Absolute Soulreading/Rigged thread #3

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, just to check then, are 20 and 16 still relatively high? Because that sounds a lot different to infinite.


[/ QUOTE ]

The only reason there was one hand sample where the River AF was infinite was because he had a 100 hand stretch where he never called on the river, and since River A/F essentially is dividing the number of raises on the river by the number of calls, you get a divide by zero error, which the pokertracker software interprets as infinity. A river aggression factor of 20 is still insane over 400 hands, while at the same time winning over 200 ptbb per 100. This is basically statistically impossible, the odds are beyond any statistical outlier. I guarantee you every player here could look at their entire hand history range, and nowhere would they find a hand history range where they were winning over 200 ptbb/100 over 400 hands while simultaneously having a River AF of over 10.

[darkcore]

[ QUOTE ]
... A river aggression factor of 20 is still insane over 400 hands, while at the same time winning over 200 ptbb per 100. This is basically statistically impossible, the odds are beyond any statistical outlier. I guarantee you every player here could look at their entire hand history range, and nowhere would they find a hand history range where they were winning over 200 ptbb/100 over 400 hands while simultaneously having a River AF of over 10.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think if the guys who coordinate this whole thing (adanthar, schneids, et al) compile one pt-db with all the evidence, put it up somewhere for everyone to download (raw data as well as pt-screens, summaries and so on) and find a credibal source who can do the math to prove that these post update luck stretches for these 5 players are, statistically speaking, very near to impossible, that'd be something that couldn't be ignored by absolute so lightly as they are dealing with the issue right now.

jmtc

[egj]

[ QUOTE ]
i think if the guys who coordinate this whole thing (adanthar, schneids, et al) compile one pt-db with all the evidence, put it up somewhere for everyone to download (raw data as well as pt-screens, summaries and so on) and find a credibal source who can do the math to prove that these post update luck stretches for these 5 players are, statistically speaking, very near to impossible, that'd be something that couldn't be ignored by absolute so lightly as they are dealing with the issue right now.

jmtc

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, I don't think a *purely* statistical argument conclusively proving wrongdoing is going to be possible. Take, for example, the river aggression statistics. A skeptic can always argue that this guy is just so good that he can tell whether you have it or not by your betting patterns or bet timing or whatever, and that's what lets him play the way he does. Now, of course, I believe that argument would be completely bogus, but it's not really susceptible to statistical disproof, in the sense of a mathematical proof.

Of course, statistics can still help us make a very convincing *argument*.

[egj]

It's beginning to seem that Absolute Poker is trying to suppress this story. For example:

http://jeremyenke.com/2007/09/17/abs...-ring-toss-is/

The relevant section:

[ QUOTE ]
Later in the day I got an email from Danielle stating she thought portions of the post were slanderous towards Absolute Poker. At first I was kind of pissed and wanted to take the stance that PAW is an open forum for affiliates to discuss any issues facing the industry. Likewise I didn’t want to censor anything or delete the post because that is not what I believe in.

[Goes on to say why he agreed to the request in the end]


[/ QUOTE ]

Additionally, it may be innocuous, but it's interesting that if you search Google News for "absolute poker", you get a link to a story on uk.pokernews.com:

http://news.google.com/news?q=absolute+p...sa=N&tab=wn

However the story itself is gone:

http://uk.pokernews.com/news/2007/9/...-superuser.htm

You can still find it in the Google cache though:

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:Hevg...lient=firefox-a

Was the story removed at the request of Absolute Poker? Impossible to prove, but...

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]

suzzer,
I've done a lot of network sniffing for all sorts of troubleshooting. It is a useful tool to have. But, if Absolute has implemented their end to end security correctly, network sniffing would not likely lead anywhere. Even if you had the private certs and could decrypt the communication, you would likely only be able to see data sent to an individual player, not the entire table.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now what if Absolute codes the info this way:

Table x - 9h 2h

Wouldn't that make the info much easier to sort through?

[Pokeraddict]

From Parttimepoker's coverage:

http://news.parttimepoker.com/2007/09/16...absolute-poker/

[ QUOTE ]
At present there’s really nothing more than the suspicions of some well-respected players, backed up by fairly thin statistical evidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jeremy at PAW has an even more biased and repulsive rundown of the events.

I thought most affiliates had learned in this day and age that being honest to players paid off way more then trying to protect the rooms you promote. I'm sure or at least hope most affiliates will not make the same mistake.

I'm not saying affiliates should stop promoting them, at least not yet. By calling the overwhelming evidence "fairly thin statistical evidence" is at the very least ignorant and IMO borders on blatant dishonesty. Lying to your players will only make them look somewhere else next time.

[jeremiah411]

Absolute Poker is in now way wrong with regards to this issue. I am not sure where you all learned how to play poker, but obviously this site is full of crappy players who need someone to blame for having to deposit every 30 seconds.

Absolute Poker is a great and loyal company who is only concerned about the well fare of its players.

AP is community minded organization that is only guilty of not making enough money. They are the true Heros.

AP I salute you

[ChrisV]

great level apart from the "guilty of not making enough money" part.

[apefish]

Time for an IP trace.


Is the template for a new cliffsnotes agreed to be

Part 1- the explanation of what transpired only without an indepth analysis- ala pineapples/josems types of informational narratives recently. Also a narrative of how the thread itself has progressed- including the parts about the dumping sessions, various replies or non replies by Absolute, and other forums in which discussion has happened.

Part 2- the data for poker players/ math people/ those who have a clue to take a look at to get a more full picture. Hand histories, pokertracker shots, etc go here. Also the mtt dbs for varying players.

Part 3- the anecdotal stuff that is interesting but not relevant to the strict analysis. The benefit of sticking it farther down is to minimize the impact when viewing the background information and data, and to also let people decide for themselves how much weight to give or not give these bits.

part 4- mspaints, the good gimmicks, lolrazz, etc.


??

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
Time for an IP trace.


Is the template for a new cliffsnotes agreed to be

Part 1- the explanation of what transpired only without an indepth analysis- ala pineapples/josems types of informational narratives recently. Also a narrative of how the thread itself has progressed- including the parts about the dumping sessions, various replies or non replies by Absolute, and other forums in which discussion has happened.

Part 2- the data for poker players/ math people/ those who have a clue to take a look at to get a more full picture. Hand histories, pokertracker shots, etc go here. Also the mtt dbs for varying players.

Part 3- the anecdotal stuff that is interesting but not relevant to the strict analysis. The benefit of sticking it farther down is to minimize the impact when viewing the background information and data, and to also let people decide for themselves how much weight to give or not give these bits.

part 4- mspaints, the good gimmicks, lolrazz, etc.


??

[/ QUOTE ]

Makes sense to me. But if you use my write-up please say something like "For discussion purposes only, does not necessarily reflect the views of the author" cause I don't want to be dragged into discussions/court [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]