Cheating in Online Poker

[uclabruinz]

Clayton,

First, I did mention one thing that PokerStars specifically said, which is that they do not have the time to review the original ActionJeff thread. To me, that is outrageous. They also contradicted themselves, i.e. one support person saying a certain action was against the rules, another one saying it is not, etc. If you really think this needs to be about PokerStars, perhaps I can start another thread about them specifically, but I think that is pretty unnecessary.

You have called me stubborn, but I have repeatedly asked for input on whether the article should be written, what it should be about, and expressed a willingness to be "educated" as to this matter. So, your insult is just ignorant.

Your input thus far has basically been "OH MY GOD DON'T HURT MY EV!" If you have specific content to contribute beyond that, I am willing to listen. However, calling me stubborn or implying I am making things up about PokerStars isn't helpful.

What are you solutions? Do you agree with Adanthar that this is a huge problem? Do you think "fish" have a right to know if the games they are entering are fair? Since this all came out, what have you done to address the problem specifically?

[Sciolist]

[ QUOTE ]
First, I did mention one thing that PokerStars specifically said, which is that they do not have the time to review the original ActionJeff thread. To me, that is outrageous. They also contradicted themselves, i.e. one support person saying a certain action was against the rules, another one saying it is not, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]
Firstly, I cannot comment on policy issues like this, because I am not really qualified to do so. But I can talk about more generalised situations.

That doesn't mean that people who are qualified to make policy in this area aren't reading these threads: I spend a lot of time on 2 + 2, and usually they know about these threads before I do. I know that management read these threads.

However, a member of support doesn't know that. If support spent all of their time reading hundreds of posts, they'd do no actual work. I haven't looked at the mails you received, but I imagine the support CSR was looking for a summary, whilst what they received was a two hour reading assignment. If you say "I think ABC is multi accounting", it'll be investigated. If you say "I think there is a policy issue for you to consider, can you point the security manager towards this thread please?", they'll send it on.

I know that sometimes you get inconsistent responses from support in some areas. This is because not everyone in support understands every area of the site 100%. I worked in support for two years and probably don't know it all, and I am more experienced than most. If you get inconsistencies, reply and point them out: The first step for fixing mistakes is noticing a mistake. Support are only human.

[Clayton]

[ QUOTE ]
Clayton,

First, I did mention one thing that PokerStars specifically said, which is that they do not have the time to review the original ActionJeff thread. To me, that is outrageous. They also contradicted themselves, i.e. one support person saying a certain action was against the rules, another one saying it is not, etc. If you really think this needs to be about PokerStars, perhaps I can start another thread about them specifically, but I think that is pretty unnecessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's entirely necessary to get specific on those matters asap, as not doing so weakens your argument towards the ineffectiveness of PokerStars.

[ QUOTE ]
You have called me stubborn, but I have repeatedly asked for input on whether the article should be written, what it should be about, and expressed a willingness to be "educated" as to this matter. So, your insult is just ignorant.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have said specifically that stating the willingness to write an article that compromises online poker as a whole without considering other options would qualify as stubborn. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I have yet to see that willingness to look into other options on your part, just on "what the article should be about". Pair that with the willingness to hurt poker overall here:

-------------------------------------------

[ QUOTE ]
I do not want to damage online poker more then it needs to be, but if my ultimate decision is to go forward with an article that exposes cheating in online poker, then you can blame me if you want, but you ought to blame the cheaters themselves, the sites that do little to combat them, and the otherwise honest people that would rather sweep it under the rug then address it directly.

[/ QUOTE ]

--------------------------------------------------------

then I feel my claim is justified. But I'm not going to sidetrack. My main involvement in this thread is to adamantly be against the writing of an article, nothing more.


[ QUOTE ]
Your input thus far has basically been "OH MY GOD DON'T HURT MY EV!"

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, this is just downright insulting. Care to actually read my writings as opposed to just blindly stating I'm all about my own financial interests?

I don't need to state twice that I'm about changing things, but yet again, "I feel that writing an article is not the best way to go". The fact that this translates in your brain that since the reply comes from a young online poker player it must be all about his own financial interests is laughable. I happen to also care about the reputation of poker, since as is I shy away from talking about my work to my friends and family. The last thing I need is another negative connotation about gambling coming from the government or the press to further ensure that what I do constitues something "wrong", and "immoral". Also consider the EV taken away from well-to-do online professionals that don't involve themselves in games that involve this "cheating" at all.

[ QUOTE ]
If you have specific content to contribute beyond that, I am willing to listen. However, calling me stubborn

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say that implying that my arguments are only served to my own benefits off the bat as well as not looking into my initial suggestion of starting a PPA geared towards online poker player ethics proves that you just want to write the article.

[ QUOTE ]
or implying I am making things up about PokerStars isn't helpful.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not insinuating you are making things up, just that in the context of a serious argument where you make serious accusations towards PokerStars unwillingness', that you specifically outline your conversations with PokerStars so that evidence to your wanting to write an article is at least out there, and not your generalized statements. I don't distrust you, I'm just saying for the benefit of discussion it's in everyone's best interest that your evidence is actual evidence.

[ QUOTE ]
What are you solutions?

[/ QUOTE ]

I gave one, the PPA-style thing. What do you think of it?

[ QUOTE ]
Do you agree with Adanthar that this is a huge problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think "fish" have a right to know if the games they are entering are fair?

[/ QUOTE ]

Adanthar specifically stated that 95% of PokerStars games don't even deal with this. Making this statement that insinuates fish enter unfair poker games given Adanthar's statement that I agree with shows that, yet again, you just want to write the article.

[ QUOTE ]
Since this all came out, what have you done to address the problem specifically?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know anyone who does any of this, so there isn't much I can do. I did suggest the PPA thing geared towards online poker player ethics, however, and I think that's a great idea and hope others would latch on so something could be done.

[Exitonly]

fwiw, i've really agreed with clayton and adanthar reading through the thread. but also agree w/ ucla that something must be done, but i dont really knnow what that can be, besides us all pointing fingers at jjprodigy.

[uclabruinz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First, I did mention one thing that PokerStars specifically said, which is that they do not have the time to review the original ActionJeff thread. To me, that is outrageous. They also contradicted themselves, i.e. one support person saying a certain action was against the rules, another one saying it is not, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]
Firstly, I cannot comment on policy issues like this, because I am not really qualified to do so. But I can talk about more generalised situations.

That doesn't mean that people who are qualified to make policy in this area aren't reading these threads: I spend a lot of time on 2 + 2, and usually they know about these threads before I do. I know that management read these threads.

However, a member of support doesn't know that. If support spent all of their time reading hundreds of posts, they'd do no actual work. I haven't looked at the mails you received, but I imagine the support CSR was looking for a summary, whilst what they received was a two hour reading assignment. If you say "I think ABC is multi accounting", it'll be investigated. If you say "I think there is a policy issue for you to consider, can you point the security manager towards this thread please?", they'll send it on.

I know that sometimes you get inconsistent responses from support in some areas. This is because not everyone in support understands every area of the site 100%. I worked in support for two years and probably don't know it all, and I am more experienced than most. If you get inconsistencies, reply and point them out: The first step for fixing mistakes is noticing a mistake. Support are only human.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair points, but can you see how your response indicates that PokerStars does not really take cheating seriously? I mentioned a SPECIFIC NAME in my email that I thought was admitting to conduct that violated the rules, and the responses were weak, inconsistent, "we don't have time," etc. Now, I realize these are lower level CSRs, but shouldn't serious accusations like this be forwarded to someone with the knowledge and experience to make accurate assessments? Basically, I asked serious questions about policies and rules, and pointed out not only the thread in general, but a specific person in the thread, and the responses I got were vague, contradictory, "we don't have time," etc.

As to Clayton, I am not going to get into long back and forths with you, it defeats the purpose. You are right, your suggestions early in this thread were good, and it was unfair to lump you into the same category as others who offer the solutions that everyone just look the other way. I apologize for that.

However, you are also guilty of applying intentions to me that I do not have, and ignoring specifically what I have written in this thread. I have repeatedly indicated a willingness to be convinced that the article is unnecessary, there are better ways, etc. However, "it hurts my EV" is not persuasive to me. Your arguments that it just hurts the game in general are more persuasive, but in the end it just depends on what I conclude the scope of the problem to be, and based on ActionJeff's and Adanthar's previous statements, I have no way of concluding anything other then that cheating is massive in scale.

I am very self-righteous when it comes to ethics, I admit that. I have tried to restrain myself as best as possible, but frankly I am the kind of person that thinks that people who are doing everything they can to prevent anyone from seriously investigating online cheating are at least somewhat likely to be among the cheaters themselves in one form or another.

There is no doubt the resources for good poker players have shrunk drastically in the last six to twelve months. The pool of dead money is shrinking every day. I have two lawyer friends invite me out to lunch to ask "everything poker" yesterday. Shortly after I got back to my office, I got an email stating they couldn't find any way to get money online. My point is that I suspect that those who depend on poker for a living, or have egos that can't deal with not winning as much as they used to, have more and more incentive to cheat.

I simply want to do everything possible to prevent that, even at the risk of short-term harm to the game in general. I am a busy guy, I don't WANT to spend my time on this, but I will if needed. If there are other ways, or the scope is not sufficient enough to cause harm to the game, I am all for hearing about it. However, to this point, those who sounded the alarm continue to be silent, at least some winning players continue to try to shush everyone up and sweep things under the rug, and I remain at a loss as to the extent of the cheating and what can be done about it other then making people aware of the problem.

[uclabruinz]

[ QUOTE ]
fwiw, i've really agreed with clayton and adanthar reading through the thread. but also agree w/ ucla that something must be done, but i dont really knnow what that can be, besides us all pointing fingers at jjprodigy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Part of what also irks me is the "defense" of ZeeJustin ("he learned his lesson" etc.). I pretty much got over it awhile ago, only to read ZeeJustin bragging about signing a deal with Bodog. I couldn't believe it when I read this, both in that Justin apparently could care less that the whole thing is going to be brought up again, and that Bodog would be so stupid as to sign a player with his history. This is what I mean when I say the sites just don't care about the cheating. They will make a passing effort, sure, if something is blatant, but in the end it is all about bottom line, and if they think Justin even with all his history is worth getting "Bodog" on television at a final table, they are more then willing to make the deal.

So, I think in order to change the overall culture, the current culture has to be fully exposed. I think the short-term damage can be minimized by properly writing the article (i.e., overall the games appear to be fair, but like any sport these days, there are small segments of cheaters, and we as a community have to police ourselves and do everything we can to make the games fair). But in the end, I think transparency and forthrightness is what are going to change the perception of poker in general, not quietly looking the other way when major sites sign known former cheaters.

[gobbomom]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]



[ QUOTE ]
Your input thus far has basically been "OH MY GOD DON'T HURT MY EV!"

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, this is just downright insulting . Care to actually read my writings as opposed to just blindly stating I'm all about my own financial interests?

I don't need to state twice that I'm about changing things, but yet again, "I feel that writing an article is not the best way to go". The fact that this translates in your brain that since the reply comes from a young online poker player it must be all about his own financial interests is laughable. I happen to also care about the reputation of poker, since as is I shy away from talking about my work to my friends and family. The last thing I need is another negative connotation about gambling coming from the government or the press to further ensure that what I do constitues something "wrong", and "immoral". Also consider the EV taken away from well-to-do online professionals that don't involve themselves in games that involve this "cheating" at all.



I would say that implying that my arguments are only served to my own benefits

[/ QUOTE ]


wow, awesome Clayton. That's what I was trying to convey concerning the viewpoints directed towards Jimmy and failed at miserably. Thank you for your eloquence.

[Exitonly]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
fwiw, i've really agreed with clayton and adanthar reading through the thread. but also agree w/ ucla that something must be done, but i dont really knnow what that can be, besides us all pointing fingers at jjprodigy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Part of what also irks me is the "defense" of ZeeJustin ("he learned his lesson" etc.). I pretty much got over it awhile ago, only to read ZeeJustin bragging about signing a deal with Bodog. I couldn't believe it when I read this, both in that Justin apparently could care less that the whole thing is going to be brought up again, and that Bodog would be so stupid as to sign a player with his history. This is what I mean when I say the sites just don't care about the cheating. They will make a passing effort, sure, if something is blatant, but in the end it is all about bottom line, and if they think Justin even with all his history is worth getting "Bodog" on television at a final table, they are more then willing to make the deal.

So, I think in order to change the overall culture, the current culture has to be fully exposed. I think the short-term damage can be minimized by properly writing the article (i.e., overall the games appear to be fair, but like any sport these days, there are small segments of cheaters, and we as a community have to police ourselves and do everything we can to make the games fair). But in the end, I think transparency and forthrightness is what are going to change the perception of poker in general, not quietly looking the other way when major sites sign known former cheaters.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't think that ZJ signing that deal with bodog should ahve pissed you off as much (or at all) liek it seems to have done.

also, do you think writing this article is going to stop anyone from multiaccounting? is jjprodigy going to read your article and feel terrible for what he's done? I think more likely answer is that they'll all keep doing it, and now some of the fish will get ideas about how to cheat.

Now i'm not saying that we shouldnt expose the cheating for fear that people will get ideas, but i just don't see any positives to this article. If the sites could actually implement something to stop this behavior as a result of the article, then maybe i'd agree with it.

I think Jeff's post a few weeks ago was actually kind of a good idea, policing it in our own groups might be one of the only ways to get this behavior stopped. Maybe some kind of reward system like the IRS uses could supply insentive for people to speak up.

I dunno, i don't know the right answer, but i dont think you've explain why ou think exposing this will work. You've said that we're afraid of hurting our bottom line to help the game in the long run, but just how will it get helped in the long run?

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
I am all for being educated that this problem is not as bad in scope as I was lead to believe be "he is always right" Adanthar, who made it sound like this is a massive problem but has offered nothing in the way of solution and, as far as I am aware, done nothing to address the problem. I have asked him to clarify with specifics as to what he learned in Vegas that caused him to make this statement, but he has thus far been unwilling to offer any specifics.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not a poker site, so I've got no specifics - most of what can be done 'technically' is on their end. most of what can be done 'socially' is already done. you might not have known about this before Vegas, just like me and everybody else, but you certainly do now. the rest is putting pressure on other people in HSNL/HSMTT (because this is a pretty insular group) to either stop or get outed.

[for the record, the only multiaccounting name I know about and have proof of right now is...JJProdigy. lols.]

[uclabruinz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am all for being educated that this problem is not as bad in scope as I was lead to believe be "he is always right" Adanthar, who made it sound like this is a massive problem but has offered nothing in the way of solution and, as far as I am aware, done nothing to address the problem. I have asked him to clarify with specifics as to what he learned in Vegas that caused him to make this statement, but he has thus far been unwilling to offer any specifics.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not a poker site, so I've got no specifics - most of what can be done 'technically' is on their end. most of what can be done 'socially' is already done. you might not have known about this before Vegas, just like me and everybody else, but you certainly do now. the rest is putting pressure on other people in HSNL/HSMTT (because this is a pretty insular group) to either stop or get outed.

[for the record, the only multiaccounting name I know about and have proof of right now is...JJProdigy. lols.]

[/ QUOTE ]

I am asking (again) for specifics about the extent of the problem. What specifically did you learn in Vegas? Some here are saying it's not a big deal, some like you are saying it's huge. Whether or not it is a big deal greatly effects whether I write an article, get further involved, etc.