Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Poker Discussion > Poker Beats, Brags, and Variance

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #821  
Old 09-21-2007, 09:31 AM
Wolfskin Wolfskin is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 39
Default Re: Absolute Cheating

Call me paranoid, but I do believe that all the posts here in defense of Absolute are coming from the same person. Certain accounts suggested I should use a standard deviation of 270 instead of 65 that I got from a winning player on pokerstars. They also suggested that I should use a t-distribution. Citation: "The t-distribution copes with uncertainty resulting from estimating the standard deviation from a sample, whereas if the population standard deviation were known, a normal distribution would be used." No one really seemed to know about statistics in this forum except drag who made some correct estimates and some other accounts that all were implying all the time by responding to each other that I should use a standard deviation of 270 instead of 65. Of course if you use a standard deviation that high the results get a lot more probable.

After spotting NobleNobleNoble's post I saw that flight2q was the first to suggest a STD of 270 after which krumeluren posted some more suggestions. Then I found out that all these accounts directly respond to each other to get a discussion going. Maybe this is the only way to have some fun doing this kind of job. I'll post some conversations, and interesting stuff I noticed.

Now we all already know that

DOUBLEDRAG = GRAYCAT = POTRIPPER = STEAMROLLER = PAYUP

MTT winnings:
POTRIPPER $30,000.00
STEAMROLLER $22,338.00
PAYUP $35,700.00

I believe that the huge number of last positions is just to get their average finish position down and stay under the radar.

but how about this

flight2q = Trogdor! = dragonystic = krumeluren = FellKnight


some posts of flight2q in other threads:

FTP Down?
[ QUOTE ]

I'm at 375.00 BB/100 today.


[/ QUOTE ]
9 Handed 150/300 Absolute
[ QUOTE ]

That's a sucker bet. Simple logic tells us he was called. baronzeus says he thinks it was a bluff, but not sure. So that means he didn't bluff-and-show it. And yet, I knew his cards. Hence, he must have been called. QED
(baronzeus called)


[/ QUOTE ]
Congratulations WPEX on dumbest improvement ever
[ QUOTE ]

Call me paranoid, but this looks like a typical scam. Drive people to the tables with no hand histories, then cheat the players.


[/ QUOTE ]

dragonystic:
[ QUOTE ]

calvinhobbes was a high stakes reg before he won the bbj. He hit it at a 15/30 table i believe.

I also don't think he got raped afterwards. He final tabled the $150k a week later.


[/ QUOTE ]
No one knew this except you.

Schneids: this game looks painful, he's taking max-time every decision.
Baronzeus: he wasnt doing this before. not sure why hes being so disrespectful

calvinhobbes pockertracker stats

This correlates to the guys in the guaranteed tourneys who took 5 seconds preflop to make a decision. Maybe he just turned on x-ray vision. I also find it suspicious that a jackpot would be won on 15/30, considering how many 15/30 hands are played per hour compared to lower stakes. His increasing aggression factor is one more thing to think about. No winning player has similar stats, because usually you have to protect your hand on the flop. So your flop aggression factor will be higher than the turn and river aggression factor where you have to be right a higher percentage of the time to make a bet or raise profitable because of the bigger betting size. Aggression Factor is calculated as: (Raise % + Bet %) / Call %


to understand the next one you must have read this first
[ QUOTE ]

Ok only once in my mind did I ever think its possible that people new what was going to come up or could see whole cards etc. I was playing the 100 f.o. in the afternoon when this guy i have never heard of comes up to me and says bigdog want to have a 1k last longer at this point i was cl I quickly looked him up on the db and he was 0-24 in multis on ap and never had a cash. But i refused the last longer anyway because i didnt no this guy. He went on to win this tourny 2 hours later he found me in the 150k for a 1k last longer again. I refused and he also won that tourny which i watched him make the most absurd moves all toury long and continue to suck out and win. It was the most bizarre thing I have ever come across. I even called AP vip to inquire about this because why would a guy who is 0-24 try to make a last longer with a person who is usually ontop of the tlb for 1k and he then goes onto win both tournys. I wish i could remember this guys name but the fact is i cant. Anyway read what you want into all that but it was defenetly extreamly bizarre.


bigdogpckt5s


[/ QUOTE ]

dragonystic
[ QUOTE ]

if you are so darn sure why not make some money off it. $500 side bet with me?

if its proven they could see hole cards, you win the $500
if its proven they couldnt see hole cards, i win the $500
if its inconclusive after its all said and done, bet is off

book it?


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

*shrugs* just forget the bet. i think it will be too difficult to set good terms on everything. a lot of grey areas. i really wish i could book this bet though. ah well.


[/ QUOTE ]
Trogdor!
[ QUOTE ]

i would book that bet but im busto ldo

most likely outcome would be a push but there is a very small chance of me winning

f it ill book that bet busto, very little risk from my end imo


[/ QUOTE ]
dragonystic
[ QUOTE ]

book it

my dragon is also > then yours


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

i dunno how to put the pic in here correctly, but here is a link


PT 200bb/100


im not saying this proves anything, but there were some weird hands in there that i bet people thought were signs that i knew what the community cards would be or some other bs.

why is everyone on here so mean?


[/ QUOTE ]
Now look at how much he knows about statistics:

flight2q
[ QUOTE ]

Drag, just so you know, Doubledrag's standard deviation was around 260 PTBB/100 in that 190-hand sample, and he won about 470 PTBB. Even if you think the loss rate should be -20 PTBB/100, the result is within 2 standard deviations.


[/ QUOTE ]
krumeluren
[ 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?

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?

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?


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.

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


[/ QUOTE ]
Trogdor!
[ QUOTE ]

krum the only reason we cant discount the 190 hands stats is because the sample size is only 2 (if we are counting via 100 hand samples) which is the lowest possible and has a huge rejection region and i dont have a SD but only a couple hundred more would be enough if it was a sustanined winrate (which it is if all of the pt screenshots are compiled together)

this is ofc not counting the river af and HH's which decrease the probability exponatially. The fact that we can even get close to rejecting the stats with 95% confidence with a high sd and very low sample size is ridiculous in itself seeing as 90/70 is not common at HS games which are uncommon themselves

it just keeps compounding and compounding until we get to a ridic prob like 10^20:1 as stated somewhere else


[/ QUOTE ]
flight2q
[ QUOTE ]

@Trogdor!: We don't know that his standard deviation is less than 260 PTBB/100. Go ahead and toss it into a t-distribution if you want, the results won't be spectacular. For those people wanting to post stats, keep in mind that the distribution for an individual hand is not normal. You might want to use a distribution-free method instead.


[/ QUOTE ]
Trogdor!
[ QUOTE ]

also the stat analysis is the probability of wolfs phantom pro not DOUBLEDRAG so isn't really relevant as DOUBLEDRAGS sd would be much higher

DD play 90/70 so we should get a good estimate from a pro at what bb/100 mean he SHOULD be at or what we think it SHOULD be at assuming he is not cheating (the more conservatite the better ie highest estimate) then hypothesist test the sample we have. My bet is hes bb/100 falls about a million points outside the rejection region


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

ok going by drags estimate of -20bb and DD rakes up 470bb with a sd of 270 over a sample size of 2. We would have to do a t-distribution as degree of freedom =1 and also@ (moron who thinks he isnt cheating) hes actual sd is going to be much lower then 270 obv


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

ok SD of 270 has to be wrong

could somone give the SD for all the PT stats on the first page??


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

if we could compile all of DD's HH (bar chipdumping) into 1 database and get the SD there should be enough as the df would be about 3 or 4 which would be enough.


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

theres no way a hacker could be getting the hands without some sort of backdoor (otherwise why not just hack a bank or federal reserve or w/e else schemes that make you billions not thousands). Thats why it has to be an inside job or a flaw in AP's program or such

And im just trying to show that DD's winrate =/ (doesnot equal) 90/70 winrate at a highstakes game

if i could show that then there is 0 chance its not cheating
as i am not factoring in the river af or suspect HH


[/ QUOTE ]
krumeluren
[ QUOTE ]

I just say that you are making too much out of a small piece of data from a very large population with high variance.


[/ QUOTE ]
Trogdor!
[ QUOTE ]

Dragon

Probability that such comprehensive evidence is just variance < Probabilty that someone has a superuser account

Considering that it is virtually impossible that someone has a superuser account, you should now understand how statistically unlikely that this is just variance, and why we are acting like it is written in stone


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Companys make million dollar decisions everyday on data collected in small sample sizes because enough information can still be calculated and larger samples are unrealistic or too expensive to obtain


[/ QUOTE ]
FellKnight
[ QUOTE ]

I think Lederer answered this question in his opinion once. He said that a WCP who knew his opponent's hole cards (and that they didn't know that he knew) would win any given $10k tournament 95% of the time.


[/ QUOTE ]
FellKnight also made a very long response to a long post of flight2q, and of course flight2q responds in a similar fashion to FellKnight.
  #822  
Old 09-21-2007, 09:41 AM
dragonystic dragonystic is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Omelettes FTW
Posts: 1,075
Default Re: Absolute Cheating

[ QUOTE ]
Call me paranoid, but I do believe that all the posts here in defense of Absolute are coming from the same person.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
dragonystic:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


calvinhobbes was a high stakes reg before he won the bbj. He hit it at a 15/30 table i believe.

I also don't think he got raped afterwards. He final tabled the $150k a week later.



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


No one knew this except you.

[/ QUOTE ]

damnit, you caught me.
  #823  
Old 09-21-2007, 09:47 AM
dragonystic dragonystic is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Omelettes FTW
Posts: 1,075
Default Re: Absolute Cheating

[ QUOTE ]
but how about this

flight2q = Trogdor! = dragonystic = krumeluren = FellKnight


[/ QUOTE ]

rofl, i missed this one. brilliant!
  #824  
Old 09-21-2007, 09:52 AM
darkcore darkcore is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ticky-tacky boxes
Posts: 813
Default Re: Absolute Cheating

i think you are a bit paranoid. but let a mod do a ip-check.
  #825  
Old 09-21-2007, 09:55 AM
dragonystic dragonystic is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Omelettes FTW
Posts: 1,075
Default Re: Absolute Cheating

[ QUOTE ]
i think you are a bit paranoid. but let a mod do a ip-check.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes and please post results so these tinfoil fanatics keep their 'theories' to themselves

or was that uberpost a giant level? i couldnt tell.
  #826  
Old 09-21-2007, 09:56 AM
ChrisV ChrisV is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 5,104
Default Re: Absolute Cheating

lol, brilliant theory Wolfskin. You clearly have an amazingly incisive mind. To the untutored eye, it might look like your theories are a heap of paranoid [censored] because all those users except flight2q signed up before the AP scandal broke, FellKnight for example signing up over two years ago. But don't let that stop you. All you need to do is work a little time travel into the theory and we'll be back in business.
  #827  
Old 09-21-2007, 10:01 AM
dragonystic dragonystic is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Omelettes FTW
Posts: 1,075
Default Re: Absolute Cheating

its not that i can travel through time. that would be preposterous.

im actually psychic.
  #828  
Old 09-21-2007, 10:03 AM
Gildwulf Gildwulf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Blogging
Posts: 20,307
Default Re: Absolute Cheating

Guys, stop sidetracking the thread. Anyone who continues this sidetrack is going to get a timeout. Focus on the issue at hand.
  #829  
Old 09-21-2007, 10:09 AM
Oski Oski is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 2,230
Default Re: Absolute Cheating

[ QUOTE ]
Call me paranoid, ...

[/ QUOTE ]

As the thread grows, the real story is in danger of collapsing on itself.

I think that at this point, the only reasonable interpretation of the facts is that AP's server has been breached and that there are at least 5 related accounts that have taken advantage of that.

Of course, such could have happened before and/or the scope of the breach could be much larger to include "competent" cheaters who have not been smoked out by their PT stats, etc.

At this point, unless real, hard evidence surfaces to expand the "story" the focus should now be on how/when AP responds (if at all) and what ultimately should be done about the situation.

Otherwise, if we want to turn this whole thing into a witch hunt, that's what we will ultimately have.
  #830  
Old 09-21-2007, 10:09 AM
dragonystic dragonystic is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Omelettes FTW
Posts: 1,075
Default Re: Absolute Cheating

ughh

Beat: someone makes a ridiculous accusation against me and i get [censored] for humorously defending myself
Brag: i had sushi for breakfast this morning
Variance: this forum of late

this is BBV right?
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.