Cheating in Online Poker

[JFJB]

I think it is safe to say that for as long as people have played poker, some have tried to cheat at it…

Now that being say, I really like Horrid’s contribution to this thread.


I will start with a question:

If you could cheat at online Poker in any which way, what would be the absolute best information you could have?

I have seen a lot of threads about accounts being hacked followed by chip dumping. What that tells me is that someone managed to get a password to go along with an account name somehow. The best way of getting that information is probably a key logger Trojan. We all have been seeing this happen to others and some have had the misfortune of having it happen to them. Generally, the online sites have gotten their [censored] together and will block the accounts and investigate… I think this scam is still a threat but I think the computer geniuses have moved on because of increased resistance and also (to a degree) traceability of the funds.

The most important fact here is that a thief got a hold of a player's account name and the password that goes with it… How did they do this? Think about it. How much effort and knowledge does it take to do that? If you can do that what else can you do?

Now let’s answer the above question.

The best information an online player (or any poker player) could have, is to know the cards of one/some/all opponents. Now if you search reputable poker site for that possibility they will tell you that it is not possible. I personally believe that everything is possible but I would have to say that getting such information as your opponents’ hole cards for the host site is not likely.

How else? Well if your computer is sending that information to your opponent then the host site has nothing to do with it. If a thief has been able to get someone’s login name and password without detection, why not a shot of your computer screen every 20 seconds?

Now I am no computer expert but I have checked with such experts and have been told this is possible (without detection). Let me ask you this? Do you have Pokerstove installed on your computer? Where did you get it? A trusted source? (Disclaimer, I am not implying that Pokerstove is rigged at all nor anything about its creator or the provider. I am just trying to show a way for bad software to get installed on your computer and since most have Stove I am using it as an example). Ever clicked on a cool picture? Maybe you want to check out this threat and think about it a bit (read it all there are some interesting names that come up in there): http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...age=0&vc=1

Think about it, if a thief/computer genius/poker player can achieve the above (get some bad software on your machine which sends them a shot of your computer screen) they make a ton of money, get celebrated as one of the truly best players and all of that with next to no risk.

Now if you are serious about playing online poker you may want to have a dedicated computer for it. I suggest following the steps in this thread to secure the machine: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=1&vc=1

On a last note, I must admit I am truly scared at the response I will get here. But in terms of cheating I think there is worse than multi-accounting or collusion. Is it out there?

[NoahSD]

[ QUOTE ]
ucla, where are you going to be publishing this article? fwiw i think this is a bad idea and im 100% against the shared accounts/multiple accounts bs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I feel like such a scum bag agreeing with this, but yeah, I agree.

We definitely should be trying to get rid of cheaters. This seems like a bad way tho.

[CharlieDontSurf]

what exactly is the idea/concept behind shared accounts in terms of cheating?

[uclabruinz]

EC10, Ansky, and Noah, your opinion in general is very valuable to me but not without further explanation as well as alternatives for dealing with what is apparently the very large scope of this problem. Why do you think publishing an article to make people aware of the extent of online cheating, and what people can do to prevent it, is a bad idea? I sure hope it's not for the reason that I suspect.

[rothko]

ucla, where many people go wrong is in making a disadvantage into a question of ethics. simply because a person may have an edge on you doesn't make it wrong. this is what is happening now with online poker.

the rules define what is right, not any one person's opinion as to what seems proper. if team play is allowed online it is not wrong. it may feel wrong, but that is a conditioned response not one based in logic.

consider the game of baseball. oftentimes the manager will switch pitchers to match up with a certain batter. the pitcher might be particularly good against one batter and may come to the mound for only that one batter. after the strike out, the pitcher returns to the sidelines and the pitcher that is better overall resumes playing. likewise a batter that is particularly good in certain situations, but isn't in the regular rotation might be brought in. runners that excel at stealing bases can be subbed in. balls can be thrown to intentionally walk a superior batter, etc. perhaps of greatest import to the current conversation is the example of the relief pitcher: the one that is a specialist in closing. nobody considers these things to be unethical, because they are explicitly allowed in the rules of the game. however, if you actually sit back and think about it you might be tempted to say that they are unfair. shouldn't the pitcher that started the game finish it? how can they bring in so and so with a fresh arm who is absolutely deadly at finishing? it's not fair. see the similarities?

there will be things that don't seem to make sense. behaviour x will be allowed, but behaviour x.1 won't be even though they are essentially the same thing. this goes for anything in life. whenever there is a line drawn there are things that may be holding hands, but are separated by that line. it is up to each of us to respect that line, regardless.

when jeff bought that seat late in the sunday million what he did was not wrong, because it was allowed by the rules of the site. however, the rules have since been changed and so it would be cheating to do it now.

if stealthmunk buys a bunch of people into a tournament and then coaches the one that goes deep it gives him a much better chance to win the tournament and most importantly, from our standpoint, to do better than us. it is this last point that makes us want to say, "hey, that's unfair!" however, if it is sanctioned by the site it is not wrong. yes, it sucks for us, but it doesn't make stealthmunk a bad guy. if the rules do forbid the behaviour then it would indeed be unethical of stealthmunk to do this.

it is the rules that define the "morality" of the game.

[0evg0]

[ QUOTE ]
I sure hope it's not for the reason that I suspect.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure it is, and I'm also sure that it's totally reasonable considering the effects of a major article like that could very easily end up costing us all more money than any number of cheaters ever could.

[Foucault]

I may have more to say about this, but it seems to me there are (at least) two separate problems here, and some are more concerned about one or the other. I dont think they are actually mutually exclusive, though they kind of seem like they would be.

Problem 1: Multi-accounting is a problem because it creates an information asymmetry. If UCLA is playing under JoeSchmo's name, then UCLA knows he is up against Foucault but Foucault does not know he is up against UCLA. Similarly, the vast majority of players who don't know the extent of this problem (including myself probably even now, and certainly until recently) are not making an informed decision to buy into a tournament because they don't realize exactly what they are getting into.

Problem 2: Multi-accounting creates a perception of wide-spread cheating that, true or not, scares away many recreational players who contribute EV to the tournament.

In the first case, the central problem is that fish don't know multi-accounting is going on. In the second, the problem is that they do.

[gobboboy]

[ QUOTE ]
EC10, Ansky, and Noah, your opinion in general is very valuable to me but not without further explanation as well as alternatives for dealing with what is apparently the very large scope of this problem. Why do you think publishing an article to make people aware of the extent of online cheating, and what people can do to prevent it, is a bad idea? I sure hope it's not for the reason that I suspect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because whether or not you want to believe it, it's impossible to stop. And at the same time, driving people away from the game or bringing bad press to the game is damaging to us all.

[uclabruinz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
EC10, Ansky, and Noah, your opinion in general is very valuable to me but not without further explanation as well as alternatives for dealing with what is apparently the very large scope of this problem. Why do you think publishing an article to make people aware of the extent of online cheating, and what people can do to prevent it, is a bad idea? I sure hope it's not for the reason that I suspect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because whether or not you want to believe it, it's impossible to stop. And at the same time, driving people away from the game or bringing bad press to the game is damaging to us all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not surprised at all that your position is to do whatever is best for your own bottom line. Someday, hopefully, with some maturity, you will understand there are more important things then $EV.

[the alex]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
EC10, Ansky, and Noah, your opinion in general is very valuable to me but not without further explanation as well as alternatives for dealing with what is apparently the very large scope of this problem. Why do you think publishing an article to make people aware of the extent of online cheating, and what people can do to prevent it, is a bad idea? I sure hope it's not for the reason that I suspect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because whether or not you want to believe it, it's impossible to stop. And at the same time, driving people away from the game or bringing bad press to the game is damaging to us all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think UCLA is trying to find a way to present this issue in a way that raises awareness that gets top players to report people and these top players' actions to give more peace of mind to the recreational players.

The responses in AJ's thread were a bit discouraging to someone like me while Stealthmunk's recent p5's thread was a breath of fresh air.