Updated Cliff Notes On Absolute Poker Scandal (18th October)

[rustyboy]

http://wizardofodds.com/software/absolutepoker.html

Michael Shackleford's website. I wondered when he would chime in.

[five4suited]

ldo... pls consider my post edited to read "he just logged into another account at the same/another machine" k thx

[LonesomeFugitive]

Is it still early to start withdrawing our rolls from AP??

[TheDummy]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh please.

The super user belongs to another user group and has access to more tables in the database. Just like you restrict user groups on your windows to have different restrictions(except that doesn't have anything to do with databases).

That modified client and decrypted sending theory is just mambo jambo.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd imagine this is pretty accurate. The server probably just checks the type of user logged in from an IP Address and sends them whatever data they need. As for decompiling the client, that would be a waste of time because most of the logic is on the server.

Regardless of how it was done, this whole affair is one pathetic mess.

Firstly, let me say that some people on this forum have done great work investigating this particular case and they should be applauded. However, I can't help but wonder what response Marco (the person who finished 2nd in that tourney) would have got had he come here ranting about being cheated but without the hand histories? Would he have been dismissed as another bad loser, or a fish who didn't know what he was talking about?

What if he even had the hand histories for him and POTRIPPER? What would that have shown? Only that POTRIPPER made one strange call with 10 high to win. Again, easily dismissed? How many other Marco's have been ridiculed, shunned, laughed at and ignored?

Whatever AP do now might be irrelevant. To the average player, their trust in online poker has been shattered. I think this incident has huge implications for all poker sites and none of them particularly good.

[RikaKazak]

[ QUOTE ]
http://wizardofodds.com/software/absolutepoker.html

Michael Shackleford's website. I wondered when he would chime in.

[/ QUOTE ]

very good read

[admiralfluff]

[ QUOTE ]

http://wizardofodds.com/software/absolutepoker.html

Michael Shackleford's website. I wondered when he would chime in.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the best layman-readable analysis of how the POTRIPPER tournament is evidence of cheating that I have read. Please sticky this somewhere.

[suzzer99]

[ QUOTE ]
http://wizardofodds.com/software/absolutepoker.html

Michael Shackleford's website. I wondered when he would chime in.

[/ QUOTE ]

"On October 8 I was provided various log files of tournaments that POTRIPPER played. Many were in formats that were unreadable, but I was able to view the details of a tournament played on September 13. In that tournament POTRIPPER played 41 hands,..."

"The next significant event was on October 15, when I was made aware of an animated playback of another tournament POTRIPPER played...."

He's saying he has logs of at least one other tourney POTRIPPER won. Has anyone looked into these? I just sent him an email requesting them, in case no one has yet.

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
http://wizardofodds.com/software/absolutepoker.html

Michael Shackleford's website. I wondered when he would chime in.

[/ QUOTE ]

He has done some great analysis here.

In particular, he calculates the probability that someone would run this good in a multi-table tournament: 1 in in 1.88 × 10^44, or, in long form, 1 in 188,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000. He put it at 14 standard deviations above the mean.

This is broadly consistent with my earlier calculations that put the cheaters' cash win rates at 15 standard deviations above the mean. The only thing I had off was the number of zeroes at the end of the number - I had guess there would've been around 30, when there should be 44.

I had previously thought that the cheaters had about the same chance of running this good as winning six consecutive one-in-a-million lotteries. In reality, the cheaters actually have the same chance of running this good as winning seven consecutive one-in-a-million lotteries.


<font color="red">To summarise: either these are now two of literally the most incredibly miraculous occurences in the history of the universe, or they are cheating.</font>

I have not found any other sample of anything with a result of fourteen or fifteen standard deviations above the mean. If anyone is aware of any, can they please PM or email me?

[Rips]

Why quote and respond to me when we obviously are on the same page? I just made a simplified version for non-programmers.

[SoCalRugger]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

http://wizardofodds.com/software/absolutepoker.html

Michael Shackleford's website. I wondered when he would chime in.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the best layman-readable analysis of how the POTRIPPER tournament is evidence of cheating that I have read. Please sticky this somewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed. That was well done.