high stakes absolute players

[pokerchap]

a lot of this stuff is extremely worthless. the only way to find out is if someone has a real decent sample... they are obv. smart enough to log SOME losing sessions... if you have them breaking even over like 500 hands it means NOTHING

[Adebisi]

That street bt street AF's for STEAMROLLER are insane 3/4/5/13. For those with a fair amount of hands on him: Has he ever called on the river? It looks like pretty much all of his lost showdowns either go check/check, or he bluff's and gets called down light.

[Schneids]

My basic contention is it is IMPOSSIBLE for somebody to play the way he plays preflop, and to combine it with the way he plays postflop. If someone were to play that style preflop, with those showdown stats, they should be losing a TON because they are simply too often putting money into the pot and then folding when either they have odds to draw, or the winning hand (basically, think of it as Graycat/whoever else has having a forced ante, and nobody else does). The only way he can be crushing, like he has, with these stats is if he sees that his second pair/3rd pair/ace high is best and he ram and jams max value, and then he saves tons of bets by folding hands when he's drawing slim or dead post flop. Basically, it's like he makes every flop/turn/river decision perfectly when he has high cards or crappy pairs -- simply NOT possible.

[bicyclekick]

I'm still not convinced but that 13 aggression factor is kinda messed up and the most damning piece of evidence.

[DEAD ON IMPACT]

Well WE will really never be able to PROVE that these players are cheating and can only look at so many hands to evaluate play that doesn't seem possible without further knowledge of their opponents hands. Only real way to show really convincing evidence is if we could see their folded hands. If their folding 2nd, 3rd pair, to top pair etc. or any other big hands when they would be the loser. It's an obvious assumption that they had ability to know when to fold by seeing the other players hand.


We will have to let AP do their work but even if they did find something out that could reflect the aligations i'm betting know way AP lets it's players know because that would really ruin it's reputation as a secure site.

[Adebisi]

[ QUOTE ]

Well WE will really never be able to PROVE that these players are cheating and can only look at so many hands to evaluate play that doesn't seem possible without further knowledge of their opponents hands. Only real way to show really convincing evidence is if we could see their folded hands. If their folding 2nd, 3rd pair, to top pair etc. or any other big hands when they would be the loser. It's an obvious assumption that they had ability to know when to fold by seeing the other players hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

If people could put together a sample of 20k+ hands on each these guys and they NEVER get to showdown against really strong hands, I think that would be damn good evidence that they're making these kind of folds.

[DEAD ON IMPACT]

I know this is the limit forum but i have to post another nl hand. Here it is...I can't see a player making these plays and being up 300k in a week.

STAGE #753361340: HOLDEM NO LIMIT $30 - 2007-09-04 17:27:15 (ET)
Table: ALHAMBRA (Real Money) Seat #3 is the dealer
Seat 3 - HEro ($6881 in chips)
Seat 4 - THE GRINDER ($5970 in chips)
Seat 5 - DOUBLEDRAG ($21702 in chips)
Seat 2 - DTON21 ($1110 in chips)
THE GRINDER - Posts small blind $15
DOUBLEDRAG - Posts big blind $30
*** POCKET CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [10d 3c]
DTON21 - Folds
hero - Folds
THE GRINDER - Raises $135 to $150
DOUBLEDRAG - Calls $120
*** FLOP *** [As 4h 8s]
THE GRINDER - Bets $180
DOUBLEDRAG - Calls $180
*** TURN *** [As 4h 8s] [6d]
THE GRINDER - Checks
DOUBLEDRAG - Checks
*** RIVER *** [As 4h 8s 6d] [5d]
THE GRINDER - Checks
DOUBLEDRAG - Bets $5550
THE GRINDER - All-In(Raise) $5640 to $5640
DOUBLEDRAG - Folds
THE GRINDER - returned ($90) : not called
*** SHOW DOWN ***
THE GRINDER - Does not show
THE GRINDER Collects $11758 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total Pot($11760) | Rake ($2)
Board [As 4h 8s 6d 5d]
Seat 2: DTON21 Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 3: hero (dealer) Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 4: THE GRINDER (small blind) collected Total ($11758) All-In HI$11758) [Does not show]
Seat 5: DOUBLEDRAG (big blind) Folded on the RIVER



Fold 90 into a 11.5k pot? Looks like he miss read his opponents hand [img]/images/graemlins/ooo.gif[/img]

[Abbaddabba]

super high river AF is the scariest part to me.

those street by street AFs are exactly what you'd expect to find from someone who could see others hole cards.


[ QUOTE ]
Fold 90 into a 11.5k pot? Looks like he miss read his opponents hand

[/ QUOTE ]

Or the miz rebluffed for $90 more with J high while doubledrag had 10 high.

[Dan Druff]

I've played a whole lot on AP this year, especially over the summer.

Oddly enough, I missed out on most of the Greycat/Supercard/etc. games due to sheer coincidences of timing (basically I'd be out or sleeping when he'd show up). Still, I played about 10 sessions with the guy, including one heads up, and noticed exactly what everyone else is noticing:

1) His hand selection pre-flop is so bad (especially 9 handed) that he should be losing a fortune against the top-flight players he's been facing. Instead, he's been winning big almost every session.

2) It is very rare that he will fold if you miss the flop.

3) When you are holding a huge hand, he folds often.

Basically, yes, he plays like someone who can see your cards. But that's nothing new to anyone on this thread. I've played against legitimate players who have run so well that I'd swear they could see my hand if I didn't know better. We've also all seen examples of huge donks running up amazing short-term streaks that we never thought were possible -- including odd plays that leave us scratching our heads.

So what's the difference here? Perhaps nothing, perhaps something. But the evidence we've seen so far, some anecdotal, others more damning, makes this worth another look.

Before I go on, I can confirm that Greycat, Supercard, and the other suspect accounts posted here ARE indeed the same person. This isn't an assumption or a guess. It's a fact. PM me if you want me to explain this part further.

So we have this Greycat person playing on multiple accounts -- sometimes chipdumping between them -- and playing the highest games Absolute Poker has to offer. He plays both limit and no limit, yet top regular players from both games report the same suspicious experience with him.

He has won a ton of money (does anyone have the exact figures?), and rarely seems to lose.

If he is cheating, I think I know how he's doing it.

Long before Greycat showed up, there was some concern that AP had a "superuser" account, created by its software developers. This account, created strictly for testing purposes, would be able to see all cards of all players in all games. As a software programmer by trade, I can tell you that such an account would be very helpful in the development and testing process for a complicated piece of software like AP. I referred to there being "some concern" that such an account exists. I say this because I have some circumstantial evidence (which I can't share in public) that this is true, but I don't have any proof. Furthermore, prior to this Greycat situation, I had no reason to believe that this account ever fell into the wrong hands.

But what if it did fall into the wrong hands? Perhaps someone could have hacked it. Perhaps a rogue ex-developer of the software could have passed some info along to an accomplice. Perhaps a lot of things.

The fact is that, if Greycat did get access to such an account, he'd pretty much be doing exactly what he's doing now. Yes, maybe some subtlety would have done him better (so as to avoid this suspicion), but history is full of criminals whose otherwise brilliant capers were foiled by just a bit too much greed.

It's time to stop guessing and get some answers here. Obviously AP will never admit their system was compromised, even if it were true. That would pretty much be the equivalent of poker room suicide. We need to put together a concrete plan of action to either prove this guy is a fraud, or prove to ourselves that we're a bunch of paranoid fools. Either way, we need to prove something. In the next post, I'll give my suggestions on what I feel we should do next.

[Dan Druff]

Since no poker site would ever want to admit to one of its players compromising its integrity, proving this case will be difficult. It's an extreme case of "innocent until proven guilty."

We already know for a fact that Greycat chip-dumps to himself. While this is a victimless poker crime, it's still against AP's rules. Much like they nailed Al Capone on tax evasion, this could be a good starting point for his undoing. If enough of us make noise about it to AP security, we can probably get the accounts all frozen while they look into this. If they refuse, we can demand answers why it is okay for certain players to chip-dump but not others.

None of us reported the chip-dumping originally because we didn't want to see such a huge donk suspended from the site. Now, obviously, seeing him suspended would probably be a better idea. The WORST thing that could happen would be him feeling satisfied (or scared) and successfully cashing out.

BradL mentioned that he has 700 hands with Greycat and not ONE involving Greycat folding when Brad missed the flop. That's a pretty damning piece of evidence right there. If Brad could put this together in a more direct and digestible form for AP security (and for us), that would be a pretty strong starting point.

We need everyone else to look up their Pokertracker hands for evidence of this. If we can come up with several players with many hundreds (or thousands) of hands each, and if Greycat rarely folded to an opponent's flop miss, it would be hard for AP to explain this from that standpoint alone.

Second involves the converse. That is, look for hands where you DID have a monster, and he immediately folded. If several players put together a complete collection of their hands where they were super-strong, and if Greycat played them weakly and/or folded nearly every time, that is also extremely damning. Put it together with the first, and you've got nearly irrefutable evidence of cheating.

The proof will come in the volume. If several players analyze all the hands they have with Greycat, and if the two themes above are OVERWHELMINGLY present with all of his opponents, AP will have no choice but to deal with this matter.

So how many people have access to ALL of the hands they played versus Greycat? How many have actually analyzed ALL hands and clearly noticed a major issue? When I say ALL hands, I mean ALL hands. I don't mean hand-picking a few really suspicious ones. I'm talking about quantifying it where you can say, "I had 98 monsters and he gave little-to-no action on 95 of them, while I missed 343 times and he folded against me in just 15 of them."

If enough people can put quantifiable evidence like that together, we'll have a real case.