Sorry, I cant give any more info about the player who told me or about how he found out. All I can say is this person is very credible and well respected among the high stakes community.

I wish you guys the best of luck with this investigation, and if there is any foul play i hope it gets routed out somehow, and the people involved get punished somehow.

However have you asked yourselves what exactly are you trying to achieve? There was a much clearer and bigger scandal at AP and you still have well known 2+2 posters still playing there although they were and are perfectly aware of what happened. In addition to this you unfortunately will never see any of the money you lost in thise sessions.

I dont want to sound discouraging, however if there was a better and more concerted effort to stop playing at AP and to make it known to everyone that AP are involved in fraud, i wouldn't have pointed this out. However not much has changed, people are still playing at AP, and unless all you guys decide to ban UB and make it known that you are all going to close your accounts over there then i think what you are doing might have an effect.

Once again if there was a concerted effort on 2+2 to completely boycott AP regardless of the useless investigation the commission is carrying out, then i would see the full point to these threads, and the time and effort you are going to be putting into this. As I said, i wish you good luck regardless.

And please guys, boycott AP already, and lets start a movement to have these pokersites where we keep tens of thousands of dollars online to be audited by reputable companies (although someone may point out arthur andersen and enron) but i am sure that this and many more precautions would make online gaming a much safer and pleasurable experience.

This crap, and multi accounting, and all the cheating really has to go. Its not fair to the people who play the game straight out

are you kidding me?

whoever it is has an obligation to make this knowledge known. if there's some reason he can't, then he can't. don't post that cryptic bull****. it's completely useless and speculative.

exactly

the hands aren't fishy at all imo, but the stats are kinda convincing, and I've def felt like durrr said after a couple hu sessions on ub. If I had to guess I'd say he is cheating, but the current evidence isn't really enough to get anything done about it.

I think people have a big flaw in their logic in applying some of the facts right now. In that they're applying them in a way which best fits the conclusion they want. How can people suggest he is playing in a fashion smart enough to avoid detection and be so afraid of being caught that he instantly closes his account at time of the AP scandal. Sure it could happen, but everyone is making it seem like its the only thing possible.

This is far from the only possible scenario. Like I posted in the other thread, let me play devil's advocate for a minute and suggest that this player ran hot, tilted a bunch of very good poker players further increasing his winrate, heard about the AP scandal and got scared about being cheated and then cashed out. There are countless reasons someone could leave a poker site and everyone is quick to assume his absence is directly related to the AP scandal. There's a very good chance if he was just some fish that he had no clue about the AP scandal at all and his leaving around that time could just be coincidence.

Realistically his run is only a 3k stretch of hands that people actually have where hes running 60bb/100 which isn't even statistically impossible to occur with normal variance.

FWIW I think it really does look fishy, and definitely should be investigated further. I think dlp is on the right track in getting the other 5k HHs, but no one piece of evidence right now conclusively says anything. On the whole everything together certainly would be one hell of a coincidence if no cheating was occuring.

Fine, just recognize that the reason we broke the AP scandal is because people came together to SHARE all of the information that we had to build a comprehensive picture of the cheating. The movement was open-source, not cloak and dagger.
So you don't want to "out" your source? Fine. Then tell him to out himself here if you care about the integrity of your statement that the software allows for superuser capability. If you want the investigation to move forward at a reasonable pace, then you've got to allow everyone to LEVERAGE each other's skills and knowledge.

Hey folks,

A new picture for you to look at:



The point in the upper-right corner is the UB alleged cheater.

Some facts about the graph:
-There are 870 "normal" players from a variety of sites and limits
-Each of those other players have at least 2,500 hands logged on them
-The graph is in big blinds/100, not PokerTracker's big bets/100.

-The mean bb/100 win rate is 1.528 bb/100
-The standard deviation is 14.08 bb/100

-The alleged UB cheater is winning at around 10 standard deviations above the mean
-The confessed AP cheater was winning at around 15 standard deviations above the mean

I think that 10 standard deviations is something in the order of winning a 1-in-a-million lottery three or four times consecutively - although I'd prefer if a maths expert could be a little more clear.

...

Bld,
These stats are pretty much impossible for 3k hands. What I'm not sure if you read or not, is that he had 8k hands at the SAME WINRATE. Obviously this makes it even more unlikely.

As many posters have pointed out so far, no single hand (since this guy in the hands we have seen so far did not make any T high call downs) is going to "prove" anything. I said this in my post before, but the all of our evidence is circumstantial, we essentially are building a case, and connecting the dots which make up the statistically anomalous play of Nionio. I would say if anyone took the time to review all 3k hands, especially the HU sessions where we have one players hole cards (trambo's sessions, for example), they would realize that something very fishy is going on.

However, I think far more illuminating in this case is the stats we have on his play, and how unlikely they are. Combine his win rate with the fact that he didn't really run above expectation in the all-in EV chart, and you have something incredibly suspicious.

Right now we need all 8k hand histories, and any other thoughts from smart hsnl'ers.

I don't care about the 28k I lost, in response to hotmark777's post. I don't see a chance of getting that back given how awful ub's customer support is. I care more about forcing online sites to have integrity.

Umm, I actually dont think thats correct. I remember Nat having a ton of sources that he could not out and a ton of info he withheld for personal reasons. Believe me, if I could tell i would. I guess you guys are just gonna have to trust me when I say I guarantee you that this info was not made up and that I can also guarantee that if I did out the source, not 1 person would question his integrity.

Josem,

"-The alleged UB cheater is winning at around 10 standard deviations above the mean
-The confessed AP cheater was winning at around 15 standard deviations above the mean"

How many standard deviations from the mean is the guy who looks to have lost 80k or so in that sample?

The biggest bb/100 loser on that graph lost at 83.8bb/100 over 2,557 hands.

He is just under six standard deviations below the mean of bb/100.


edit: some commentary on this issue:
a) Just looking at the graph, you'll notice a slight trend towards losing amongst higher VPIP players. This makes perfect sense - after all, loose players are more likely to be losers. I imagine if you got a significant sample size of 60+ VPIP players, the mean bb/100 would be a lot more negative than tight aggressive players.

b) It's not particularly difficult to lose at poker, since, by its nature, everyone else at the table is trying to win money from you. Thus, a player losing below the mean is much less significant than a player winning above the mean.

BTW thank you very much for the graph josem, thats really interesting to see

wow