Don't you know?!? - Three hands is always more believable than statistical probabilities (@$$ho!3)!

Hmmmm, tough call.

Are we allowed calculators for this one?

+1

We all know about Potripper and NioNio etc using their superuser abitity very stupidly in the highest games going.

What about a clever superuser? Where would we find one?

If I were a superuser here s what I would do.

1. I would not play high limits. I would probably stick to 100NL and lower and low limit tourneys like 2-11$ buyins not the WCOOP or 100$ entries, maybe winning an occasional bigger tournament for a few thousand bucks.

2. I would keep my stats believable, not 60/40+ but more conservative like 25/17.

3. I wouldnt be making 9 high calls with no hand whatsoever vs good bluffs.

4. I would make sure I lost to regular players a good % of the time.

5. I would only make a few hundred dollars a day to keep under the radar.

My point is we ve seen a few stupid superusers get caught but what about the clever disciplined ones, assuming there are any. Wherever they are I know it wouldnt be 100/200$ No limit. Ive suffered those terrible beats, particularly on Pokerstars where it defies explanation why the opponent has played a hand a certain way similar to the hands Webiggy has posted above. It feels like your being cheated.

The two are not comaprable.

The 3 hands posted are looking at a possible superuser not a card distribution problem.

Did you actually look at the hands?

J2 AIPF vs obvious strength. 10 8 again the same? Does this player know what cards are coming?

superuser ? AK vs KQ and he hits runner str .. What kind of superuser would that be ?

You will remember "bunches" more because they stand out, even though they are a routine part of any sequence of results.

Paranoia about the UB/AP super user account thing needs to be measured against reality. Reality is anyone with that advantage will not spend hours in a $2 tourney to try to make a "score" equivalent of a single hour of work at a job that says "would you like to super size that sir?"

What if scenario based belief structures like this are the first step toward paranoid based rigged/cheating beliefs where you start to see patterns and super users everywhere once a strange hand takes place. Your choice to embrace that way of thinking (as some in this thread do) or not.


Good plan. By the year 2095 you might make as much as they did. Assuming noone noticed you first

Why is suspicion of a possible individual cheater (however misguided) being discussed in a rigged site thread? It isn't in dispute that there are cheaters in poker. The are trojan programs you could get on your computer that allows a remote user to know when you are playing and then watch your hole cards (as well as get your credit card number, bank accounts, etc.), if you are stupid and don't protect your computer. There's also the chance that an insider at some site has a way to see your hole cards, although it's pretty unlikely anymore after UB/AP (and they won't be playing low stakes). But speculation about superusers without evidence is worse than useless.

Standard initial paranoid based beliefs adapting to your huge statistical evidence. If it aint the site it must be something else that made these small samples of hands happen...

Your work is quite interesting and revealing, but many hard core rigged believers and paranoid personalities will just adapt to it and maintain their beliefs regardless of the amount of evidence presented. That is their choice to make and they are welcome to it.

Many of the rest of us do find your research interesting and hope you keep at it at your convenience.

Wait, what is too much of a tin hat theory? Trojans on your computer is much more of a real threat than superusers are, because they enable the same thing and it's much more likely you have a backdoor on your computer than it is you're playing against a true superuser.

Also what's this about Paradise?
The three hands he posted weren't examples of a superuser like UB/AP, they were examples of someone who knew (presumably) the hole cards of his opponents and the cards that were going to be dealt out.

And obviously he's doing his best avoiding detection playing $2 donkaments... And putting his money in with J2o. [/sarcasm]

"Defy explanation"? Not everyone plays to try to get in the most +EV spots, many players play to gamble. Even I'm guilty of playing 10NL occasionally with some (usually drunk) friends and open-shoving every few hands and totally monkeying around.

So basically you would suggest to run like a normal winning player... My suggestion in that case: just improve your game and be a normal winning player. Or....are those all superusers...??

Yes Im saying dont be greedy and run like god just make it look like your a regular winner. I take it you would be a stupid superuser and run like 150 BB per hour.

And to be clear, the UB/AP superusers didn't know the cards to come, that has never been shown to have happened anywhere. Some sites even shuffle after every bet so that it can't ever happen.

In the UB/AP case it was clear that some staff and senior management knew what was going on or were directly involved. In other words a site doesnt rig itself it needs corrupt ownership/employees. UB/AP didnt co operate initially with the players investigation and lied about what they knew.

Its possible that the RNG isnt flawed at all just that there are people playing with access to the dealer cards and hole cards who know when the cards they need are coming, making it look as if the RNG is flawed. This could be trojans, hackers, employees, management so this does belong in a rigged thread.

Just because a few stupid superusers were caught doesnt mean that there are clever more patient superusers not risking everything for a quick 200k, but instead milking it slowly making a little every day for years.

I see you get quite upset by my speculation leading you to insults, why is that?

Oh so its a good plan to make 200k in 60 hours like NioNio is it is that how you would do it Monteroy?

My way you could gring out say 3k a week for maybe only 20 hours at say 100NL,plus a couple of decent tourney wins through the year and net yourself maybe 150-200k a year for life or as long as people play OP. So I would say it is a good plan Monteroy.

Please tell me how you would work it if you were a superuser. Key word being "if" and dont put I would never do that I a person with morals blah blah just tell me your clever plan for not being detected?

Actually, wasn't that exactly what happened with Planet Poker? Basically all the cheaters had to do was synchronize their clocks with the server clocks and voila.

If I was a superuser, I would grind the micro stakes cash games and pump out a profit of $10/hour.

But seriously, if someone were to do that, I would say in a weeks time they would be bored of superusing out a profit of a few bucks an hour and move up, where the money starts to mean something. Ever hear of greed?

Did you happen to notice what the buyin for that tournament was?

OMG ! I just cant stand it anymore, scoopdonk and kitchma you are both non brained monkeys. Thank you.

your first sentence is correct, they are different issues.

however, 3 hands won't catch a superuser either.

yeah greed is why those guys were caught.So greed =stupid. Smart=3-500$ per day.

Most people work boring jobs and you could make $ relatively quickly if you were a superuser, it wouldnt be like you have to grind 12 hrs per day just an hour or two and win a few key hands and make a few key folds.

Of course not but if the guy had say 15-20+ hands played like that in a tourney winning every time would very suspicious.

Did you look at those 3 hands also they re pretty bad.

Cant take the heat then get out the kitchen.

You a mod now Mark? When did that happen? You gonna ban rigtards now? delete their posts?

naah, I'm looking at more horse porn these days.

This is flawed logic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question


In this scenario, of course. Here we have a system with a security error that can be noticed (by the site or players) and corrected. Best approach is grab as much as you can as fast as you can. Not a very tricky choice to make.

Your approach may work, but it is hardly the most practical approach in this scenario if maximizing money is the goal.


With an uncertain window of opportunity and immense relatively safe profit to be made, the smash and grab approach is by far the best plan of attack.

No idea why you brought up morality, I never considered that much of a factor in this case. Even if I am against crime, I certainly can see which form of crime makes better sense here.

All the best