|
|
#871
09-21-2007, 02:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Absolute Cheating
I haven't been on 2p2 much lately so I've missed this whole thing. I read the cliff notes and the last page or so of this thing (lol @ this thread derailing). Can someone just tell me if this is correct?
- A bunch of well respected posters/players feel quite strongly that cheating occured based on the ridiculous river play, calling all in with ten high no draw, 4bet capping pre to c/f flop to one bet when villain flops it, yada yada yada. - There's a bunch of the usual "go against the grain" type guys that got thrown off by the losing/dumping sessions and say it was just variance or running well or whatever. - We don't know what Absolute is doing internally, but as far as all client facing communications go they are flatly denying any wrongdoing took place. amirite? Edit: Oh, and either way, to be safe, it's best probably not to play at Absolute for a while? |
|
#872
09-21-2007, 02:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Stop Railbird Speculation
I really don't feel a lot of these people posting here are qualified to comment on this, bar high limit-regulars. It ends up being blind railbird speculation or exaggeration.
I'm a high limit regular. I'm not going to reveal my sn but a few of you know my stance.... No offense to Doubledrag but he's definitely not the type who comes off with the intelligence to be able to crack the security of AP. If you know anything about systems or programming you guys are really kidding yourself if you can find someone who can do that, let alone it be DoubleDrag. If there were such a person who was able to crack AP, why would they give it to someone with the intelligence of DoubleDrag? My simple explanation is he's a nutcase, and nutcases will enjoy the good and bad of variance and also make some pretty jaw droppingly bad (or seemingly brilliant) plays. Ok so say he raised 90% pre-flop and 10x the big blind, he has to keep playing overly aggressive post flop to compensate. Against solid players we're not going to commit a lot of chips with a marginal hand 90% of the time. His is a losing strategy but he'll benefit a lot from variance when he runs good but also suffer when he runs not so good. When you play like he did the standard deviation is going to be like 15 buyins / 100. When he started losing he played like a sheep. I was able to make a chunk of my money back when he started losing. Btw I severely doubt he won 200k-400k whatever people are saying. I encourage the high-limit regulars to each post how much they lost to him. Send DoubleDrag back please. If you don't play him I will.. |
|
#873
09-21-2007, 02:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Absolute Cheating
[ QUOTE ]
A bunch of well respected posters/players are positive [/ QUOTE ] Correct |
|
#875
09-21-2007, 02:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Absolute Cheating
pretty much
|
|
#876
09-21-2007, 02:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Absolute Cheating
No surprise here. They can't admit cheating went on, even when it's blatantly ovbious that a few hundred thousand $$$ was dumped. What about the hand where DD raised to $9950 or something and folded for another 50, can someone link to that please.
I'm actually surprised there bothering making anymore statements on this at all. It's not really in their interests, I suppose they must think it is for some reason. |
|
#877
09-21-2007, 02:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stop Railbird Speculation
[ QUOTE ]
I really don't feel a lot of these people posting here are qualified to comment on this, bar high limit-regulars. It ends up being blind railbird speculation or exaggeration. I'm a high limit regular. I'm not going to reveal my sn but a few of you know my stance.... No offense to Doubledrag but he's definitely not the type who comes off with the intelligence to be able to crack the security of AP. If you know anything about systems or programming you guys are really kidding yourself if you can find someone who can do that, let alone it be DoubleDrag. If there were such a person who was able to crack AP, why would they give it to someone with the intelligence of DoubleDrag? My simple explanation is he's a nutcase, and nutcases will enjoy the good and bad of variance and also make some pretty jaw droppingly bad (or seemingly brilliant) plays. Ok so say he raised 90% pre-flop and 10x the big blind, he has to keep playing overly aggressive post flop to compensate. Against solid players we're not going to commit a lot of chips with a marginal hand 90% of the time. His is a losing strategy but he'll benefit a lot from variance when he runs good but also suffer when he runs not so good. When you play like he did the standard deviation is going to be like 15 buyins / 100. When he started losing he played like a sheep. I was able to make a chunk of my money back when he started losing. Btw I severely doubt he won 200k-400k whatever people are saying. I encourage the high-limit regulars to each post how much they lost to him. Send DoubleDrag back please. If you don't play him I will.. [/ QUOTE ] You're retarded. Try reading all these Absolute threads in their entirety. Like Adanthar said, the time for wondering about WHETHER this guy cheated is over. He did. The time for wondering whether he chip-dumped over $200,000 to Romnaldo is over. He did. All that's left now is to assess how well Absolute handles the investigation and what they do and do not admit to...and as per my post above, it looks like the verdict is in on that too. |
|
#878
09-21-2007, 02:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Absolute Cheating
Oh, and one last question -
It seems pretty intuitive that if someone had the skills to get the hole card cam, they'd be an intelligent person, and you'd think they could just cheat more subtlely. I feel like if I played my normal game but only used the hole card cam once in a while when I wasn't sure if I should go for a big bluff or if I should make a marginal big call, that I could absolutely crush the games and be 100% undetectable to observers. What's the party line rationale about this? Edit: Sorry for the late to the party, I'm sure this has been answered somewhere - but the threads are sooo long heh... |
|
#879
09-21-2007, 02:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Absolute Cheating
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] again, I'm not particularly mad at you for playing devil's advocate, but enough is enough. it's cheating. [/ QUOTE ] fine, im done. i promise. last post in this thread for me. but fwiw, i wasnt playing devils advocate. i just flat out disagree with the conclusions you and many others have drawn. and if this claim was leveled with EXACTLY the same data (screenshots, HH's and everything) but the $ amounts were downscaled proportionally to $1NL, there wouldn't be a single person who would think it was cheating. [/ QUOTE ] Wrong. |
|
#880
09-21-2007, 02:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Absolute Cheating
[ QUOTE ]
It seems pretty intuitive that if someone had the skills to get the hole card cam, they'd be an intelligent person, and you'd think they could just cheat more subtlely. What's the party line rationale about this? [/ QUOTE ] Hacking skills != Poker skills if it was an outside job. If it was an inside job... well, we know that Absolute monkey security department skills !!!!!!!!!!!!= poker skills. Fell |
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
