Because the accounts weren't logged into the client for the tournament no computers were needed. Registration simply says, "I'm am going/want to be there". Logging into your account on the client says, "I'm here". If you never log in for the tournament you are simply "sat out" and show as "inactive" at the table.

From what I remember -- and I'm basically done with the "bigluckygus" portion of this thread -- none of the bogus "bigluckygus" accounts ever sat in for the tournament. The bogus accounts were created, registered, but never actually played. Those stacks just got bled off over the tournament.

On second thought, there may have been one fake who did show up for a while because I remember one table that was made up of 4 of the bogus accounts and one other player -- who also didn't bother to show up -- and one of the fakes had a stack about double the starting stacks. That table was completely inactive -- no hands being dealt -- for quite a while.

To be honest, no I don't know if they were play money accounts or not. I've had my ACR, BCP and DSI accounts for a while now and have forgotten how the sign up procedure went for creating an account. [Maybe I should create a True Poker account for a refresher.] If play money accounts can register for real money tournaments then they could be.

I hear what you are saying but if you look at the chip stacks there are two accounts that were up in chips so at least two accounts were being played on. Also, and i could be wrong, but if the accounts were sat out from the beginning of the tourney I would expect all of the accounts to have been blinded down to roughly the same chip counts. But there seems to be some discrepencies there especially considering how small the blinds were.

Could be. I wasn't looking at all of them. Mainly the one table with 4 fakes + 1 no show.

Would depend on how the fakes were distributed among tables, how many live players were at the tables with the fakes, and how fast tables were playing compared to each other.

Slower tables = slower blinding; faster tables = faster blinding. A table with one live player and everyone else a no show will blind down much faster than a table with 1 no show and everyone else live and fighting over the no show/sitting out players's blinds.

Ya I see your point there but just from going by the screen shot provided of the accounts chip stacks to me it seems possible to me multiple accounts were being played on. When you consider that the screen shot shows the tourney still being in the first level and blinds only 15/30 just seems like the seats weren't all being sat out.

Nothing really out of whack on the screen shot. The fake accounts with > 5K chips -- other than the real bigluckygus -- were probably the ones that were at that particular table I was talking about and had picked up some blinds + antes, but had not given them back yet on their own blinds. Just an artifact of when I "snapped the picture".

While I don't discount what you are saying, since the tourney was only five minutes old when that snap shot was taken it doesn't seem likely that some accounts had already been blinded down a few hundred chips considering the blinds were so low. And the accounts that were up had to have had someone playing them since other live players at their tables would have picked up their blinds if they were sitting out.

If they were at a table with one live player, it is quite plausible. And these were 6-max tables which increased the speed of blinding off.

They were at a table with no live players...at all. The table was just shuffling blinds + antes back and forth.


I appreciate the thought you're putting into this, but the bigluckygus mystery has been solved. What hasn't yet is:
(a) why real, live, documented multiaccounters are still able to play
(b) how it was that players were able to play certain Cage freerolls from skins on which the freeroll was supposedly not running on which led to...documented multiaccounting.

I totally agree and until I feel secure I won't be playing on WPN.

Well there Mr. Stone... Nice movie. One problem though, there just isn't any truth to it. 1.5*


While I'm sure freeroll traffic will suffer, and nobody really cares how you feel.. If such an ardent supporter of the network can be scared off by basically nothing, what of the weaker minded WPN fish?



I mean, come on lol. You expect people to believe there is multi-accounting on a site with <1k players. Please, just please.

Every single day I play the same people. I know what their names are on multiple skins. Im pretty sure you could switch skins after busting and late reg the tournament under a different SN. This is no different. Get used to it..


On a side note, Bigluckygus was in $33 SS to cage yesterday, and he was the only one. I guess he/his fanboys are multiaccounting under different names now..

OP is sure on to the next UB/AP scandal... Docu-movie coming...

Thank you, very much, for your completely useless input. Any further "contributions" on your part are not necessary.

If you don't understand the difference between reentry and freezeout tournaments and the issue being discussed, there's not much I can say to further educate you as to why this is even being talked about.

Just wondering maybe_mammaries but does that cute little guy giving everyone the middle fingers you have there make you some sort of tough guy?

I understand that some trolls ruined you freeroll, sorry.. The issue was obv handled but you feel wronged. And there is only 2 of oyu in this thread, im just trolling you tards.

Nope, but I sure hope it offends you. That's what I do, offend your delicate sensibilities.. its not hard. most over 40 part-time, freeroll-playing 'cardsharks' are easy to offend.

Have fun with your thread guys You two sound real in tune with one another..

Got it. Standard 2+2 d-bag supreme. Maybe you can get that placed under your avatar.

Really? That would be cool. You''ll notice I only troll the absolute worst posting morons on here right? So if some idiot hadn't made this thread, I wouldn't be able to troll it

Honestly tho, I'm playing all the time. I only do this when in bored before/after session

Actually it would only offend me if i actually cared what you thought, said or did. To me you are just an internet tough guy that would never say anything that offended someone face to face because you are a coward.

Just a thought though, you come into this thread and disagree with myself and Steve. Now wouldn't your words travel father if you were to disagree and not be disrepectful? For example, SycoSteve and I don't see eye to eye on this situation and yet still had a polite conversation. Just some free advice for you.

And once again I will point to the fact that the issue was not about this tourney being a free roll. It was about a potential security breach on the site that could affect everyone, I still don't think you understand that point btw.

Chopsy, SycoSteve: I hope you guys realize that you are probably talking to a 12 year old.

Got it. Standard 2+2 d-bag supreme

Nah. A 12-year-old would've gotten bored and found a new toy to play with already.

Hmmm, you don't know me very well then. I offend people to their face all the time.. That general lack of fear I possess.. I generally don't have these problems tho. Nobody outside an Internet forum has ever come at me. If you ever saw me, you would know why.

And to the point of not being aware of this 'possible breach of security'... In over 3,000 games over the last 5 months, I have not witnessed a single thing to make me think that there are multi-accounters on this network. I've seen players try every angle on this site to gain an edge.. If it could be done, it would have been done before.

You guys can keep being stupid and trying to scare people off. Anyone with a brain can see what happened here..

Lemme see if I can summarize Maybe_malarky's position based on his oh so useful contributions to this thread:

[X] Freerolls aren't entitled to the same protection and integrity as real money tournaments even if real money -- or equivalent -- prizes are awarded

[X] Players who aren't grinding multitables 16 hours a day shouldn't have their concerns or opinions heard 'cause they ain't worth $#!+

[X] Unless Maybe_malarky has seen verifiable multiaccounting with his own two little beady caveman eyes, such a thing cannot possibly exist

[X] Anyone who has seen verifiable multiaccounting happen -- convinced enough to call in security to investigate -- is just a crackpot who's trying to scare people away

FWIW -- and something that will be completely ignored by Maybe_malarky conveniently -- I am not talking about the bigluckygus fiasco -- yes, that is over and done with -- but about the handful of others that were reported to security.

Be my guest, Maybe_malarky, go right on ahead thinking all I was talking about was the bigluckygus harassment incident. Just shows you need to work on reading comprehension skills.

Coward

Well Steve, you can put words in my mouth all you want, but the simple fact is there is zero evidence of multi-accounting on the network.

Anybody can be believe with the proper evidence. Since you have none, your entire point is irrelevant.

*yawn*

*snore*

*zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz*

Glad this problem has been taken care of. There's simply no way every security threat can be prevented before it happens. The best we can hope is that the security team contains the threat quickly and corrects the problem. Looks like that has been done here. Good looking out on the player's part and good follow through by the security team.