I'm posting this hand again, I assume it got deleted because I called stoxtrader an expletive. It gives a little bit more insight in the character of this guy. Here he grimmed Hallinggol (leaving the table after raising the first hand heads-up) when he couldn't buy in short.

POKERSTARS GAME #12008703140: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($100/$200) - 2007/09/11 - 23:07:21 (ET)
Table 'Erminia' 9-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 4: knockstiff ($20000 in chips)
Seat 8: H@££INGGOL ($20000 in chips)
MezmerizePLZ has returned
H@££INGGOL said, "daniel sets it up from london in hotelroom LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL"
MezmerizePLZ said, "lol"
H@££INGGOL said, "got to love this site"
knockstiff: posts small blind $100
$tinger 88 said, "heh"
H@££INGGOL said, "weve paid millions in rake.... ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz"
H@££INGGOL said, "and this is how hard it was to set it up"
H@££INGGOL: posts big blind $200
*** HOLE CARDS ***
knockstiff: raises $400 to $600
H@££INGGOL: folds
knockstiff collected $400 from pot
knockstiff: doesn't show hand
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $400 | Rake $0
Seat 4: knockstiff (button) (small blind) collected ($400)
Seat 8: H@££INGGOL (big blind) folded before Flop

he grimmed him? they agreed to a flip and he folded?

It could be because that HH is 2.5 years old but I'm surprised to know that it's been going on for so long without being detected MUCH earlier.

grimming is when you raise your btn in a hu match then quit the very next hand

For one thing nobody would profit from selling or buying HH and thats +EV

this is the earliest date I have hand histories with them being together at the table:

POKERSTARS GAME #8556601368: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($25/$50) - 2007/02/21 - 19:02:44 (ET)
Table 'Libussa V' 9-max Seat #8 is the button
Seat 1: nmehebean ($5272 in chips)
Seat 2: knockstiff ($1727 in chips)
Seat 3: gp333 ($5061 in chips)
Seat 4: Daut44 ($5000 in chips)
Seat 5: ferry_06 ($3182 in chips)
Seat 6: Boosted J ($8822 in chips)
Seat 7: ActionJeff ($14676 in chips)
Seat 8: idoubleL ($947 in chips)
Seat 9: LittleZen ($925 in chips)
LittleZen: posts small blind $25
nmehebean: posts big blind $50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
knockstiff: folds
gp333: folds
Daut44: raises $150 to $200
ferry_06: calls $200
Boosted J: folds
ActionJeff: folds
idoubleL: folds
LittleZen: folds
nmehebean: folds
*** FLOP *** [4d Qs 3h]
Daut44: bets $300
ferry_06: calls $300
*** TURN *** [4d Qs 3h] [Td]
Daut44: checks
ferry_06: bets $600
Daut44: folds
ferry_06 collected $1072 from pot
ferry_06: doesn't show hand
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $1075 | Rake $3
Board [4d Qs 3h Td]
Seat 1: nmehebean (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 2: knockstiff folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: gp333 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: Daut44 folded on the Turn
Seat 5: ferry_06 collected ($1072)
Seat 6: Boosted J folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: ActionJeff folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: idoubleL (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: LittleZen (small blind) folded before Flop

I think that's a fair compromise actually. Notes are only the product of your own hard work, allowing users to change screen names shields them from people just datamining.

I'm guessing this would easily be "fixed" by tracking software tagging the note of the player with an identification key and then being able to track players across name changes also.

SQL is EZ. Gimme table structure (fields) and tell me what you need to extract.

If sites close the accounts of the trackers regularly, they'll constantly lose their keys. It's gotta be pretty easy to determine which accounts are datamining even now, and it will get even easier if they add notes to 100% of the players they track. Just turn their accounts off again and again, they'll be dark so often they'll miss half the ID changes.

It will be a bit of a cat and mouse game, but if the sites want to do it they can make datamining too hard.

People will revert to put datamine info in the notes

Why does the note stay the same after a namechange. Arent the notes recorded on your own computer and thus attached to a screenname? Changing screennames should automatically mean = notes gone. hats how it at party at least. You could (dunno if ya still can havent played there for ages) change your screenname like every two months or so. I dont understand the cons of that. The sites could still monitor the IP addresses for possible collusion.

I love how Taylor has to be responsible for everybodys actions and make sure he babysits everybody and ignore his own busy life.

Give the guy a break jesus. 90% of you don't even care about this situation

I have suggested before that the persistence of notes in unnecessary for changing screen names to permit anonymity while retaining the ability to catch colluders. All that would be needed is a system with main account names that could never be changed, anonymous table names that either changed automatically on a periodic basis or could be easily changed by the user, and the automatic release of hand histories, tied to main account names, every so often (say weekly or monthly) — but only after the table name in question had been retired (or the user had been given a fair opportunity to retire it).

That is actually a really good idea.

Lee Jones had an article on random table names a while ago. He basically said the names on a table can just be like Player 1 through Player 10. Link the two ideas together so you have your screen name like now which is shown in MTTs but in SnGs and cash games you just have a name that relates to your seat.

You could have a buddy system like Facebook where if someone accepts a friend request they can see your real screen name on the table so they can sweat you in games (with an option to auto accept if people want their play to be seen), this opens the idea that regs could "friend" each other so they can game select easier, but that is balanced by them being able to read each other better with datamined stats. This also means players like Ivey who are an advertisement for the site can still show his play so you still get to railbird games.

The ability to release hand histories a day after the game is truly genius though. It covers the fact you can stop datamining's validity BUT you also allow players to police their own games which time and again has been used to catch cheaters with UB being the biggest example.

You should go start a petition thread in Internet Poker, the idea is actually damn solid, it doesnt stop fish from being able to look up their own losses but at the same time sites such as PTR will pretty much end in their current format because there is no value in getting these stats after the game has broken a full day earlier.

I assumed it was obvious — not worth making a poll about or even really discussing because it's so simple. But I'm getting the impression that it's otherwise.

I hope it's OK that I am going to add your buddy idea to the whole proposal, which I will try to present to Stars and Tilt.

Unless the latest version of HEM and PT3 are different than how PT2 was laid out, you'd have to reparse the actual raw HH to get this kind of information. I'm sure that is stored in the program's DB but taking them out is the easy part, text parsing is the more difficult matter.

If you somehow make a million dollars just keep me in mind

Ive seen a few discussions on the whole randomising of names and whilst simple and logical your solution i havent seen before and it is also the closest to the perfect equilibrium of accountability and privacy i have seen.

Also to refine the concept, for MTTs give everyone on sign up a unique ID number, so you can follow the other player's play (inc single tournament HUD stats) in that MTT but wont have an ability to make long term notes and reads.

If anyone has connections at PTR, please contact me.

I guess we now know why Stox had poor results at limit PTR -- that wasn't the main account.

With all the resignations, now the apparent plans to discontinue the Stox brand altogether, it sure seems like there may be more going on than just having double accounts. It seems somewhat understandable that a high profile player would want to play on another account than he makes videos on, and not the worst thing ever done, but it seems like too much blood is flowing for just that to be the case.

The Bryce Statement I

The Bryce Statement II

Cliff notes: Bryce statement went on for about 12 minutes and had 30 seconds of substance. He is sad, and Nick Grudzien refuses to say why he multiaccounted. Nick claims he did not collude, and has reasons that must remain secret for the extra accounts. And he has not turned over HM data.

:leavebritneyalone

yo bryce, where can i get a turtleneck like that?

This is actually how it works or used to work (haven´t played there for years). You had your login name, which was unchangeable, and then your screenname which you could/can change every X months. I don´t see the connection between notes transferring and screenname changes, as the notes are on your own computer and not on the pokersites´ servers. Making this the universal way of operating would undermine datamining, the big big bomb under online poker.