Absolute Soulreading/Rigged thread #3

[Chump Change]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You guys suck at analogies. I think a good one would be chess.

This is like a 1000 rated amateur suddenly beating grandmasters. It just isn't possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for your input, but there is virtually no luck in chess. So I guess you suck even worse than us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not so fast though, pineapple. The analogy might be apt if you use blitz or rapid chess. Sure, the grandmaster could easily blunder a few times in this format and the novice could find some moves well above his strength, but in even a short run you're going to see the disparity.


Edit: But yeah, just go with battleship.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You guys suck at analogies. I think a good one would be chess.

This is like a 1000 rated amateur suddenly beating grandmasters. It just isn't possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for your input, but there is virtually no luck in chess. So I guess you suck even worse than us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not so fast though, pineapple. The analogy might be apt if you use blitz or rapid chess. Sure, the grandmaster could easily blunder a few times in this format and the novice could find some moves well above his strength, but in even a short run you're going to see the disparity.


Edit: But yeah, just go with battleship.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not quite sure what you are getting at, but it's well-established that a GM's advantage in blitz chess goes up. They still see just about everything, while the noob flounders about hopelessly. See the $50K durrr/curtains chess prop bet thread for more discussion.

[suzzer99]

[ QUOTE ]
this is like by far the dumbest poker analysis ive read in a long time. of course it proves that our fear that fish would be hard to convince is a legitimate one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bengie, this is deep stack poker, and Doubledrag plays a style that will put you to the test on the river.

[Chump Change]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not quite sure what you are getting at, but it's well-established that a GM's advantage in blitz chess goes up. They still see just about everything, while the noob flounders about hopelessly. See the $50K durrr/curtains chess prop bet thread for more discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, i'm really not going to hijack the thread discussing this, but this isn't exactly true. Some of the best blitz players in the world aren't even GMs (they're IMs so i'm not saying they're nobodies) and there are plenty of players that exclusively play blitz, with an extensive opening library memorized and the ability to analyze short combinations quickly, without a deeper understanding of chess. This is the type of player I had in mind, not a rank amateur.

You are correct for the sake of the this analogy, however, because we are talking about a rank amateur.

[nath]

One thing that strikes me about the doubters' posts is that they seem to be picking out individual hands and samples and circumstances and saying "Well, this is explainable by a number of things."

Yes, some of these hands, and some of these sessions, as played, in a vacuum, can be reasonably attributed to something besides cheating. However, looked at as a whole, there is literally NO WAY to explain the cheater's play besides "He can see his opponent's cards."

Again, the aggression factor is damning. It's not just a donk that decided, "Hey, I'm gonna try to be more aggressive and see what happens." It's a player who raises or folds EVERY river when it's an option, only losing the pot when he bluffs and fails, or declines to bluff. And his actions taken vs. his opponent's actual holdings are essentially perfect. He induces bluffs from draws he has high-carded and calls. He makes loose calls of PF pushes that he ALWAYS ends up being slightly ahead of. From that, it's not "Oh, a donk called a shove with A high because he's a donk," it's "Oh, someone WOULD call a shove with A high when he knows his opponent has K high, and given ALL THIS OTHER EVIDENCE he probably DOES know."

I haven't contributed much to this thread, mostly because I'm thoroughly convinced and don't have much else to offer. But I hope when I put it like this it becomes more obvious to those of you that still have questions.

[suzzer99]

Yeah, if Absolute wanted to clear up any doubts these guys were just getting lucky, they would show us his hole cards from the folded hands. Assuming they aren't completely incompetent (big assumption), someone somewhere is going over those HHs and seeing villian folding a flush to a small bet from a FH or something. Which means someone there pretty much knows. But I guess we know that anyway.

[ChrisV]

At this stage I don't think Absolute have enough credibility left that I would believe them if they came out with doubledrag's supposed hole cards. For me they lost all credibility when they made the ludicrous claim that no chip dumping had occurred.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not quite sure what you are getting at, but it's well-established that a GM's advantage in blitz chess goes up. They still see just about everything, while the noob flounders about hopelessly. See the $50K durrr/curtains chess prop bet thread for more discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, i'm really not going to hijack the thread discussing this, but this isn't exactly true. Some of the best blitz players in the world aren't even GMs (they're IMs so i'm not saying they're nobodies) and there are plenty of players that exclusively play blitz, with an extensive opening library memorized and the ability to analyze short combinations quickly, without a deeper understanding of chess. This is the type of player I had in mind, not a rank amateur.

You are correct for the sake of the this analogy, however, because we are talking about a rank amateur.

[/ QUOTE ]


against a beginner, I would win always no matter what. The distinction is that at material odds against a beginner, especially major ones, my odds go way way up in speed chess.

[Bad Beat Maker]

chess = nerds.

speaking about chess = nerds.

[Redgrape]

how many AP reps do you think have posted in this thread?