yes good point, Blue mod gave me OK to start that thread , which I did a few days ago.

Improved procedures for Live MTT organizers to avoid future cheating scandals

Bottom line that if the industry doesn't get ahead of the curve on this the regulators will do it for us (and might do it anyway), depending on how the new rules and regulations unfold over the next 6-18 months, the days of 10-20% MTT rake might seem like the good ole days when MTTS were affordable.

the other thread is ONLY for serious discussion about possible solutions both procedural, tech and non-tech new solutions.

good man. its been publically disclosed, outside an NDA thus this idea can never be patented, so just disclosing it accomplished your goal. I do think you are going down the right path for longer term solutions. short term prob combo of better chips and tightened up procedures,

+1 please discuss more in other thread. impossible to get thru all the other stuff ITT to discuss what I think is a very important topic to minimize the long term damage / fallout from this.

pretty cool, but put yourself at the desk of the Surveillance guy. I need to be able to recall 10 seats, from 100 tables, over a 40 hour period.

again,,, maybe discuss in other thread, I think its very likely regulators now dictate better more expensive cameras in tournament rooms. casino grade equipment from licensed suppliers is not cheap

Tab:

I suspect some of the 27 have consulted lawyers just to get an idea of what their options are. In most cases, the first words out of a lawyers mouth to his client are: "Have you talked to anybody?" Answer: "Yes ..." Question: "What did you say?" followed by, "From here on, don't talk to anybody! Don't say anything. Don't write anything down! Anything you have to say, say it to me! If you're contacted by any third party and asked to comment, refer the contact to me. It's very important that you say nothing while we investigate this situation and await developments."

An earlier poster in this thread noted that this is the kind of case sharks come out of the water for. Lawyers don't like their clients talking as loose comments have a tendency to weaken a potentital claim.

Thank you.

By definition one person is not an organization. The more technically correct term for you would be "windbag".

You are not lobbying your elected representatives here since they don't post here. Unless you mistakenly think you elected the PPA officials.

People like you who argue against one action because of tangentially related issues hold up overall progress.

For what is probably not the last time... The PPA and AGA are not the poker police. They are lobbying organizations. Part of what they do is to make sure there is appropriate legislation and regulation to provide a secure gaming environment.

There are laws and regulations at the state and federal level regarding poker cheats. If you have an issue with the lack of enforcement, take it up with the people responsible for enforcing those laws, not the ones who are more or less successfully helping those regulations get enacted.

PTLou:

Matt Savage said as much yesterday on the Pokercast. After acknowledging that he reads the 2+2 message boards "every day" and "2+2 does a valuable service for the poker community," Matt proceeded to dismiss the RFID identification proposal as being "too expensive" for most poker rooms - especially the smaller rooms that don't have massive slot machines and table games that could absorb some of the cost. (Matt estimated a cost of approximately $1 per chip to embed a RFID chip in each tournament chip. I'm paraphrasing a bit, but I believe Matt said the "math would not work" with respect to RFID technology.)

Matt and Mike Johnson detoured off into a conversation to the effect that game security - and ensuring game security - should be more the responsibility of players rather than the responsibility of the operator. Mike Johnson put it this way (paraphrasing): "If you insist on playing live poker with human beings - as opposed to playing poker online - you should expect to encounter some of the 'problems' that come with dealing with people - such as cheating." I think the point Matt and Mike were trying to get across is: "We as operators can't do it all. We need help from you players!" (I believe Matt actually said that if you see something that doesn't look right, you should assume responsibility by calling the floor.)

I'll concede that they may need help, but I vehemently disagree with the notion that the operators can't do more. Operators have been coddling these cheaters and letting them off with mere slaps on the wrist for years. Men the Master getting away with what he got away with at Foxwoods and the cheater that Ken Lambert refunded are two cases in point. There's also the case of Doc Sands getting away with the stunt he pulled earlier this summer at the WSOP. (Jack Effel rebuffed a player who reported Doc [allegedly] proclaiming: "We all would have done the same thing ourselves!" So much for operators giving a damn about game security and preventing cheating. All the operators seem to care about is collecting the rake. All the rest is somebody else's problem ...)

Men and the other fellow - and his wife - should have been permanently banned from every card room in the country. Instead they were coddled and encouraged to continue their cheating and inappropriate behavior. A cynic (like me) might conclude: "The operators don't really give a damn if cheaters are playing or not since they're going to collect the rake (and the tournament entry fee) regardless of who wins the pot - or who wins the tournament."

The point has been made that a portion of that $60 entry fee goes (or should go) toward ensuring game security and game integrity. If the operators are bound and determined to protect these cheaters (at our expense) then I'm perfectly content with the regulators coming down hard with new regulations and new requirements. If that makes the cost of conducting big-field tournaments prohibitive, that's fine too. I get just as much pleasure from playing in a tournament limited to one or two hundred runners - which ends in under one day - as I do busting out of a multi-day monstrosity that runs the better part of a week.

Nor will they ever be.

Let's look closely at the Borgata Press Release:

Borgata announced today that the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement has ordered the cancellation of the first event of the Borgata Winter Poker Open due to a pending investigation.

Thus far, investigators have found that one or more tournament entrants improperly introduced a significant number of counterfeit chips into the tournament, gaining an unfair advantage and compromising the integrity of play for the event.

I would rather represent the first player "permanently banned from every card room in the country" if he was a she, non white, muslim, over 40 and, why not, physically disabled than someone who busted out day one of this event.

Ducy Lawhon?

These suppliers might not have the audit trail required by NJ or NV. The supply chain is strictly regulated. Think you would need to find out what Paulson or Bud Jones ( now part of the same company) or some other major supplier charges to get a good read on the cost.

Please
Take
RFID
discussion
To
PtLous thread.

OK its cancelled.. What does that mean to people that were knocked out or people that have been paid out already? How are they handling the facets of those scenarios?

Great questions. Im really surprised these havent come up before.

that are counterfeit themselves and probably do not work

CSI -Borgata

Pay ALL survivors 27th place just in case one was staying at Harrahs on the "cheaters never win" principle.

Arrrest everyone from top 150 WHO STAYED AT HARRAH'S AND QUESTION everyone they seem to have been talking to, SUBPOENA their phone records and sweat them out in the County Jail for the weekend and break them down.

EZ GAME

^^^^that flaking paint was probably lead based.

This.

Deleted several rfid posts.

ZenForest posts this early on, and nothing. Sundot does the same and gets applause.

Obviously, people like Sundot more than they like Zenforest.

someone counterfeited the pic of counterfeited chips!

i like sundot more anyway though

I want my money!

+1 when will we know what the result is

waiting on rebate before I fire any more bullets there

I sit and think about different scenarios like they can prove chips were out into play at the end of bagging but I feel like nothing you say or show me will make me believe it wasn't done at all during day. 1 just maybe less noticeable.... It would be nothing to win the pot before break and throw two grays in there.

isn't it common practice to count the total number of chips in the game when they get down to about three tables? discrepancy would be detected and tourney would be scrapped.

i would like to know also, i mean i did come in about 2197th place, that should mean something lol

Might be worth a listen...

PokerNews Podcast Episode #199: Counterfeit Chips feat. Nick Guagenti

The crew is joined by Nick Guagenti, who was second in chips in the Borgata Winter Poker Open $2 Million Guarantee when it was cancelled. He talks about the atmosphere on property, what he knows about the situation, and tries to forecast some sort of conclusion.

http://www.pokernews.com/live-report...ost.224542.htm