https://gyazo.com/59be842098101019cc9d0d32be439a04

These players have super high winrates. I realize outliers do exist but this seems really sus. I checked on 25nl, 100nl and 200nl and found nothing similar.
I've been playing in these games for a few months and losing. Anyone know something I should know?

Thanks.

You can run super good. It just doesn't have to happen. Those winrates are pretty nuts tho.

Look at the nicknames: FirstAlex, TopJosh...clearly bots names, NO IMAGINATION at all.

I know from looking up my own name on that site it misses a lot of hands. Missing a few losing sessions while tracking most of the winning sessions can have a significant impact on the recorded winrate.

I do not know if that happened but that combined with a low sample size (under 20k hands) is one explanation.

Firstalex and topJosh not only have really similar names but their numbers all the way through are almost exactly identical. Number of hands played, winrate, EV.

How is that even possible? Even the exact same playing style for 2 programmed bots shouldn't have numbers that similar especially in such a small sample.

Really curious. Can't think of a reasonable explanation here.

Multiaccounting?

This is an alias I made with the few hands I played against: TopJosh, FirstAlex, chichapit, loveowe and maskoov.

Their stats are beyond terrible, yet they are winning at >50bb/100.

then i guess tight is right!!

It could be one person controlling each account. I'm unsure they will do anything but its worth contacting ACR support with your findings.

gl

What website is tracking that? #curious

smart hand poker

I wrote to them, just in case OP hadn't, already:


"Dear Security

This SS was posted on TwoPlusTwo:

https://gyazo.com/59be842098101019cc9d0d32be439a04

In case you haven’t noticed these accounts’ ridiculously high win rates, I thought I would draw them to your attention for investigation.

Thank you."

*

"Hello,

We hope this email finds you well, it is a pleasure for us to assist you.

We understand that you wish to report possible cheating on our tables, we appreciate you taking the time to provide this. However, you are not providing enough details to continue with the investigation. Please follow the link and fill out the form with the details needed so our security team can get on this as soon as possible. Also be aware this investigations result will not be shared for privacy policies.
https://www.winningpokernetwork.com/security/

Please let us know if there is anything else we can do for you!

Kind Regards,
Customer Service Representative"

*

"Dear CSR

Thank you for your response.

If you look at the originally attached screenshot, you will see the usernames of the alleged cheats and can investigate their play. In addition, you could read the TwoPlusTwo Forum thread at https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...cr-nl-1795696/

Once you have done that you will have the full information from a user’s point of view, but obviously your own investigations of their play will give you all you need to proceed further.

Much obliged."

Thanks for the info. Until I get better, probably a bad investment for me. lol

Thanks for reporting them Mike.

Sure. It's possible. But even multiaccointing I don't understand why two accounts would end up with 60BB/100 over that kind of crazy sample-size.

And if those two accounts are playing together at the SAME TABLE then that is 120BB/100 for that person controlling them. While they also both happen to be playing really tight? So that doesn't make a lot of sense to be either.

Maybe that is what this is. But I still don't think that explains really identical winrates like that...much less something that outrageously high after 12k hands.

In other words, if you and I multi-accounted and if we purposefully TRIED to get matching winrates I'm not sure that we could. And I don't think there is any way you and I would get 60BB/100 each after 12k hands.

Somebody else mentioned that maybe not all of the hands are counted. If these stats come from a tracking program or site that doesn't show all hands and maybe only shows hands that went to showdown or something really weird like that then we might be getting somewhere. Right now we are just left with 12k hands each and 59BB/100 with the two different players with similar names. (I'm focusing on those two specifically the most right now)

Thanks Mike for sending that in.
Kind of a strange response from them unfortunately. Somewhat offputting. Hopefully they take a look at it and also comprehend the issue. Their own investigation into these accounts should likely yield even more suspicions almost right away. This stuff was detectable from the outside without nearly the amount of resources they have including whether some of these accounts are always playing at the same time and same tables, etc.

I also have hands on them. See the ss I took of their combined alias.

I don't see how hands being omitted would change anything unless losing hands are more likely to be missed than winning ones.

Agreed. I don't know how it could be either.
But maybe a combo of "run hot" along with "showdown only" or some other weird filter that was turned on or another kind of a data glitch? That's a lot of "showdown only" hands or "data glitch" hands though I think.

Something goofy is certainly going on here. And either they are getting hole-cards of their opponents or something in the data we are seeing is really really flawed somehow.

I'm not sure what other explanations there are. Even team-play between two players (or more) at a table wouldn't explain racking up a win-rate that high...that also happens to be almost identical.

Seeing their opponents' hole-cards could explain it of course. I'm running out of hypotheticals and possibilities beyond that but I'm sure there must be some other cheat-worthy way somehow.

If I had to guess, I'd say there is some problem with the data the site is showing. Those winrates are impossible over the sample size and I would think its unlikely they are colluding with the stats you have on them.

I think these win-rates would actually be possible at low stakes on a soft site for the best players in the pool running a few sigma above EV. But then ACR isn't a soft site, right?

For the very best players on an ultra-soft site and running hot...sure...I guess.
But 4 players at 60BB/100'ish all running that super hot over this specific sample? And 2 players both with virtually the exact same numbers...including numbers of hands played and their crazy winrate of 58.1BB/100? Simply no way.

If we had one player at 60BB/100 I would agree with you that a really good player in a weak field that pays off all over the place plus the best run of super-run-hot-hitting-quads-a-few-times over 12k hands and we were asked if this one guy was cheating then I would agree with you. That's ridiculously hot...but possible. Maybe a 1-in-500 caliber run of 10k hands. Maybe 1-in-1000? I don't know. But still within the realm of possibility.

But with 4 players all at that amount of run-hot and 2 players with really similar names not only running hot but also playing almost exactly the same number of hands, I think we are well beyond the idea of "They could be really good players getting super lucky in a weak field."

It can skew the results dramatically.

For instance; if a site tracks 18 of 20 sessions from a player on a heater but misses two sessions when he lost most of what he won; the bb/100 will show the heater without including the huge downswing.

Not long ago I lost nearly 10 buyins in about 500 hands. If I were to remove those 500 hands my win-rate would show me winning at a far better bb/100 than I am.

I thought the results in OP were from a different site and I have no clue how accurate they're.

A while back pokertableratings would miss a lot of sessions and a site (i don't wish to name) doesn't track blitz.

I'm just offering a possible explanation and definitely not sticking up for the players mentioned - there's clearly a lot of suspect results coming out of ACR lately.

The site is tracking correctly. See the post I made with the screenshot of their combined alias.

Coincidentally, I went on a relatively sick heater last night. One of my best in awhile. Partway through it I checked my winrate and I was at 50BB/100 over 1000 hands. (Naturally, it didn't last).

I guess I've had better stretches than 5 buy-ins over 1000 hands but this one kind of stuck out. The luck involved in landing something like that 12 times in a row has to be pretty darn high. And even on my sick heater I STILL wasn't at the 60BB/100 win-rate of these multiple players. Haha.