recently signed up for a datamine site that has all hands from all the players on ub.

aph 5.77


this player is at .75bb/100 winner over 310k hands

aph 6.77


this player is at 1.09bb/100 over 115k hands

ok, after looking at stats and checking some dates it seems these guys are likely the same player.

doesnt matter, the point is 50/30 is def beating this game pretty well.

is it aph 5.77 over the whole 310k or over this 16k sample? same question for second set.

so obv these are filtered for 5-6?

In any case there's about a 2-3% chance these guys are BE and running good.

the 5.77 aph is over my sample.

i just plugged his name into mypokerintel to see that this clown is actually beating the game.

for leader, no these stats are not filtered for 5-6 but well, put it this way, when this dude sits down, the game fills fast.

anyway, filtered for 5-6, i have 10k hands at 52/29 for one guy and 5500 at 52/28 for the other guy.

its not a case of playing super short. these guy/s are legitimately beating this game 5-6 way, with no table selection, often against a bunch of tags.

What also surprises me is that his AF is only 1.0?

So loose/agressive preflop and loose passive postflop is a viable style?

or what your saying is , this game is a absolute crapshoot...

Well the thing is that, if these guys play well post flop by which I mean they rarely bluff/semi-bluff and they make thin value bets/raises with small pairs, then they're style does will counter traditional tag strategies vs. lags like inducing action and SD very light. Basically that strategy gives very good lags free cards when behind and pays them off to the max when they have any piece.

AF 1.0 is not that passive if your playing 50% of your hands.

In a pool of say 100million+ players worldwide it does not surprise me one little bit that somebody can learn to beat the game, by accident!
If you let 1million monkeys play 300k hands one of the monkeys would get rich just by clicking buttons.
Either he has hit on something or he is very fortunate, I think a little of both.

And, of course, it is also possible that this is another case of someone using illegal information but not being as obvious about it as the other hole card seers.

highly doubt this. winrate is waaaaaaaaayyyyyyy too low, among other reasons.

But suppose he is a losing player who is only occasionally able to get some sort of extra help? It could be enough to put him over the top and make him a small winner.

I'm not really sure what sort of cheating would fit these criteria Emerson. I'm inclined to agree with Victor. It'd be an interesting challenge to try and make these stats work. Having a quick think about it now im inclined to believe I could and be a breakeven or very slight winning player but that might be very naive of me. I'd need to game select though no doubt and i may need to exploit the image I have currently until the stats start to set off alarm bells for the TAGS.

then u would not be accomplishing what this guy is.

Why do you guys still play there?

ezest games on the net and its not close. im fairly sure i would not be a winner at ftp or stars.

Curiously enough. 1bb/100 would be the kind of winrate I would use if I was cheating, it would allow me top slide through the cracks indefinately...

But I'm not saying anything, just making bubbles.

JT

then ur ****** stupid. i would use 3.5 proly.

3.5... I'm sure you wouldn't gert any attention with that number... Seriously, I'm not getting into a conversation about good ways to cheat online...

JT

Victor,

the way most 15/30 and 30/60 players adapt to bad players and bad play makes me think that going outside the conventional wouldn't cost you THAT much in winrate. The main thing is that someone who is good enough to maintain this style and who is sophisticated enough to finesse their stats to 50/30 and plays well enough post flop to maintain this style would just play better pre flop

ps I'd rather die than cheat to run at 1bb/100 3.5 seems optimum to me too btw

ya, bc gehrig and nikla and baronzeus and gildwulf are always accused of cheating.

3.5 aint crazy.

i think u underestimate most tags. i think in general they play well. i dont think im better than all the clown grinders on abs.

i think u are overrating this dudes sophistication. i suppose you would have to play with him. he makes plenty of mathematical errors.

im completely baffled by how he has maintained winning. i was intrigued by him long ago, and asked baronzeus about him. bz was adamant that he was a loser. like, it wasnt even a question. mebbe he will stop by, but i think hes on an island or something at this point.

Yeah, greed gets the best of most cheats and that's why they get caught. If those idiots at the high stakes games weren't so completely blatant nobody would have ever caught them... and that's scary.

From experience I think the main problem the players at this level have is that they overplay their hands b/c they hand read less well than they should. Playing more hands with slightly wackier pre flop combinations means I would exploit this weakness even further. This experience is from playing with the grinders on AP. I wasn't claiming this guy in particular was a good player I have no experience with any of the players on UB. He probably is an ok player that is running really well and is a slight losing player. I was merely claiming that in order for me to conceivably upkeep this style this is how i'd have to play.

Also from your replies on here I would argue that you are quite a deal more advanced in your thinking, at least in theory, than the 15/30 and 30/60 players on any of the sites ive played at.

3.5 =/ 60 LDO