Absolute Soulreading/Rigged thread #3

[Injection]

I hope there's a good supply of grease out there, I think I will be starting some fires in the not-too-distant future.

Plz live through them.

[ibluffoldladies]

If the Kahnawake setup is a front, shouldn't that make people more suspicious of shady activity? There is no recourse for online poker players. You can't sue, you can't do anything, and you sure as hell can't call other people fish with this knowledge because you're the one they have on the hook.

[Marnixvdb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is how often he could be expected to play perfectly with an infinite river aggression.

[/ QUOTE ]

People also wants to believe that this guy plays several hundred hands perfectly. But to know he played perfectly we must also must know he never folded the best hand and ideally that he had 100% showdown winnings (or that we know for sure that he lost only with a bluff which might be hard with a guy that may think his T high is good).

edit: I also beleive that all estimates of playing perfectly on the river will have a very large uncertainty in them because IT is exremely difficult to models it taking into account hole cards, prior betting and board texture.
If the stimates are based on a random board, they will be way off for someone that runs hot.

[/ QUOTE ]

The same guy that, in a 190 hands stretch, never showed down a losing hand calling a riverbet (since he never called unless opponent was allin and in those cases he always won, save one exception), started calling some huge bets on the river with the worst possible hands (with one call he loses to 6 high on 25xxx, he had 34) after the alleged cheating was exposed.

Under you assumption this could all be coincidence.

So your assumption is that a player who will sometimes call with the worst possible hand on the river, can randomly have a 190 hand stretch where he never calls the river with a losing hand because he is running hot?

edit: corrected some grammar

[krumeluren]

[ QUOTE ]
man stop saying that people wants to believe. They don't and you don't have good arguments to say they do. At least, I'm still waiting to hear them from you.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of people wants to believe in conspiracy theories. Thats old news. But in this thread, the most compelling evidence for the fact that people wants to believe is that they immediately dismiss any sound questioning me and others make of the assumptions behind the rigged theory and instead choose to believe in ridiculous estimates and sometimes clearly after the fact explanations of any event that does not fit the conspiracy theory.

There is very little critical reflection in this thread because people wants to believe.

[FellKnight]

[ QUOTE ]
There is very little critical reflection in this thread because people wants to believe.

[/ QUOTE ]

There have been 3 megathreads on the issue already. The "critical reflection" was mainly completed by the end of the first thread.

Some of us know that the case has already been proven beyond reasonable doubt and get bored when new posters repeatedly ask the same old questions and want the same old explanations without having read the source material.

Fell

edit: I approached the first thread with the mindset of "oh god, here we go again". I was ready to dismiss the accusations out of hand but the evidence was far too compelling. I most certainly did not and do not "want to believe"

[Marnixvdb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
man stop saying that people wants to believe. They don't and you don't have good arguments to say they do. At least, I'm still waiting to hear them from you.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of people wants to believe in conspiracy theories. Thats old news.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not on here. These types of theories / threads have always been shattered to pieces.

[ QUOTE ]
But in this thread, the most compelling evidence for the fact that people wants to believe is that they immediately dismiss any sound questioning me and others

[/ QUOTE ]

They are not dismissing it because they want to believe, they are dismissing it because the points you bring up have been brouight up by others much earlier already and have all been countered directly by the evidence or through analysis

[ QUOTE ]
make of the assumptions behind the rigged theory and instead choose to believe in ridiculous estimates and sometimes clearly after the fact explanations of any event that does not fit the conspiracy theory.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's not a rigged theory and the people bringing up the evidence have always been the first to question its validity and to look for counterarguments

[ QUOTE ]
There is very little critical reflection in this thread because people wants to believe.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah there is always noise but if you look at the core of the threads, this is absolutely not true

[krumeluren]

[ QUOTE ]
Under you assumption this could all be coincidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you hit the nail on the head there. Yes, I think that possibility has been overlooked and the current estimates this possibility are not very good.

High stakes poker hands are probably among the most analyzed data i the world because all high stakes players likes to analyze their game. They look for (among other things) suspicious behavior, big losers and big winners and they try to find an edge in the game. This means that all the data generated at high stakes poker tables over the years compile a huge dataset with an extreme variance due to the nature of poker. If you take a huge dataset you will always find extreme outliers if you look for them. Always. To be honest, I would be more surprised if this would never happen by chance. And when it happens, I can guarantee that a High Stakes poker pro will find it and post it to the boards. ANd I think that might just have happened. But I don't know, all I know is that the evidence so far is not convincing enough.

[suzzer99]

[ QUOTE ]
If the Kahnawake setup is a front, shouldn't that make people more suspicious of shady activity? There is no recourse for online poker players. You can't sue, you can't do anything, and you sure as hell can't call other people fish with this knowledge because you're the one they have on the hook.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also candy is sweet and puppies are cute.

[ibluffoldladies]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the Kahnawake setup is a front, shouldn't that make people more suspicious of shady activity? There is no recourse for online poker players. You can't sue, you can't do anything, and you sure as hell can't call other people fish with this knowledge because you're the one they have on the hook.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also candy is sweet and puppies are cute.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you really blame me for stating the obvious? Look at the number of people posting who aren't convinced.

[FellKnight]

[ QUOTE ]
This means that all the data generated at high stakes poker tables over the years compile a huge dataset with an extreme variance due to the nature of poker. If you take a huge dataset you will always find extreme outliers if you look for them. Always.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude. There have probably been fewer than 1,000 players in history at these stakes with these types of stats (preflop/raise/RiverAF)

Fell