Absolute Soulreading/Rigged thread #3

[krumeluren]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If i interpret your results correctly, under the assumptions your model is correct, if you have 100.000 streaks of 100 hands each, one of those will show a win rate of 284bb/100 just by chance? How many hands are there in ppls PT-databases (which would be the population) and what is the probability that every once in a while we will find a maniac with those winnings without cheating?


[/ QUOTE ]
I edited my post, because I'm not used to the 1 in x thinking. The chance to run that good is 1 in 20 million hands actually, because the other time you will be on the losing side. The player I used for this analysis has won more than 1 million this year on pokerstars so far on 25/50 NL.

[ QUOTE ]
And what if you increase the standard deviation a little? I mean, this kind of maniac could have a SD of 100 right? That would make it even more probable that such good streak could occur right?

EDIT: I just saw that the had a SD of 270ptbb/100 and that it was 190 hands. That will give completely different estimates. It would be very interesting if you could present a new analysis with those paramters.


[/ QUOTE ]
The sample size of 5 100 hand intervalls is just too small to provide any meaningfull result. However if you calculate it for 400, 500, 300, 1000 and 400 bb/100 hand classes using the one outlier of 1000, we get a mean of 520, a standard deviation of 277.5 and a 90% chance that the bb/100 lies between 63.5 and 1777.9 bb/100 for any 100 hand intervall. If we don't use the outlier and only 400, 500, 300, 400 we get a mean of 400, a standard deviation of 81.6 and a 90% chance that the bb/100 for a 100 hand intervall lies between 265.7 and 534.3 bb/100.

[ QUOTE ]
your model also assumes that winnings are normally distributed. Do you think this is a good assumption and in what way do you think violations th normality would affect the estimated probabilities?


[/ QUOTE ]

I just assumed that it was a normal distribution and after checking it actually is one. Here is the graph:



[ QUOTE ]

My guessing is that you will find a very high probabbility that such streak would occur in ppls PT databases, more than once.

[/ QUOTE ]
On heads-up NL 25/50 a 284bb/100 hand intervall is possible every 20 million hands. However to get a 481bb/100 hand intervall you have to look at approximately 2000 trillion hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the update. There is a big problem though with your approach that you might not have thought about.

Your are trying to estimate a persons win rate from a small sample of hand where he obviously runs extremely hot. This means that the cards did not fall in a very representative manner and your confidence interval is only valid when you hit your cards that good.

I suggest that you use another approach instead. Say that this person has a negative expected winning of -20ptbb/100 with a SD of 270ptbb. What are the probability that such a player makes 284ptbb/100 in 190 hands? And when you have that probability, try to estimate the probability that such person could be found in the poker community's collective PT-.DBase for High stakes poker.

[pineapple888]

Post deleted by pineapple888

[pineapple888]

Enough with the earn rate stuff!

It's enough to cause some suspicion, but not relevant to the main argument, which is HOW he got there, which is where we get the 10^20 estimate.

If it was just "ZOMG THIS DONKEY RAN HOT!!!!!!111!!!1!!!" this whole thing would have been over after about 5 minutes.

[krumeluren]

[ QUOTE ]
Enough with the earn rate stuff!

It's enough to cause some suspicion, but not relevant to the main argument, which is HOW he got there, which is where we get the 10^20 estimate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting approach, I have read several post that suggest their main argument for believing this is a cheat is the earn rate together with river aggression. Thats what they consider the best proof to prove a cheat beyond a reasonable doubt. But you don't think so obviously.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Enough with the earn rate stuff!

It's enough to cause some suspicion, but not relevant to the main argument, which is HOW he got there, which is where we get the 10^20 estimate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting approach, I have read several post that suggest their main argument for believing this is a cheat is the earn rate together with river aggression. Thats what they consider the best proof to prove a cheat beyond a reasonable doubt. But you don't think so obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

The win rate is the smoke, the river aggression is the fire.

[krumeluren]

[ QUOTE ]
The win rate is the smoke, the river aggression is the fire.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, but river aggression can just be the result of an idiot donk saying to himself I will try a new approach for a few hundred hands, I will never call a river bet.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The win rate is the smoke, the river aggression is the fire.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, but river aggression can just be the result of an idiot donk saying to himself I will try a new approach for a few hundred hands, I will never call a river bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

And get it right 50 times in a row, the first time he tries this brilliant strategy, after moving up 100x in stakes? Please.

[cracks]

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.

[Chump Change]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Enough with the earn rate stuff!

It's enough to cause some suspicion, but not relevant to the main argument, which is HOW he got there, which is where we get the 10^20 estimate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting approach, I have read several post that suggest their main argument for believing this is a cheat is the earn rate together with river aggression. Thats what they consider the best proof to prove a cheat beyond a reasonable doubt. But you don't think so obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

The win rate is the smoke, the river aggression is the fire.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you, pineapple, thank you. I might even clarify further to say, 'The win rate is the smoke, the river aggression coupled with the showdown percentage is the fire.'

I know you guys are versed in advanced statistics but save your energy, it's all practically moot if you don't somehow factor in the latter.

[FellKnight]

Repost from another forum:

Dear Mr. xxxxxxxx,

Thank you for contacting us.

We have been following the forums closely and are aware of your concern.

First, we’d like to assure you that a ‘super-user’ account does not exist. Absolute Poker was created by poker players who value security and fair play. The backend of the Absolute Poker software makes it impossible for such an account to function. Our game client only receives data regarding an individual’s hand and no other player hole cards are ever visible – by anyone – except in the event of a showdown.

We have temporarily frozen the accounts of the players in question while we continue our extensive investigation. At this point, we have found no evidence of wrongdoing. However, given the seriousness of these allegations, our investigation will go on.

Our fraud department has combed through all hands involving the accounts that were mentioned in the online forum. Please note that the examples mentioned in the forum present only a small snapshot of each player’s activity. Our ongoing investigation continues to show that the long-term success rates of these players aren’t in line with what the forum suggests.

Fair play and security are as important to Absolute Poker management and staff as they are to our players. Our fraud department is dedicated to ensuring that everyone on the site has a fair opportunity to win. We stand by the results of our random number generator and we take great pride in
our game client security.

Absolute Poker remains a 100% secure place to play. We value all of our players and we will continue to provide our community with a safe, secure and exciting online poker experience.

Thank you, once again, for your email. If we can be of any other assistance, please don’t hesitate to contact us.

Thanks for playing at Absolute Poker!
Sincerely,

Alexa

Well no [censored] the long term results don't pan out. That's the whole point. These players were big losers until they learned how to cheat!

Is Absolute seriously examining hands from months ago?

WTF.

Fell