Absolute Soulreading/Rigged thread #3

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
I understand why people want an analogy for non poker people to be able to relate to.
Here is why I think the baseball one doesn't work and we should keep searching.

The idea behind the analogy with baseball seems to be to draw a parallel between skill games- and skill games in which someone has an unfair competitive edge due to cheating.
The problem with the suspected accounts is that the argument we are making in order to point out how incomprehensible this play is that we are attempting to explain a level of skillfullness that can only be due to cheating.

In fact- the premise of a large part of the argument is " this is how a retard would play if he knew the hole cards". Or a nearly complete lack of skill otherwise.

If you reach the minors in baseball- you have some amount of skill.
If you reach the majors, you have a considerable amount outside of helping substances.
If we try to paint it like baseball/steroids it isn't as simple as saying "omg this guy batted .100 in the minors and is tearing it up now." That's not a valid comparison.
Steroids don't do that to your hand eye coordination, timing, and mechanics.

The may help you jump from 4 home runs a year to 25, but they cannot make you a major league phenom if you were a minor league bust as a batter.

We are trying to make the argument there is only one way this could have happened.
I don't think an analogy that draws a comparison to situation where you have to have a fair amount of skill to begin with helps us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the analogy was "worst hitter on high school baseball team jumps right to the majors and leads in homers." Maybe he won a contest or something. Of course it's unrealistic but any analogy will be.

[SL__72]

Lol @ the comments for that article. The first one is my favorite:

[ QUOTE ]


What about people who are psychic? Setting aside, for the moment, if they actually exist (I think they do, but to what extent, is the question that is relevant here), if such people can win at online poker through psychically knowing the cards, is this still cheating?

— Posted by Rita: Lovely Meter Maid


[/ QUOTE ]

From there it quickly turns into your standard poker sites can't be trusted thread.

[krumeluren]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi, apologies for contributing to thread as newb.
But in response to this guy 'Flight2Q' who seems be trying to justify the cheaters play in spite of the statistical evidence...

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no statistical evidence. The analyses presented suggest that in large datsets these winning stats will not be common but they will exist. And we are talking very large datsest here that are analysed by players every day. Somebody is bound to pick up an extreme outlier some day. Maybe they just found an idiot with luck that has decided to play a game where he never calls river.

Also, the analyses presented above has a SD of 50 but there are reports he has an SD of 270. If thats true, the presented anlyses are heavily biased and the probability of finding such outliers is much much higher.

[NobleNobleNoble]

Yeah but my point was why would this flight2Q poster randomly write in a thread on 070307
"I'm at 375.00 BB/100 today."
Which is strangely similiar to the winrate the cheater/s had and then also be posting in their defense now?

[ikestoys]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi, apologies for contributing to thread as newb.
But in response to this guy 'Flight2Q' who seems be trying to justify the cheaters play in spite of the statistical evidence...

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no statistical evidence. The analyses presented suggest that in large datsets these winning stats will not be common but they will exist. And we are talking very large datsest here that are analysed by players every day. Somebody is bound to pick up an extreme outlier some day. Maybe they just found an idiot with luck that has decided to play a game where he never calls river.

Also, the analyses presented above has a SD of 50 but there are reports he has an SD of 270. If thats true, the presented anlyses are heavily biased and the probability of finding such outliers is much much higher.

[/ QUOTE ]

and what is the sd in making the correct decision on the river 100 times in a row [censored]

[krumeluren]

[ QUOTE ]
correct decision on the river 100 times in a row [censored]

[/ QUOTE ]

Wel the probability wont be high, but given how many hands is played every day I wouldn´t be surprised if it happened every week. Besides, we don't know if he made the right descision in everey hand, he might have folded the best hand and he didn't have 100% winning at showdown right?

The odd thing about this guy is his river agression. But think about it, hes an idiot (we know that) and an idiot sometimes decides that he knows how to play and maybe he decided he would never call a river bet. Then he ran hot for a few hundred hands. That could explain most of it.

Or he might be cheating. I don't know.

[Redgrape]

Every good player we know needs to come to this thread and assure everyone that it is clear that cheating has been going on because this is [censored] ridiculous. We shouldn't be arguing over whether or not they are cheating anymore, its obvious that they did. We need to gather more evidence though, not because there's not enough for a poker player to realize they cheated, but so its obvious to a non poker player that they cheated.

[Drag]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
correct decision on the river 100 times in a row [censored]

[/ QUOTE ]

Wel the probability wont be high, but given how many hands is played every day I wouldn´t be surprised if it happened every week. Besides, we don't know if he made the right descision in everey hand, he might have folded the best hand and he didn't have 100% winning at showdown right?

The odd thing about this guy is his river agression. But think about it, hes an idiot (we know that) and an idiot sometimes decides that he knows how to play and maybe he decided he would never call a river bet. Then he ran hot for a few hundred hands. That could explain most of it.

Or he might be cheating. I don't know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Check HS limit forum for more hands. There seems to be at least 500 hands in NL, 500 hands in Limit and 2 high stackes tournies all won in a similar fashion.

(In limit they have 22BB/100 against the best players, who themselves have at most 2BB/100.)

There is enough purely statistical evidence from the winrates.

P.S. Surely it would help if someone compiled a database with all the avilalble hands on these players and posted a link to it.

[teddyFBI]

[ QUOTE ]

P.S. Surely it would help if someone compiled a database with all the avilalble hands on these players and posted a link to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Adanthar...i know you've done yoeman's work so far (sp?) but maybe you can do this?

[dpdawson]

I want to take a step back from this craziness and say something.

How can you be smart enough to figure out how to cheat and then use that knowledge in such a stupid way? (whether the person who figured it out is the person who was caught or whether he or she gave it to the person who was caught is debatable)

This is like figuring out how to cheat on the lottery and then winning it every week for 10 years. At some point, people are going to start asking questions.

All this person had to do was play a standard strategy at the highest level the site runs, while making (what appear to be) a few extra great bluffs and calls and they are rich.

The real question here is not "how could someone cheat?", but "how could someone cheat so stupidly?".