My First, And Perhaps Only, Statement About Absolute

[Hattifnatt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A wise man once said,
"Every time you play a hand differently than the way you would play it if you could see all of your opponent’s cards, they gain. Every time you play your hand the same way you would if you could see your opponent’s hand you gain. The same principle applies to your opponents."
Guess who?

[/ QUOTE ]

Laugh. Hard.

[/ QUOTE ]

[GinaSD]

[ QUOTE ]
First let me thank phzon for his crystal clear summary in the other thread.

Anway, this stuff doesn't horrify me the way it does some of you. My 59 years in this world have taught me that the majority of people who don't do wrong, at least as far as money is concerned, choose that honest path only because it is the better play. In other words most people won't pass up unfair advantages if they can get away with it.

So rather than being shocked, one should strive to put themselves in positions where those who could cheat you think it is in their best interests not to. Don't trust people to be honest. Trust them to do what is in their best interests. Make exceptions of course. But not with poker players you hardly know.

…….later……

As far as what should be done now, I say do what is your own best interest. Don't worry if Absolute was cheating you or lying to you or was simply incompetant. Most likely all of that has changed. What apparantly hasn't changed however is that they still don't have software to pick up on cheating. So if you are a cheater or colluder you should rush right over there. If you are not, do what is best for you. Don't make it a matter of principle. You are not going to put them out of business regardless. And it is still not clear whether they deserve it or whether that would be in the best interests of internet poker in general.

When I play poker I always factor in a very small chance that I might get cheated. You should too. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't play. As long as the profit motive is your main motive. Many of the best players are not playing at Absolute right now. The games are probably juicier and Absolute is probably bending over backwards to entice you to go there. This isn't the Civil Rights Movement. We are talking about internet poker. If you think you can win more there, as long as you remain vigilent and are a bit quicker to quit when you are losing then normal, I say go for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

That there was cheating does not horify me either. Glad we have that in common.

However, the attempted cover up, denials, and attack on Dan Druff by AP shill Seif, does.

Ok, so what would make it in the best interest of Absolute Poker resolving the cheating issue? It would appear that they have not decided to have an honest organization because it is the “better play”, so what to do? It appears to me what is important to AP, is our money- be it legitimately or illegitimately gained.

I completely disagree on the idea that we as individual poker players should look at our potential “individual” gain when deciding whether to play on Absolute poker. We as individuals are not worth much. Pennies of drop here, pennies of drop there—just a drop in the bucket.

We as a group of individuals are worth much, and potentially have enough value to cause those at Absolute Poker who make the key decisions regarding their honesty to determine it would be in their best interests to clean up their act.

This is one of those situations where making the “better play” individually must be balanced against making the “best play” overall. Do we choose to win the battle, while losing the war? If we stick to guiding principles of honesty, good business models, and rewarding those who will not willfully screw us over, our best play is to reward those sites who we believe also espouse those beliefs—and not to skulk back to liars, cowards, cheats—because of potential personal gain. I can think of several AP alternatives without effort- as I'm sure all of us can.

As a poker player (albeit new to online- and relatively low-stakes in B/M’s) I can tell you that in life, I do try to put myself into situations that are +EV time and again- AS LONG as it is in line with my guiding principles.

I did not have an account at AP before this debacle.

Unless this is successfully resolved with the key people who were cheated by AP, I will never have an account at AP.

I think playing on AP at the moment, before a full and complete acknowledgement and corrective action by AP is shortsighted, and counterproductive to the legitimacy of online poker as a whole. It is quite honestly disrespectful to the many many players who were likely cheated in years past- who we do NOT know about, because hand histories have vaporized.

It is disrespectful to those who were knowingly cheated, and later were referred to with derision by AP shills (notably Dan Druff).

It is disrespectful to anyone who is vested in seeing that this investigation uncovered the truth, and who believes that cheating should not be rewarded.

But ya know, you could make a few bux, so eh… screwit, right?

Bigger picture please.

[doucy]

Think of someone you hate. You have a choice between:

A. You getting $50k and that person getting $10k
B. You getting $25k and that person getting $0

If you choose B then you are a moron.

I don't get why everyone is hating on this OP.

[zen_rounder]

me thinks this adds more fuel to the fire off the "ban online poker" brigade. youll get regulated if your lucky in the usa.. AP wouldnt pass any kind of audit or test ayway if poker did get regulated. tuff spot for americans
[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[Redgrape]

[ QUOTE ]
So if you are a cheater or colluder you should rush right over there.

[/ QUOTE ]

I feel like you're going to get hammered from this but I think its a great point.

[pineapple888]

Thus, according to the Sklanksy Fundamental Theorem of Cheating, poker sites should invest exactly zero dollars in developing some near-magical anti-cheating software, because, like, who cares if you are getting cheated, because, like, you'll just go back there anyway.

[OodaThunkett]

[ QUOTE ]
to put it bluntly, unless the hand histories were not as they have been represented to me

[/ QUOTE ]

He hasn't even looked at the hands to decide for himself. How many poker players who know of the scandal at Absolute can say that they haven't even at least watched it on YouTube? But then, he probably doesn't even know the hands are on there. What complacency.

[LuckyMux]

I have decided to take your advice and do whatever is best for me, money-wise, without any consideration for anything else (the game, basic morals, my fellow players or supporting the most corrupt poker site in history).

I am therefore giving up poker and moving to Costa Rica, where I shall work as a hitman specialising in the assassination of pregnant women, blind children and puppies (regular hitmen consider this 'unethical' - I'll clean up for sure).

(Seriously, Mr Sklansky... way to take the moral high ground.)

"Never meet your heroes, you'll only be disappointed."

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
Thus, according to the Sklanksy Fundamental Theorem of Cheating, poker sites should invest exactly zero dollars in developing some near-magical anti-cheating software, because, like, who cares if you are getting cheated, because, like, you'll just go back there anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

At least so far, this appears to be one of the major conclusions of this saga. The people most likely to be affected by cheating appear to also be the ones with the least interest in seeing anything happen to sites that cheat, empirically.

[duh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


When I play poker I always factor in a very small chance that I might get cheated. You should too.

[/ QUOTE ]

So everytime we log onto a non-AP site we should be thinking "Someones probably cheating me right now."

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes that is exactally what David is saying. A++