Latest cliffsnotes on Absolute soulreading.

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
There are other factors that say would cause him to fold like an UTG raise being a likely big pair etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

that would be true of a normal player, but Adanthar's analysis doesn't show any difference in play on the basis of where the pot-opener is.

from what I can understand - and i don't have the full hand histories, only the abbreviated versions posted by adanthar - potripper's favourite play is to call and re-raise a preflop raise, regardless of its position.

eg, 1st hand on the table: UTG calls and UTG+1 raises; potripper re-raises with TT
eg, 2nd hand: UTG+1 raises; UTG+2 re-raises; potripper calls from utg+4 (and check/folds when UTG+1 hits two pair)
eg, a few hands later, UTG raises; UTG+2 calls; potripper then calls from the BB, and check-re-raises perfectly to make a perfect cold 3bet sniffing out 2 bluffs on an 8 high flop

in addition, some of the hands folded by potripper have potripper folding *before* the action of the player holding the big hand.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
Assumption: cheater plays with 90% VPIP.

In the 25 hands analysed by Adanthar (the first ones listed in the cliff notes) the cheater folds whenever another player - and only when another player - has AA, KK, QQ, JJ. There is another hand analysed, but it involves a re-raise squeeze, which is a slightly wider range, and we can ignore it for this analysis.


So - what are the chances that a player who plays 90% of hands will randomly fold the 4 precise hands that someone else has AA, KK, QQ, or JJ, and none others?

I think the mathematics can be written out like this:

.1^4 * .9^21

ie, it is .1 * .1 * .1 * .1 * .9* .9* .9* .9* .9* .9* .9 etc.
^--these are the four premium hands ^--these are the rest

chucking that into excel provides the following answer:

0.00109419% chance of occuring.

in other words, a 1 in 100,000 chance of occuring randomly.

hopefully this methodology is right. can someone who is smarter than me (ie, almost anyone) confirm or correct me?

does this then mean that we can say with 99.99890581% certainty that the cheater was cheating in these hands? the more i think about it, i think not, but i feel that there is a calculation somewhere here that would give us the probability that this was cheating - can someone who knows mathematics/statistics well chime in?

incidentally, the figures vary a bit depending on what the cheater's VPIP is. if the VPIP is .95, then there is a 0.00021285% and a 99.99978715% chance respectively. if the VPIP is .8, 0.00147574% and 99.99852426%)

[/ QUOTE ]

Well.... no.

With a VPIP of 90%, there is a 1/10 that Villain folds.

It's a little more complicated to figure out how often one of his opponents has AA-JJ, but 10% is somewhere in the neighborhood, and will make the calculations easier, and won't much effect the unlikeliness of the result.

Four possible outcomes on each hand:
Villain folds, an opponent has AA-JJ: (.1 * .1) = .01
Villain folds, an opponent doesn't have AA-JJ: (.1 * .9) = .09
Villain doesn't fold, an opponent has AA-JJ: (.9 * .1) = .09
Villain doesn't fold, an opponent doesn't have AA-JJ: (.9 * .9) = .81

Note the sum of the probabilities is 1.

Now for 25 independent events, we just multiply, so you end up with:

(.01^4) * (.81^21) = 1E-10 = 1 in 10 billion. [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

[towery]

[ QUOTE ]
There are other factors that say would cause him to fold like an UTG raise being a likely big pair etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because someone with 90 vpip clearly takes things like this into account.

[Josem]

i think your calculation is wrong because it assigns a probability to AA-JJ being dealt.

that's not a random event in this circumstance - that's what has happened, and is what we are using to test.


if AA-JJ was dealt less often in the trial, the 1 in 10 billion figure would be shorter odds. the chances of the villain cheating is not something that should logically be affected by the cards that are dealt.


hypothetical example, take one hand:
in this hand, hero is dealt JJ.

to use my calculation process, if the 90VPIP villain folded, he either:
a) happened to hit a 1 in 10 chance of correctly folding
or
b) hit a 9 in 10 chance whereby he used cheating powers to fold.
thus, i think there is a 90% chance villain is cheating.


to use your calculation process, if the 90VPIP villain folded,
Villain folds, an opponent has AA-JJ: (.1 * .1) = .01
i think this would mean there is a 99% chance villain is cheating - which i don't think makes sense.


OTOH, i've totally misunderstood what you were meaning.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
i think your calculation is wrong because it assigns a probability to AA-JJ being dealt.

that's not a random event in this circumstance - that's what has happened, and is what we are using to test.


if AA-JJ was dealt less often in the trial, the 1 in 10 billion figure would be shorter odds. the chances of the villain cheating is not something that should logically be affected by the cards that are dealt.


hypothetical example, take one hand:
in this hand, hero is dealt JJ.

to use my calculation process, if the 90VPIP villain folded, he either:
a) happened to hit a 1 in 10 chance of correctly folding
or
b) hit a 9 in 10 chance whereby he used cheating powers to fold.
thus, i think there is a 90% chance villain is cheating.


to use your calculation process, if the 90VPIP villain folded,
Villain folds, an opponent has AA-JJ: (.1 * .1) = .01
i think this would mean there is a 99% chance villain is cheating - which i don't think makes sense.


OTOH, i've totally misunderstood what you were meaning.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, a 1% event happening doesn't mean there's a 99% chance someone is cheating. It means that a 1% event happened, which happens all the time.

Now, if we have other reasons to think somebody's cheating (which we do here, of course), that becomes the hypothesis. Then somebody comes along and says "Hey, dude, he might have just happened to fold exactly those times AA-JJ came up." Then we say, "No way, dude, that's 1 in 10 billion."

I'm afraid I have no way to respond to your other points other than to reiterate my previous post.

[Josem]

firstly, i think it is beautiful that we're discussing whether the 25 hands is a 1 in 100,000 event, or a 1 in 10billion event.

to clarify, you would need to have 100,000 sets of 25 hands to presumably replicate it.

[ QUOTE ]
Now, if we have other reasons to think somebody's cheating (which we do here, of course), that becomes the hypothesis. Then somebody comes along and says "Hey, dude, he might have just happened to fold exactly those times AA-JJ came up." Then we say, "No way, dude, that's 1 in 10 billion."

[/ QUOTE ]

i think that's the difference - my hypothesis is:
"what are the chances that villain makes the 'right' decision <u>given</u> the cards that were dealt?"

i think your hypothesis is:
"what are the chances that villain makes the 'right' decision <u>and</u> the cards are dealt in that way?"



i prefer my hypothesis because i don't care about the luck of the cards falling in that particular way. i'm only interested in looking at the chances of the villain responding as he did.

[Check_The_Nuts]

pine,

1.8% of hands are JJ-AA. I took this from pokerstove.

Table is 9 handed, so each person has a 1.8% chance of having JJ-AA. Or 98.2% chance of not having JJ-AA (for each individual person). So 8 other people at the table, the probability of noone having those hands is 0.982^8=86.5%. Therefore 13.5% of the time someone has JJ-AA.

Here I just used the fact P(A)=1-P(B). However, determining the P(A) directly is obviously more annoying because you have to use combinatorics.

rest of your math looks good. Been a while since I took stats tho.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
firstly, i think it is beautiful that we're discussing whether the 25 hands is a 1 in 100,000 event, or a 1 in 10billion event.

to clarify, you would need to have 100,000 sets of 25 hands to presumably replicate it.

[ QUOTE ]
Now, if we have other reasons to think somebody's cheating (which we do here, of course), that becomes the hypothesis. Then somebody comes along and says "Hey, dude, he might have just happened to fold exactly those times AA-JJ came up." Then we say, "No way, dude, that's 1 in 10 billion."

[/ QUOTE ]

i think that's the difference - my hypothesis is:
"what are the chances that villain makes the 'right' decision <u>given</u> the cards that were dealt?"

i think your hypothesis is:
"what are the chances that villain makes the 'right' decision <u>and</u> the cards are dealt in that way?"



i prefer my hypothesis because i don't care about the luck of the cards falling in that particular way. i'm only interested in looking at the chances of the villain responding as he did.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, that's not it at all.

You can't examine the hypothesis "Villain doesn't know the cards" and then look at the cards.

What you do is say "What are the chances that Villain plays perfectly preflop, where perfectly given his style is defined as folding only when an opponent has AA-JJ, over a 25-hand stretch?"

Then you run it.

THEN you pull open the data to see how he did.

I mean, maybe think about this intuitively. 1/100,000 doesn't even begin to capture the unlikeliness.

Or think about a single hand. OK, we're dealing the cards. What are the chances he folds AND somebody has a premium pair? 1/100 with my numbers. Oh, shnap, that's what happened. I mean, if you just use 1/10, that's just his chance of folding, and so what? Then the question you are answering is something like "What is the chance that Villain demonstrates the follwing pattern: CCCFFCCCCCFCCC..." etc. and who cares about cards, and that's 1/100,000 or whatever you got. The whole point is to account for the cards.

[Injection]

Typical completely incompetent response coming from AP once again to the head guy of CasinoMeister. Hopefully it helps speed up the process of roguing them over there.

CM's response to one of their standard 'everything seems fine' emails

[ QUOTE ]

Hi Christian,

Thanks for the response. Please keep me up to date on the
investigation since this thread is getting a bit of traffic, and it is pretty much in the forefront of the poker news.

With what has been posted, it seems that there is a fair bit of collusion going on. I hope you can find out exactly what is happening.

Sincerely,
Bryan


[/ QUOTE ]

AP's replies..

[ QUOTE ]

Dear Mr. Wilson,

Thank you for your email.

We were unable to locate an account under the email address bryan@casinomeister.com. Please keep in mind that we will be more than happy to provide any information you may require regarding the mentioned account, once we verify you are the account holder.

To ensure the security of our customers' account, it is our policy not to provide any information about an account to anyone but the account holder. To verify that you are the owner of the account, you contact us from the registered email address or send us an email with the following information:

- Complete Name
- Nickname
- Registered email address
- Complete physical address
- Phone number
- Deposit method and ID details
- Zip code

By submitting this information, we will confirm your account rights and then we can properly provide you with the requested information.

Remember, that we are always eager to help our customers, however for your own security we hope you understand that sometimes we need conduct security checks, to ensure that your personal information is not distributed to any one other than yourself.

Thanks for playing at Absolute Poker! If there is anything else we can help you with, please let us know. We are here for you!

Sincerely,

Dan


[/ QUOTE ]

Bryan/CasinoMeister: Who da ef is Mr. Wilson?

[ QUOTE ]

Dear Bryan,

Thank you for writing us back!

At Absolute Poker, we want to make sure that your experience at our tables is great and will strive to do everything possible to meet this goal.

Please let us inform you that will keep you updated in the events of news.

Feel free to contact us again, should you have further questions or concerns.

Have a nice day!

Thanks for playing at Absolute Poker!

Sincerely,

Ana
Team Absolute ~ Customer Support
"To Continue to be the Best and Most Trusted"
Support@AbsolutePoker.Com

We’re Here To Stay! All Players Welcome!

Come and join the action this weekend with our 150k guaranteed on Saturday and 60k on Sunday! With more and bigger guaranteed tournaments, Absolute Poker is your place to play. See you at the tables whenever, wherever!


[/ QUOTE ]

Bryan/CasinoMeister: Why in the hell do they wish that my experience at their tables is great? I'm not a customer, unless they think I'm Mr. Wilson

Looks like someone is doing some hellacious bong hits in Costa Rica.

[knappis]

[ QUOTE ]
Well.... no.

With a VPIP of 90%, there is a 1/10 that Villain folds.

It's a little more complicated to figure out how often one of his opponents has AA-JJ, but 10% is somewhere in the neighborhood, and will make the calculations easier, and won't much effect the unlikeliness of the result.

Four possible outcomes on each hand:
Villain folds, an opponent has AA-JJ: (.1 * .1) = .01
Villain folds, an opponent doesn't have AA-JJ: (.1 * .9) = .09
Villain doesn't fold, an opponent has AA-JJ: (.9 * .1) = .09
Villain doesn't fold, an opponent doesn't have AA-JJ: (.9 * .9) = .81

Note the sum of the probabilities is 1.

Now for 25 independent events, we just multiply, so you end up with:

(.01^4) * (.81^21) = 1E-10 = 1 in 10 billion. [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

We know villain folds about 4 times in 25 hands. What are the odds that he does that exactly the four times somebodey had AA-JJ?

(4/25)*(3/24)*(2/23)*(1/22) = .16*.125*.086*.045=.0000774 =
1:112919 [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img].

That is ofc not complete because we don't know the odds that villain would fold 4 times in 25 hands but I would say that those odds a are pretty good.