mark Seif.

This whole story blows my mind. I'm just wondering if the data might suggest this.

[Anna.]

[ QUOTE ]

But, if someone was playing in this tournament and periodically checked chip counts, would there be a possibility that people notice that POTRIPPER had a large chip lead and wanted to kibitz the table to see what this guy was doing to get that lead? Would that explain maybe the table opens for 2 seconds, 30 seconds, etc?





[/ QUOTE ]

tough to kibitz in 2:30

[tereg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

But, if someone was playing in this tournament and periodically checked chip counts, would there be a possibility that people notice that POTRIPPER had a large chip lead and wanted to kibitz the table to see what this guy was doing to get that lead? Would that explain maybe the table opens for 2 seconds, 30 seconds, etc?





[/ QUOTE ]

tough to kibitz in 2:30

[/ QUOTE ]

Notice I said not including #363

[N 82 50 24]

There's no real evidence to suggest anything was going on with this latest thing, just trying to follow up all leads here.

[N 82 50 24]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So we're trying to narrow down reasons for this guy to be interested in those tables, particularly 13. Note that he checks back on it, etc, so it wasn't a mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet (I've gone though about 80% of this thread). This is just a thought, I don't know if this has any merit.

But, if someone was playing in this tournament and periodically checked chip counts, would there be a possibility that people notice that POTRIPPER had a large chip lead and wanted to kibitz the table to see what this guy was doing to get that lead? Would that explain maybe the table opens for 2 seconds, 30 seconds, etc?

In your data, is there any kind of correlation between when the tables were open and what his chip count was (not including #363) such that people were going in and out of Table 13 more often when he had a very large chip lead?

Also, people might open Mark Seif's table just because it's Mark Seif.

This whole story blows my mind. I'm just wondering if the data might suggest this.

[/ QUOTE ]
The guy first showed up 8 minutes in. POTRIPPER had a starting stack at that point.

[cpitt398]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So we're trying to narrow down reasons for this guy to be interested in those tables, particularly 13. Note that he checks back on it, etc, so it wasn't a mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet (I've gone though about 80% of this thread). This is just a thought, I don't know if this has any merit.

But, if someone was playing in this tournament and periodically checked chip counts, would there be a possibility that people notice that POTRIPPER had a large chip lead and wanted to kibitz the table to see what this guy was doing to get that lead? Would that explain maybe the table opens for 2 seconds, 30 seconds, etc?

In your data, is there any kind of correlation between when the tables were open and what his chip count was (not including #363) such that people were going in and out of Table 13 more often when he had a very large chip lead?

Also, people might open Mark Seif's table just because it's Mark Seif.

This whole story blows my mind. I'm just wondering if the data might suggest this.

[/ QUOTE ]

thats what I was thinking if it was just some random account . The fact that it was in Quebec makes it a little more suspicious but at the same time if you knew about this you would probably watch the entire time b/c it would be entertaining to watch