Who knows how much money this guy made off with playing PLO!! Mypokerintel does not even track PLO.

Now here may be a smoking gun.

Just withdrew from UB, will see how this mess turns out.

They always put you on AK amirite?


This is really discouraging. UB should be contacted if they haven't been already. I want to see what their response is to the allegations.

lost a bunch to this guy at 5k nl and plo. pissed.

Does the 600k include PLO?

I'm pretty sure i lost a bunch to him at 25/50 hu PLO

edit: I didn't use PTO for these sessions, anyway to try to retrieve the hands? I'll shoot UB an email

A note, as can be seen in the graph the winrates go down as the VPIP goes up. The xpert running -80BB/100 should not be compared to the average.

Let me break down this all-in call just to give it a little more context.
NioNio is getting almost exactly 2:1 on his call of the post-flop all-in.

vs. AK he is a 60:40 favorite
vs. AQ he is a 54:46 dog
vs. KQ he is a 55:45 dog

vs. an overpair or any sort of AT or AJ hand, he is approx a 76: 24 dog (except if villain's hand includes a Q, in which case he's closer to a 92/8 dog; set of Ts or Js is also close to 92/8). I don't care to lay out the exact math for every possible combination, but if Nio thinks that any of the 3 overcard combinations combined or a complete airball/underpair make up a substantial part of Carl's range, the call is "correct.")

p.s. I think evidence is overwhelming at this point that Nio's a cheater. Just wanted to add some math to this HH before people scream ZOMG, 77, must have superuserability enabled.

i do think he's a cheater, but calling that 77 call a smoking gun is ridiculous

Agreed. See math above. Much crazier calls are made in high-stakes NLHE games every day.

Yeah IMO the evidence in hand histories comes in the pots he loses.. which are never in poor calls (from what I have seen) but rather in all-in pots.

And more evident than the hand histories are his stats and the timing of this player in relation to the Absolute scandal.

This is the real smoking gun.

cts is pissed. This means war.

So ill take it you finally got home and were able to review your PT? if so please send me all of your plo and holdem hh's. I like to compare the hole cards of his opponents when we possible and we can basically only use the hands that went to showdown when looking at the ones http://www.mypokerintel.com sent us.

cts get it in good :P

Hand #44150261-2284 at Mississauga (No Limit Hold'em)
Started at 09/Jul/07 01:34:01

NioNio is at seat 3 with $24726.60.
MUCKEMSAYUHH is at seat 4 with $5522.
The button is at seat 4.

MUCKEMSAYUHH posts the small blind of $25.
NioNio posts the big blind of $50.

NioNio: -- --
MUCKEMSAYUHH: -- --

Pre-flop:

MUCKEMSAYUHH raises to $150. NioNio re-raises to
$250. MUCKEMSAYUHH calls.

Flop (board: Ah 9h Jc):

NioNio bets $500. MUCKEMSAYUHH raises to $2000.
NioNio re-raises to $3500. MUCKEMSAYUHH goes all-in
for $5272. NioNio calls.

Turn (board: Ah 9h Jc 8c):

(no action in this round)


River (board: Ah 9h Jc 8c 7s):

(no action in this round)




Showdown:

MUCKEMSAYUHH shows 6h Jh.
MUCKEMSAYUHH has Jh Ah 9h Jc 8c: a pair of jacks.
NioNio shows Kd Ac.
NioNio has Kd Ac Ah 9h Jc: a pair of aces.


Hand #44150261-2284 Summary:

$1 is raked from a pot of $11044.
NioNio wins $11043 with a pair of aces.



Hand #44150261-2285 at Mississauga (No Limit Hold'em)

I'm famous!

On a serious (and way delayed note), thanks for the assistance you guys have provided. These tools are so clutch in catching these scumbags.

Ok, I agree, but still, it's a pretty ridiculous call.

Also, yeah, he's not in terrible shape v the ranges shown, but funny how he calls off 13k more so easily with an underpair and bad undergut.

WOwowowow, look at the post I found on pocketfives from November. Posted by Gank, a well respected tourney player....

The UB skinny: An insider talks (Edit: with sickening update)
by gank on 11/9/2007 23:32



Well, I guess I have become the reporter everyone trusts to talk about what goes on behind the scenes while protecting my source's identity, as I have been contacted by and had a long conversation with an employee at UB who wished to shed light on the company. Again, I will protect my source and not be releasing his/her name to anyone, ever.

I will list the all the important points from the conversation as best I can.

1. It is possible to have upto 25 usernames registered to 1 players name on UB, they know about this and are ok with it as a company.

2. If someone does have multiple accounts, even if they are registered to the same name and use the same IP address, they are permitted to play at the same table, cash games and sitNgos and tournies. UB knows about this, and are OK with it.

3. Although my source is not sure if hole cards could be seen during the hand by a superuser account, my source does know that as soon as a hand is over with, UB personell has access to see everyones holecards even those that didnt go to showdown. This has been used by some UB higher ups at times while they were playing. Not a direct form of cheating, but definitely an unfair advantage if the person has access to this while playing.

4. A higher level executive was fired not to long ago, because her 19 year old son, who she got a job at UB, was caught cheating games at the UB office. It is unclear to my source if holecards were able to be seen during the hand, but it is a possibility. He definitely was cheating customers somehow, maybe a cobination of the above things mentioned at the very least.

edit: Another close, reliable source has just talked to me and told me "the woman's son had"administrative access" which let him see hole cards." and that the source "wouldn't besurprised if administrative access still exists" The person went on to say "there's also evidence that at least a couple months agoAJ (Green) was overseeing day to day operations"

5. "Someone" was brought on board by UB to help clean up the site. He figured out the problem was that they were using a version of the software from 1998 that had security holes in it(i.e. no security firewalls were/could be put in place) that couldnt be fixed without a complete overhaul of the software, which was estimated at costing 6 million dollars. UB decided it was not in their best interests to upgrade the software.

6. My source also voiced their concern for my safety for vocalizing these points.

I bring this to light because I feel that this is the important stuff that our community needs to be aware of.


here is the link to the entire p http://www.pocketfives.com/73CFD2BC-...CB1FD89B8.aspxost

Whoa.

holy ****

now what

everyone cash out there money and leave the fish to me

Wow, I'm kinda surprised there are people who didn't see that back when it was originally posted. I used to post primarily on p5 before making the move over here, I guess I just took it for granted that people from 2+2 were reading what was posted over there during superuser scandal pt. 1.

poker players are so degen

lol.


Your hot run is still about 33% below what the suspicious player is.

Also, as detailed above, winning at 50ptbb/100, on my data, should happen on about .3% of samples (other issues at play).

Winning at 75ptbb/100 is far, far, far, less likely. These things become exponentially harder to achieve as you get further away from the mean.


People saying "I ran hot" are failing to realise just how hot this guy allegedly ran, even without being much ahead on all-in situations.