Absolute Soulreading/Rigged thread #3 - Page 99

Marnixvdb · #**981** 09-21-2007, 07:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Under you assumption this could all be coincidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you hit the nail on the head there. Yes, I think that possibility has been overlooked and the current estimates this possibility are not very good.

High stakes poker hands are probably among the most analyzed data i the world because all high stakes players likes to analyze their game. They look for (among other things) suspicious behavior, big losers and big winners and they try to find an edge in the game. This means that all the data generated at high stakes poker tables over the years compile a huge dataset with an extreme variance due to the nature of poker. If you take a huge dataset you will always find extreme outliers if you look for them. Always. To be honest, I would be more surprised if this would never happen by chance. And when it happens, I can guarantee that a High Stakes poker pro will find it and post it to the boards. ANd I think that might just have happened. But I don't know, all I know is that the evidence so far is not convincing enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

really, that possibilty was not overlooked. That possibility is what most people in this thread assumed by default until they let the facts convince them otherwise

Injection · #**982** 09-21-2007, 07:40 PM

If someone could dumb the situation downie enough that Krum could understand, we'd have our article. gl.

PokerStorm · #**983** 09-21-2007, 07:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Under you assumption this could all be coincidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you hit the nail on the head there. Yes, I think that possibility has been overlooked and the current estimates this possibility are not very good.

High stakes poker hands are probably among the most analyzed data i the world because all high stakes players likes to analyze their game. They look for (among other things) suspicious behavior, big losers and big winners and they try to find an edge in the game. This means that all the data generated at high stakes poker tables over the years compile a huge dataset with an extreme variance due to the nature of poker. If you take a huge dataset you will always find extreme outliers if you look for them. Always. To be honest, I would be more surprised if this would never happen by chance. And when it happens, I can guarantee that a High Stakes poker pro will find it and post it to the boards. ANd I think that might just have happened. But I don't know, all I know is that the evidence so far is not convincing enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am getting seriously sick of listening to this crap. Someone run an IP check on this guy. All the high stakes pros here are in agreement on this and these are usually the first people to laugh at the "omg online poker is rigged theories". What stakes do you play, how much poker do you play in general? I'm asking this because from your posts it seems as if you don't comprehend the evidence and are completely out of your depth. Do you understand the HHs posted? Do you understand what 90/70 means and how it relates to playing perfect poker?

Do you deny that a few hundred thousand was blatantly dumped to another player and the cheater called a bet with 4 high on the river to purposely lose his money after this story broke. If you don't deny it, and you can't, how do you see this issue fitting in with the story in general? You have lots of opinions on why it's not cheating, can you give me your opinion on the chip dumping please?

krumeluren · #**984** 09-21-2007, 07:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
really, that possibilty was not overlooked. That possibility is what most people in this thread assumed by default until they let the facts convince them otherwise

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
the current estimates this possibility are not very good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Victor · #**985** 09-21-2007, 07:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You have a PM victor

[/ QUOTE ]

ummm, i dont. deleted a few just in case.

KurtSF · #**986** 09-21-2007, 07:45 PM

krumeluren, can you explain why, after averaging about 4 posts a day since you started posting here, you stopped posting to 2+2 for a month between 8/22 and 9/17? Returning basically for this thread?

PokerStorm · #**987** 09-21-2007, 07:46 PM

krumeluren, please give us your opinion on the chip dumping, do you think this is just something that we have all misinterpreted aswell?

krumeluren · #**988** 09-21-2007, 07:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Do you understand what 90/70 means and how it relates to playing perfect poker?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I do. Its a losing strategy with huge variance

Injection · #**989** 09-21-2007, 07:46 PM

"My god you're greasy"

krumeluren · #**990** 09-21-2007, 07:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
krumeluren, can you explain why, after averaging about 4 posts a day since you started posting here, you stopped posting to 2+2 for a month between 8/22 and 9/17? Returning basically for this thread?

[/ QUOTE ]

I took a break from poker for almost a year and now I'm back since June. I post in this thread because I saw too much flawed reasoning and unrealistic estimates and I thought this issue deserves a more critical and balanced discussion.