Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Internet Poker Discussions of Internet poker venues, including RB & bonuses.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-21-2015, 08:52 PM   #1476
Bluenowhere
adept
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,147
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post
Sharing a graph amngst a few mates or discussion group, or even posted here is not crossing a line. Doing so in order to be admitted to a conspiracy regarding table selection is - especially when it is verified by a full audit, using other players data, illegally data mined information and a security check via TeamViewer to watch the graph being created in real time, that explains the complexity of the conspiracy.
So this posts says to get into any group the graph has to be "verified by a full audit, using other players data, illegally data mined information and a security check via TeamViewer to watch the graph being created in real time". This is where you try and misrepresent the divisions by saying this is what they require you to go through to get in. Now you are saying...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post
LOL - asked and answered - at least twice - the data mined info and TeamViewer check stuff is openly discussed in the $60 cartel thread linked to earlier by another poster. If your read it you would see I was merely talking about what they were advocating. If there is a lie it is the $60 cartel's lie not mine. Maybe the whole thread clarifying the rules and the audit process was a bit of Pleeb baiting, I don't know, but I take them at their word.
How do you reconcile what you say in the first quoted bit with the part highlighted in the second section? You are honestly going to claim that earlier you were merely stating what was advocated? Why did you represent it in a manner that suggested that is what happens when you had absolutely no idea what happens? This is so clearly a change of what you are saying that I can only think you were willfully lying earlier to try and put divisions in a bad light to anyone unfamiliar with the process.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post

As for your divisions rubbish...can you not see that Premier League teams are not in a conspiracy to win all their games by never playing each other and instead knocking three past the Division Two teams...unless they are lucky enough to play a Conference league team. They have divisions where they play each other to find out who is best and who goes down.

Your conspiracy "division" is entirely about the best NOT playing each other. Can you really not see the difference i terms of the impact upon the members of the division and the aspirants for a place in that division? Can you really not see that your analogy just shows how dishonest the cartel is in comparison to a real meritocratic league structure?
It's an analogy, it's not meant to be an exact comparison. Certain features are the same and I made that clear when I compared them. Premier league teams have access to the big money by virtue of their current league standing. To get access to this money the teams outside of these leagues have to prove their worth. The league is set up in a way that allows the teams that perform the best to win more money. If you can't see how those points are analogous I'm not really sure what to say.

Hypers have almost always been about the best at each level not playing each other, even long before divisions. The only thing that changed is the incentive for weaker regs to get sat and this is what divisions are about. As I said earlier divisions are more meritocratic than a football league. If you put Chelsea in league 2 it would take them a minimum of three years to play Premier league football again. If you put Skai in the 30s it would take him less than a year (or in any case, certainly less than 3) to reach the top again.How can something that offers such mobility and correction based on skill level be anything other than the ultimate meritocracy?
Bluenowhere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2015, 08:58 PM   #1477
mme
old hand
 
mme's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: true anti-CFR-HUDs
Posts: 1,668
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

this nonsense talk from the cartels is is really worth it. they protect the fish, fight climate change deniers, run more ethically than soccer leagues.
mme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2015, 09:17 PM   #1478
TimTamBiscuit
veteran
 
TimTamBiscuit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: cRUSHed!!!!!!
Posts: 2,134
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

At the WSOP main event this year the table seating won't be random but will be based on past participation and finishing position. This new meritocratic system has been introduced to more fairly cater to the rising number of professionals and lower number of recreational players that enter the Main event. This new simplified approach also allows smoother administration of the event, enabling the winner to be crowned before a hand is played.

Prior final tablists will be automatically seeded to this year's final table division and will not have to pay an entry fee. This division will battle for 8 of the seats at the final table of 9. This is totally fair as these players have spent many previous entry fees to battle their way to the main event final table and totally deserve a fairer chance of making this year's final table.

Prior participants lower than final tablists will be automatically seeded into divisions of 1000 players based on highest prior finishing position. The first 1000 will be seeded at tables with proportionately more recreational players than lower divisions. A recreational player by definition is a player who has never entered the main event before no matter how well qualified in other arenas. The main event is special and cannot be allowed to be made unfair by seeding players from lesser backgrounds such as online poker millionaires or champions of Europe.

The winner of each 1000 player division will earn the right to next year participate in the one higher division but only if they were a seeded player. If a recreational player some how wins a seeded division then they are still eligible to participate as a recreational player next year. The exception is if a recreational player wins the lowest 1000 division. This fortunate player will be seeded next year in the second lowest 1000 division. It is of course not possible for a recreational player to make the final table. They must pay their dues through the divisions.

With this new fairer structure it is anticipated that a talented recreational player will need to spend about $80,000 to make the final table of the main event but only if they are talented enough to win each 1000 player division eight years in a row. But this is entirely fair because the final tablists got there first and "finders keepers."

WSOP management have been overwhelmed with the dramatic increase in main event entries and the many accolades for the simplified meritocratic system for determining the main event winner.

"I always wanted to spend my entire life savings for a chance to sit at the WSOP Main event!", exclaimed Harry Mullet of Idaho before killing himself. "After all what's a bucket list for!"

The 2015 Main Event Champion Dolly Brunson proudly thanked his supporters, "Thankyou for awarding me the 2015 Main Event title without playing a single hand of poker in recognition for the many years I have played the game at the highest of levels."

Past champion and self-proclaimed greatest player the world has ever seen, Ryan Riess endorsed the new structure, "My year was so unfair. Why anyone could have won! This new structure ensures only the best will win."

TimTamBiscuit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2015, 09:17 PM   #1479
fish_but_lucky
journeyman
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 259
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by skier_5 View Post
I don't think it's quite that simple.

What if I play skier_6 and decide I want to play like him and display his strategy in my HUD and play following that? Is that making decisions for me or is that remembering how an opponent played? What if a friend and I play each other and iterate until our histories reflect the preflop strategy which we want to play?
in this case, you've decided that you want to play like your opponent. you've interpret the game in a certain way and you decided to play accordingly. I don't see what could be wrong with that.

Quote:
When does reference material begin to make a decision for you? What if I have a 5bb and under push fold chart for fish and a 5bb push fold chart for regs. I have 94o on the button at 5bb and my fish chart says to shove and my reg chart says to fold. What do I do and can you bring forward an argument that the reference material has made a decision for me?
in this case, even tough you have to decide if vilain is a fish or not(and maybe we have a different oppinion of what a fish is) there are things done between "he is a fish" and "i shove". your refence tool allows you to not interpret those other factors, not crunch number, and not calculate things wich made you shove vs the fish. whats his range, whats your equity vs it, whats your fold equity etc. so here your chart has interpret all the decisions factors but one(categorizing your opponent).

what if i have to solve an equation for an exam and in the lessons the solution was presented in 10 steps. Do you think it's cheating if i write the whole solution on my arm and look at it during the exam? What about writing just the 2 first steps cause i dont know how to figure them out logically? still cheating?

Quote:
How is it more fair that you can have a superhud breaking down your opponents history in every possible way, but you cannot write down your preflop strategy beforehand which you worked on off the tables?
what happened in the previous hands is perfect information, theres no calculation involve about them, just remembering. hud helps you remember those and i've said in previous post why i think its fair, no matter how powerful and accurate they are.
however having a written strategy allows you to not interpret the game structure or stats, you also don't need to calculate the right answer(how to play) according to certain factors wich i think it's unfair. It doesnt matter if it solves one piece of the puzzle or solves the hole thing for you.
Do you agree that those 2 things are fundamentally different? Could you elaborate more on why you see them as being the same?

And to answer your next question no i don't think that charts should be allowed, not even 1. The only reason why stars is in a tough spot with your programm is because they want to allow 1 chart wich is fundamentally wrong imo.
Another question: Do you think bot are cheating?

Last edited by fish_but_lucky; 06-21-2015 at 09:23 PM.
fish_but_lucky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2015, 09:18 PM   #1480
brutalrng
newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 33
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

If this is going to happen ( I hope it doesn't but if it does), then I'd prefer the tables just become anonymous ...like Bovada.

Therefore nobody can cheat.

It's like how banning guns gives the criminals who are willing to still use them a bigger edge against the people.

Banning these softwares will just take away the ability for the average players to play on the same field as the big dogs. It will give the big dogs who are willing to cheat an even greater edge now.

Last edited by brutalrng; 06-21-2015 at 09:23 PM.
brutalrng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2015, 09:31 PM   #1481
TimTamBiscuit
veteran
 
TimTamBiscuit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: cRUSHed!!!!!!
Posts: 2,134
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenowhere View Post
If you put Skai in the 30s it would take him less than a year (or in any case, certainly less than 3) to reach the top again.How can something that offers such mobility and correction based on skill level be anything other than the ultimate meritocracy?
In business this is called a cartel that artificially creates a deliberately high cost of market entry to prevent new entrants from accessing customers. It is also illegal in business pretty much around the world.

A just turned 18, but broke Skai-Mark-II would need how much loss money backing to battle solely strong regs while being denyed access to any fish for 3 years do you think?

(You admit that reg vs reg battles in a raked environment are unprofitable I think).

In contrast it is much fairer to all entrants if Skai-Mark-II can simply play at the highest level he can afford the buy-in with no artificial cost barriers. The problem is the HUSNG lobby which should instead be blind like SpinnGos (but with SpinWiz and any other software way of manipulating the entry cost banned).

Last edited by TimTamBiscuit; 06-21-2015 at 09:39 PM.
TimTamBiscuit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2015, 09:53 PM   #1482
Bluenowhere
adept
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,147
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTamBiscuit View Post
In business this is called a cartel that artificially creates a deliberately high cost of market entry to prevent new entrants from accessing customers. It is also illegal in business pretty much around the world.

A just turned 18, but broke Skai-Mark-II would need how much loss money backing to battle solely strong regs while being denyed access to any fish for 3 years do you think?

(You admit that reg vs reg battles in a raked environment are unprofitable I think).

In contrast it is much fairer to all entrants if Skai-Mark-II can simply play at the highest level he can afford the buy-in with no artificial cost barriers. The problem is the HUSNG lobby which should instead be blind like SpinnGos (but with SpinWiz and any other software way of manipulating the entry cost banned).
There is no high cost of market entry though, a profit is still expected. He would not expect losses before earning his place back at the top. He would just make less than he otherwise would've done whilst he proved himself.

I don't agree that reg v reg battles are unprofitable, no. There is an absolute mountain of evidence that shows this not to be true as well. One of the most highly regarded players in the world would likely expect to make a profit for many of the levels (and possibly including the highest ones as well, post rb)

It's interesting that you think a blind entrance would avoid these problems though, do you think a blind entry makes the entrance cost higher or lower for Skai mkII?
Bluenowhere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 12:35 AM   #1483
TimTamBiscuit
veteran
 
TimTamBiscuit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: cRUSHed!!!!!!
Posts: 2,134
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenowhere View Post
It's interesting that you think a blind entrance would avoid these problems though, do you think a blind entry makes the entrance cost higher or lower for Skai mkII?
No, I'm not falling for that tarp.

Blind entry makes it fair for all participants. Regs would earn less than they do today and that would be fairer for all entrants than today.

The expectation of regs that they should be able to avoid each other is unfair to all other players. Fairness IMO means all players get an equal random shot at all other players. The division method deliberately creates unfairness for all players so as to maximise reg profits. Regs claim this is "fair" but that is ludicrous (see my WSOP post above).

Recs may or may not be good at poker but they are either ignorant of the way the divisions work or stupid for playing HUSNGs unless PokerStars makes entry blind like SpinnGo (but without any software like Spinwiz).

Would you have a problem if all players that entered a SNG received an email explaining to them how divisions work and what software was available to make sure they never play against a recreational player but always face a proven champion?
TimTamBiscuit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 02:50 AM   #1484
skier_5
Pooh-Bah
 
skier_5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 5,443
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by fish_but_lucky View Post
in this case, you've decided that you want to play like your opponent. you've interpret the game in a certain way and you decided to play accordingly. I don't see what could be wrong with that.



in this case, even tough you have to decide if vilain is a fish or not(and maybe we have a different oppinion of what a fish is) there are things done between "he is a fish" and "i shove". your refence tool allows you to not interpret those other factors, not crunch number, and not calculate things wich made you shove vs the fish. whats his range, whats your equity vs it, whats your fold equity etc. so here your chart has interpret all the decisions factors but one(categorizing your opponent).

what if i have to solve an equation for an exam and in the lessons the solution was presented in 10 steps. Do you think it's cheating if i write the whole solution on my arm and look at it during the exam? What about writing just the 2 first steps cause i dont know how to figure them out logically? still cheating?



what happened in the previous hands is perfect information, theres no calculation involve about them, just remembering. hud helps you remember those and i've said in previous post why i think its fair, no matter how powerful and accurate they are.
however having a written strategy allows you to not interpret the game structure or stats, you also don't need to calculate the right answer(how to play) according to certain factors wich i think it's unfair. It doesnt matter if it solves one piece of the puzzle or solves the hole thing for you.
Do you agree that those 2 things are fundamentally different? Could you elaborate more on why you see them as being the same?

And to answer your next question no i don't think that charts should be allowed, not even 1. The only reason why stars is in a tough spot with your programm is because they want to allow 1 chart wich is fundamentally wrong imo.
Another question: Do you think bot are cheating?
There are plenty of calculations involved in today's HUDs of which the most common is the averaging of statistics. Don't forget that HUDs filter, categorise, merge actions together, calculate aggregate stats, and present data in easy to interpret formats. A text file of hand histories is something with which there are no calculations involved (ignoring the underlying processes of saving, opening, etc), but a HUD is a far cry from that. I think that brings us pretty comfortably into the "2 steps" which you mention and beyond. HUDs may not tell you what to do (except they can, if you want them to) but they automate the process of collecting past history, interpreting past history, compiling past history into useable data, and turning that data into useable information. Some HUDs can go even further with some clever colour coding, etc and start the next step which is what decision to make off of this useable data. HUDs already tell you parts of the decision making process you laid out above (as an argument against a static preflop chart): you can get HUDs with matrix heatmaps of ranges and if you can't already, I'm sure we'll soon start to see HUDs with matrixes of equity vs historical range and fold equity vs historical range.

More importantly, HUDs can be manipulated into being charts as well (which you say is OK). Raidalot talks a lot about how newcomers to online poker are getting fleeced because they aren't aware of these tools' existence, but if there are rules with easy loopholes, this situation is going to be much worse. Our naive newcomer might find out about these tools and then start using them, but be completely unaware of the fact that while he thinks he cannot use charts, all of his opponents have manipulated their HUD to display the information which they want. This means that this player cannot ever get on an equal footing with the "HUD charters". If there are enforceable and consistent rules then at least with some effort our naive newcomer can put himself on equal footing.
skier_5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 03:34 AM   #1485
UKZodiac
grinder
 
UKZodiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Through the looking glass
Posts: 401
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTamBiscuit View Post
No, I'm not falling for that tarp.

Blind entry makes it fair for all participants. Regs would earn less than they do today and that would be fairer for all entrants than today.

The expectation of regs that they should be able to avoid each other is unfair to all other players. Fairness IMO means all players get an equal random shot at all other players. The division method deliberately creates unfairness for all players so as to maximise reg profits. Regs claim this is "fair" but that is ludicrous (see my WSOP post above).

Recs may or may not be good at poker but they are either ignorant of the way the divisions work or stupid for playing HUSNGs unless PokerStars makes entry blind like SpinnGo (but without any software like Spinwiz).

Would you have a problem if all players that entered a SNG received an email explaining to them how divisions work and what software was available to make sure they never play against a recreational player but always face a proven champion?
I've been following this thread since the beginning thinking I was fully aware of the issues (huds,nc etc). However this is completely out of left field for me. I need to go back and see what I've missed. If it is as it appears, players organising themselves offsite, then it's basically little different from what has been going on over at Sky as far as recs are likely to be concerned.

Jeez. This is going to end up in anonymous play eventually.
UKZodiac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 03:45 AM   #1486
Ilya N
journeyman
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 315
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

if you want to make poker more human, you need to remove all software including such basic things as hot keys for betting x% pot. in fact it takes a lot more time to calculate 70% of each pot than just press a button that bets 70% pot for you which pokerstars has built into its software. so you see it a very tought question. where do we draw a line between a human and a robot?
Ilya N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 03:50 AM   #1487
FR-Nit
adept
 
FR-Nit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 981
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by UKZodiac View Post
I've been following this thread since the beginning thinking I was fully aware of the issues (huds,nc etc). However this is completely out of left field for me. I need to go back and see what I've missed. If it is as it appears, players organising themselves offsite, then it's basically little different from what has been going on over at Sky as far as recs are likely to be concerned.

Jeez. This is going to end up in anonymous play eventually.
The solution for all this is already built into the Stars client. It would just require the removal of some other stuff:

[IMG][/IMG]
FR-Nit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 04:41 AM   #1488
Richas
veteran
 
Richas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the learning curve
Posts: 3,440
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by UKZodiac View Post
I've been following this thread since the beginning thinking I was fully aware of the issues (huds,nc etc). However this is completely out of left field for me. I need to go back and see what I've missed. If it is as it appears, players organising themselves offsite, then it's basically little different from what has been going on over at Sky as far as recs are likely to be concerned.

Jeez. This is going to end up in anonymous play eventually.
Here is the $60 Cartel thread
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/18...9/index19.html

First few pages have the audit process, teamviewer stuff but it soon gets dull and it is a bit dated. The latest rules are a bit more complicated and they include the balcklisting of non members who are too good and have no interest in joining the conspiracy. Here is the latest rule summary, which BTW includes a link to a live document of members, aspirant members - the sitlist and the way some uninterested in joining get treated as if they do and get added to what I will call the ****list.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=367

Quote:
New requirments in chips ev:
3200 games = +17978
4800 games = +20102
6400 games = +21900
8000 games = +22472

and we have some new Rules
- A public spreadsheet has been created: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing
- Members are able to vote against sitlist players in a forum thread, based on the following reasons:
a) A sitlist player sit/declined.
b) A sitlist player denied 2 tables.
c) A sitlist player played less than 25 games without a reason.
- Members can only vote based on their own games.
- All votes will be recorded as anonymous votes in the public spreadsheet.
- If a sitlist player receives 5 votes he will be blocked as long as he doesnt get rehabilitated.
- While a sitlist player is blocked, he cant join 60s division.
- While a sitlist player is blocked, he loses all his rights. Members wont need to play him for 30 minutes or add a second table.
- To be rehabilitated, a sitlist player needs to get 5 votes.
- At this point, the group will vote, if the stats of the rehabilitated sitlist player will be reseted and if the sitlist player will have to restart with 0 games.
- If a sitlist player loses his poll, another poll for the same player cannot be held for 2 months
Please note that the entry requirement does indeed mean that data must be shared and validated against other members data and or data mined data

The cartel has created a new conspiracy within a conspiracy where 5 collaborating to vote annonymously can blackball at will. Any player in the pool who is kicking your butt...no probs, just get 4 mates and block that sucker, then if they beg others an win a vote of all we will let them crawl back with zero stats on their audited record to establish a right to join.

Don't believe they might do this to players who don't even try to join the cartel well see this post and the abuse received fo not obeying the cartels rules:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=371

Now TBF, the cartel does seem to have a rule for those blackballing others, they can only vote based on games they themselves have played against the ****list candidate...oh goodie yet more data sharing between cartel members to impose a conspiracy regarding who gets to seat who, and a significant hint that there is a non public cartel forum operating.

Don't worry too much about it though these cartels are a temporary phenomenom, an unstable equilibrium.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=un...ml%3B573%3B201
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 04:43 AM   #1489
pies01
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 570
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTamBiscuit View Post
No, I'm not falling for that tarp.


The expectation of regs that they should be able to avoid each other is unfair to all other players. Fairness IMO means all players get an equal random shot at all other players. The division method deliberately creates unfairness for all players so as to maximise reg profits. Regs claim this is "fair" but that is ludicrous (see my WSOP post above).

Recs may or may not be good at poker but they are either ignorant of the way the divisions work or stupid for playing HUSNGs unless PokerStars makes entry blind like SpinnGo (but without any software like Spinwiz).

Would you have a problem if all players that entered a SNG received an email explaining to them how divisions work and what software was available to make sure they never play against a recreational player but always face a proven champion?
Is your problem with the software or the divisions? The divisions were set up as a result of the software.
If your issue is with the software then Pokerstars should group your complaint with all other table selection software complaints.

Last edited by pies01; 06-22-2015 at 04:58 AM. Reason: fixed it up a little
pies01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 04:56 AM   #1490
pies01
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 570
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post

Please note that the entry requirement does indeed mean that data must be shared and validated against other members data and or data mined data

If you meet the criteria to get in, you send a report to the division summarising your results. The data basically shows Player name, no. tournaments, ev roi, chips lost ev.
Those summarised results can either come from actual games played or you can re-download them from pokerstars. Is this what you are calling data mined data?

At this point, each player's results is compared so if player "A" says he has played player "B" 100 times with a 5% ev roi but player "B" says the ev roi was actually 0.5%, then they need to sort out who is right to ensure that player "A" has the results that he claims. Is this what you are calling data mined data?

Or is there something else in the process that suggests to you that the data is mined?
pies01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 05:08 AM   #1491
mme
old hand
 
mme's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: true anti-CFR-HUDs
Posts: 1,668
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

funny though that stars is fully aware of this cartel*s and has been for a long time + they are aware of a solution to this, still they let it run. i would call this co-conspiration, taking their share of the profit, defrauding their customers. so gain, the door that needs to be kicked in by the police is the front door of stars HQ.
mme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 05:10 AM   #1492
heathen1
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 86
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Im happy to see these guy's exposed.Great work richas, let's hope this "cartel"+ software is banished
heathen1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 05:11 AM   #1493
pies01
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 570
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post
Here is the $60 Cartel thread

The cartel has created a new conspiracy within a conspiracy where 5 collaborating to vote annonymously can blackball at will. Any player in the pool who is kicking your butt...no probs, just get 4 mates and block that sucker, then if they beg others an win a vote of all we will let them crawl back with zero stats on their audited record to establish a right to join.
That is a rule in place to ensure that players trying to meet the ev criteria are able to prove they can play under the same conditions as the "division" members. Therefore, if you have no interest in joining, this rule doesn't impact you and if you do have an interest in joining, you need to prove you can play under the same conditions as your opponents.

Most rules can be twisted in any way you want but if you take it as a given that the table selection software exists, I would love you or someone else to come up with a fairer more transparent system.

And if you are saying the table selection software shouldn't exist, then as I said earlier, group husng table selection software with all other types
pies01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 05:15 AM   #1494
pies01
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 570
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by mme View Post
funny though that stars is fully aware of this cartel*s and has been for a long time + they are aware of a solution to this, still they let it run. i would call this co-conspiration, taking their share of the profit, defrauding their customers. so gain, the door that needs to be kicked in by the police is the front door of stars HQ.
Check out this link, I'm sure there are a lot more you can add into your conspiracy charge


https://www.google.com.au/search?q=t...oftware++poker
pies01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 05:21 AM   #1495
mme
old hand
 
mme's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: true anti-CFR-HUDs
Posts: 1,668
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

didn't the cartel fly to stars HQ when they announced that they want to change the lobby and came back reporting they convinced stars to keep it as is? didn't baard state thereafter in stars thread in husng they have no problem with the cartels and the lobby control software that is needed to run them?
mme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 05:32 AM   #1496
Richas
veteran
 
Richas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the learning curve
Posts: 3,440
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by pies01 View Post
If you meet the criteria to get in, you send a report to the division summarising your results. The data basically shows Player name, no. tournaments, ev roi, chips lost ev.
Those summarised results can either come from actual games played or you can re-download them from pokerstars. Is this what you are calling data mined data?

At this point, each player's results is compared so if player "A" says he has played player "B" 100 times with a 5% ev roi but player "B" says the ev roi was actually 0.5%, then they need to sort out who is right to ensure that player "A" has the results that he claims. Is this what you are calling data mined data?

Or is there something else in the process that suggests to you that the data is mined?
I was actually talking about improperly sharing data between cartel members but you have missed out a bit, if the requiremnt is for reports on the total and reports vs individuals so those individuals then the data can't be checked for complenes, leaving out just a few games changes the total so either the check means a bit more detail from the applicant to let another player use their database rather than a data mined set of data to compare a subset of the data not the total.

In practice they don't well can't just use a check on players that get named so that you can improperly compare shared data what they do is check the datamining site and see what it says. Of course they do, it is the easiest way to check the player is included total play for the period.

Anyway, the minuitiae of the data sharing and data mining involved to police the conspiracy is a bit trivial compared to a group actively collaborating, colluding, to control the lobby to their benefit, at the expense of those outside the group.

The whole setup is doomed anyway so pfft, sorting it is scarcely the priority.
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 05:40 AM   #1497
Richas
veteran
 
Richas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the learning curve
Posts: 3,440
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by pies01 View Post
That is a rule in place to ensure that players trying to meet the ev criteria are able to prove they can play under the same conditions as the "division" members. Therefore, if you have no interest in joining, this rule doesn't impact you and if you do have an interest in joining, you need to prove you can play under the same conditions as your opponents.
Nope the "punishment" of those on the sitlist is not linked to them applying, it is linked to anyone they put into the group sitlist before getting 5 people to vote them on to the extra list where "sitlist" has an extra h in it.

The cartel can and does have the power to conspire in discriminating against outsiders. They do it. Take the root of this whole thread and row. Skier was not joining the cartel, he was beating cartel members and refusing to join the cartel or share his software so the nice cartel peeps decided to go crying to teacher....and Stars finally decided to reopen their Third Party software rules for discusiion....hoist, own, petard.
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 05:41 AM   #1498
mme
old hand
 
mme's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: true anti-CFR-HUDs
Posts: 1,668
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

and you cheating scumbags want to sell ..that the most crucial piece in this, the lobby control software, is run by some unknown in a country faaar away that goes by the name of "marc" and nothing else is known. you want to sell ..that in this setup with detailed rules and divisions the cartels up to high stakes trust some unknown to run a centralized queue containing all players involved, having full access to all matchmaking and having full access to manipulate matchmaking in any ways, on some unknown server?

hahahahaha ..chadders emidiately recognized the potential of this. smart guy, except he should not go anywhere near a car.
mme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 06:00 AM   #1499
_dave_
_Pooh_Bah_
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK (or what remains of it)
Posts: 13,109
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post
improperly compare shared data what they do is check the datamining site and see what it says. Of course they do, it is the easiest way
_dave_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 06:11 AM   #1500
pies01
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 570
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by mme View Post
and you cheating scumbags want to sell ..that the most crucial piece in this, the lobby control software, is run by some unknown in a country faaar away that goes by the name of "marc" and nothing else is known. you want to sell ..that in this setup with detailed rules and divisions the cartels up to high stakes trust some unknown to run a centralized queue containing all players involved, having full access to all matchmaking and having full access to manipulate matchmaking in any ways, on some unknown server?

hahahahaha ..chadders emidiately recognized the potential of this. smart guy, except he should not go anywhere near a car.
Nice time to use the word cheating scumbag. Who is cheating, how?

How about you stop making reckless and/or inaccurate comments.

Even better, come up with a constructive realistic, fairer, more dynamic system to play HUSNGs when table selection software is a part of the game or just STFU.
pies01 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive