Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

News, Views, and Gossip For poker news, views and gossip.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-17-2019, 07:03 PM   #8901
Xenicide
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 223
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angrist View Post
Just to confirm explicitly, when you say you accounted for straddles, that means you considered the straddle the BB for that hand. So a win of $30 would be 6bb with the a $5 straddle?


This is very interesting data, and exactly what we need to see more of ITT to figure this out.
For example: If i saw that the current hand was a bomb pot ($100) I would count that $100 as the big blind for that hand so now if mike were to win a 1k pot that pot would only be considered 10bbs in total. Also i msged you all the numbers privately.
Xenicide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 07:19 PM   #8902
Xenicide
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 223
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loctus View Post
Yea decent effort I guess Xenicide but your assumptions are ridiculously off. Your logic is sound, but your inputs are just potato. Think about it, mathematically impossible to win 16 buyins in 170 hands? I mean... No.

It is mathematically impossible if you use normal standard deviations for like, a regular aggressive 200bb deep game. Wild live games are not that.

And to be more technical with my critique: standard deviation is not an effect of playing fullring or HU or 6max or even what game you're playing (though standard deviation usually changes depending on those variables). Standard deviation is a statistical concept of how much from the mean that the observations swing: in poker a high standard deviation is the result of winning or losing a lot of very big pots. Which Postle does. Which would put his standard deviation a lot higher than 150bb/100.

I guess you do prove that it is impossible to have a 1600bb upswing in 170 hands off of a 150bb/100 standard deviation. Which it is. But the hand sample you used to reach that conclusion is hell of a lot swingier than 150bb/100 hands on average (remember, the swing he had is 1600bb/170hands. Of course a 1600bb/170 swing is incompatible with 150bb/100 assumption almost no matter what winrate you plug in)
You make a good point, but is that really how it works tho? If postle were to show up with a std d of 140 lifetime you are saying its incorrect to use that std when calculating a small hand sample?
Xenicide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 07:22 PM   #8903
garetjaxor
newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 34
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

LoL Dneg's vlog title today:

"Using CTO to defend against GTO in the mini main event"
garetjaxor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 07:26 PM   #8904
jjjou812
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,551
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenicide View Post
Proving Mike Postles Guilt In Two Sessions.

I decided to go through two of Mikes cheating sessions and record my findings. I understand there are a lot of people in here that are not poker players so im going to try my best to explain how this works in the easiest way I can think of.

I went through each hand individually to make sure I accounted for any bomb pots or straddles.
I appreciate you showing your work but how did you account for the bomb pots and straddles?

Let's say Mike loses the 1/3 blind for -1. The next hand is a $30 dollar straddle and he wins $300.00, are you calling that +100bb or +10bb?

Bombpots can be different in some are run out without further betting or its just limiting the preflop action. But lets assume early in the game, $30 each, nine handed and they only limit the preflop betting. If he wins a $270 pot on the flop, are you saying he won 9bbs or 90bbs?
jjjou812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 07:29 PM   #8905
aoFrantic
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
aoFrantic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 23,494
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by matt hirschhorn View Post
Agreed, I was curious as to what mike postles true win-rate was, people were saying that it is irrelevant and it does not matter if it's 900bb/100 or 300bb/100. My point was that it's important to understand all the facts, and if his true win-rate is not 900bb/100 that's is something we should figure out. BuT wE kNoW hEs AlReAdY gUiLTy
I don't think it really matters. He cheated more in "bigger games" (ie deeper and when straddled). He wasn't good enough at PLO to even be profitable when knowing other people's cards. The difference if he won at 200 or 900 or whatever is pretty negligible imo.
aoFrantic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 07:32 PM   #8906
Xenicide
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 223
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjjou812 View Post
I appreciate you showing your work but how did you account for the bomb pots and straddles?

Let's say Mike loses the 1/3 blind for -1. The next hand is a $30 dollar straddle and he wins $300.00, are you calling that +100bb or +10bb?

Bombpots can be different in some are run out without further betting or its just limiting the preflop action. But lets assume early in the game, $30 each, nine handed and they only limit the preflop betting. If he wins a $270 pot on the flop, are you saying he won 9bbs or 90bbs?
If the hand is a straddle or a bomb pot the big blind becomes whatever that number is. I don't get what you mean there is only one way to do it. Doing it this way can only benefit Mike anyway dude.
Xenicide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 07:32 PM   #8907
Loctus
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Loctus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 10,324
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenicide View Post
You make a good point, but is that really how it works tho? If postle were to show up with a std d of 140 lifetime you are saying its incorrect to use that std when calculating a small hand sample?
Good question tbh.. I think it matters that the variance calculator and its inputs not being meant as a tool for comparing one players former performance to his performance *now*, but as a way to figure out how likely a certain good/bad run is compared to the data used as input.

I can't formulate my exact thoughts here properly, but when the session(s) we're looking into has a wildly different std dev than both the players previous std dev (Postle not cheating Std dev) and what a reasonable actual normal play std dev (even when erring on the high side like you did) would be, the results aren't applicable/comparable I think.

Again, I can't fully iron out my thoughts here, nor am I even sure of if I'm right, I lack in intelligence/statistical knowledge

edit: Basically I think what I'm trying to say is "Ofc 150bb/100 std dev assumption means it's mathematically impossible to win 1600bb/170 - this doesn't prove he cheated, it can also be that the std deviation of his play wasn't 150bb/100"

Last edited by Loctus; 10-17-2019 at 07:36 PM. Reason: .
Loctus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 07:44 PM   #8908
Xenicide
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 223
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loctus View Post
edit: Basically I think what I'm trying to say is "Ofc 150bb/100 std dev assumption means it's mathematically impossible to win 1600bb/170 - this doesn't prove he cheated, it can also be that the std deviation of his play wasn't 150bb/100"
Pretty sure you just proved my point. Obvoiusly his std deviation isnt 150bb/100 in the sample thats because hes cheating. His std is some absurd number that doesnt make any sense.
Xenicide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 07:57 PM   #8909
jal300
journeyman
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 326
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenicide View Post
For example: If i saw that the current hand was a bomb pot ($100) I would count that $100 as the big blind for that hand so now if mike were to win a 1k pot that pot would only be considered 10bbs in total. Also i msged you all the numbers privately.
I'm no statistician; but can't this lead to some rather significant consistency/distortion issues? Theoretically; each hand could have a different BB, or at least BB is not a consistent "thing" if you will. To use an analogy, in one hand a BB is a "car tire" and in another hand the BB is "a set of car tires." If we simply add up 4 car tires plus 8 sets of car tires for a session win of 12 BB's; what is that 12 BB really: it's not 12 car tires and it's not 12 sets of car tires.

Simple example:
- Assume a 2 hand session.
- Hand 1, non-bomb pot, non-straddled hand, MP wins $90 (or 30BB)
- Hand 2, $30 straddle, MP wins $550 (or 18.333BB)

The session win is 48.333bb if we just add. But; is 550+90 actually 48.333bb for the session when bb means something different in each hand.
jal300 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:05 PM   #8910
Xenicide
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 223
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jal300 View Post
I'm no statistician; but can't this lead to some rather significant consistency/distortion issues? Theoretically; each hand could have a different BB, or at least BB is not a consistent "thing" if you will. To use an analogy, in one hand a BB is a "car tire" and in another hand the BB is "a set of car tires." If we simply add up 4 car tires plus 8 sets of car tires for a session win of 12 BB's; what is that 12 BB really: it's not 12 car tires and it's not 12 sets of car tires.

Simple example:
- Assume a 2 hand session.
- Hand 1, non-bomb pot, non-straddled hand, MP wins $90 (or 30BB)
- Hand 2, $30 straddle, MP wins $550 (or 18.333BB)

The session win is 48.333bb if we just add. But; is 550+90 actually 48.333bb for the session when bb means something different in each hand.
This is my last time explaining this.
Examples:
Hand 1: $100 bomb pot postle takes it down on the river for a total profit of $1500(15bb)
Hand 2: The exact same thing happens except its a $30 straddle
postle wins $1500(50bb)
Hand 3: same action as before except no stradde blinds are 5/5/10
Postle wins: $1500(150bb)
I also did the same thing for pots he lost
Example: postle loses $100 in bomb pot (-1bb)
Xenicide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:07 PM   #8911
Loctus
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Loctus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 10,324
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenicide View Post
Pretty sure you just proved my point. Obvoiusly his std deviation isnt 150bb/100 in the sample thats because hes cheating. His std is some absurd number that doesnt make any sense.
Yeah but anyone can get a super high std deviation, especially in a small sample, all you have to do is play a couple of 1000bb pots and you're there
Loctus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:12 PM   #8912
Xenicide
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 223
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loctus View Post
Yeah but anyone can get a super high std deviation, especially in a small sample, all you have to do is play a couple of 1000bb pots and you're there
The first person to show me a hand sample of 174 hands un edited with a std dev similar to postles in the sample I showed gets to defend him in court.(Losing sessions doesnt count)

Last edited by Xenicide; 10-17-2019 at 08:18 PM.
Xenicide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:13 PM   #8913
wiiziwiig
old hand
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 1,407
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

I just listened to the UTG Podcast with guest Andrew Milner, an aussie developer who made Poker GFX, who I must say is a top bloke who does a fair dinkum job of answering questions for the layman.

As others have mentioned before it is definitely worth a listen, especially if you are interested in the RFID tech, Poker GFX software, and any graphics changes that may have taken place. Here is a link to the podcast both the interviewer and Andrew do an amazing job: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas...=1000453274898

1:17:00 In depth conversation about RFID, Poker GFX, its potential exploits and how to mitigate them
2:22:00 The 86o graphics change hand
Side note: Postle actually had 86o not 96 https://www.twitch.tv/videos/365129696?t=02h30m44s

So we know that:
1) Cards can be miss-registered but not misread
2) If a card is pitched to the wrong player, and the RFID reader picks it up, the player's who's card was pitched incorrectly will not display cards at all. The software prevents the same card displaying twice in the event of a duplicate RFID read within the same hand.
3) There is a persistence error where prev cards can be read as current cards.

The podcast has new information as to why graphics might be wrong. Andrew, the creator of Poker GFX, lists 3 scenarios that causes graphical errors. The first 2 are listed above as 1 and 2 respectively, and the 3rd is as follows.
Quote:
"If all antennas (RFID readers) are connected to the router module (in the center of the table) using thin cables that all accumulate at one point, and are coiled up together, it is possible to get card data bleeding between random players at times".
This explains why there are so many graphical errors relative to other streams. It explains hands like when the Kc was showing up on two different peoples hands preflop. He also goes on to say that when card bleeding occurs, a popup notification is sent to the operator to let them know. Which for me, explains the extremely weird hand where Postle folds TT to J4o which turned out to be JJ. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/306445878?t=5300s

Andrew goes on to say that all 3 of these possibilities are red herrings and that there would never be a reason that the graphics should ever change in real time unless the cards were tabled. I would like to add to this point in that there is no way for Taylor or anyone else but MP, to know the exact hand, down to the suit, what MP held in real time. Taylor then goes to the booth and confirms 30 minutes later that the graphics change was correct, meaning he magically guessed MP's cards and was correct after confirming with MP himself. Even if card bleeding occurred in this hand and a popup notified Taylor, he or someone else would have had to make the split second decision to change the cards, and they would have had to have been right, as they confirm the change 30 min later in the delayed stream. There is no reason to change it. MP is known for crazy plays. MP is known for soul reads. There are graphical errors all the time. Why change it? There must be a motive.

Anyway, it makes more sense now why Stones was experiencing so many graphical errors. They were just lazy with the RFID table. It's possible they didn't want to fix it because it made for a good excuse for Mike, but they made a huge mistake changing the graphics here. I emailed the creator of Poker GFX with more specific questions regarding what could affect graphics and will share it with you guys if he decides to respond.
wiiziwiig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:30 PM   #8914
wiiziwiig
old hand
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 1,407
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenicide View Post



After running the simulation we come to the conclusion that it is in fact Mathematically Impossible for anybody to hit these sorts of heaters, even with numbers in his favour.
I don't think you understand what mathematically impossible means. There is an infinite amount of mathematical impossibilities, this is not one of them. It should be impossible for the universe to even exist, as there should have been equal parts matter to anti-matter, yet here we all are. Great effort and something to submit for review from your peers, but its a very small sample size so it is somewhat statistically insignificant. I've seen someone sit down with $600 at 10/20 NLHE and run it up to $24k in 5 hrs. Crazy **** can happen in small sample sizes.
wiiziwiig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:31 PM   #8915
Abbaddabba
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,770
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawdude View Post
I understand what you are actually saying, but I don't think you should use this terminology (or at least you should never use it in a court proceeding).

All of the statistics that are brought to bear on Postle's winrate are probabilistic. Now, some of them have absolutely fantastic probabilities, billions or trillions or quadrillions to one.

But they are still probabilistic. Is it "mathematically impossible" to flip an unloaded coin 70 times in a row and have it come up "heads" all 70 times? That isn't the terminology I would use. I would say something closer to "the probability is so miniscule that the only reasonable conclusion if it happened was that the coin was loaded". But there's nothing in the universe that guarantees that incredibly improbable statistical events can never happen. "Impossible" is just not the word to use here.
if you were trying to explain the situation to a layman this would be true and yet you'd be misleading them to emphasize the fact that it's not impossible. in some peoples minds any amount of doubt is tantamount to reasonable doubt because human beings are notoriously poor at weighing the proportionality of low probability events.

Quote:
Good question tbh.. I think it matters that the variance calculator and its inputs not being meant as a tool for comparing one players former performance to his performance *now*, but as a way to figure out how likely a certain good/bad run is compared to the data used as input.

I can't formulate my exact thoughts here properly, but when the session(s) we're looking into has a wildly different std dev than both the players previous std dev (Postle not cheating Std dev) and what a reasonable actual normal play std dev (even when erring on the high side like you did) would be, the results aren't applicable/comparable I think.

Again, I can't fully iron out my thoughts here, nor am I even sure of if I'm right, I lack in intelligence/statistical knowledge

edit: Basically I think what I'm trying to say is "Ofc 150bb/100 std dev assumption means it's mathematically impossible to win 1600bb/170 - this doesn't prove he cheated, it can also be that the std deviation of his play wasn't 150bb/100" .
It's very difficult to assign a stdv over such a small number of hands in general because one of the core assumptions is that the sample stdv is equivalent to stdv of all possible hands that could have occurred.

Which is one of the reasons why we'd be using baseline estimates of what the stdv tends to be in those types of games.

his sample stdv being so astronomically high could be a consequent of a unique play style but is also something you'd expect to happen as a consequent of him cheating and so it's not really an effective way to estimate the probability of that kind of a run happening by chance.

the difficulty is establishing to non poker players why peoples stdv tend not to be that large absent of cheating (or playing in a manner that would show enormous losses). it's very easy for people to see poker as some kind of an art form where some just have super genius iqs that let them play in ways that would befuddle mere mortals and see the accusers as being bitter/jilted losers looking for someone to blame for their losses.
Abbaddabba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:36 PM   #8916
jal300
journeyman
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 326
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenicide View Post
This is my last time explaining this.
Examples:
Hand 1: $100 bomb pot postle takes it down on the river for a total profit of $1500(15bb)
Hand 2: The exact same thing happens except its a $30 straddle
postle wins $1500(50bb)
Hand 3: same action as before except no stradde blinds are 5/5/10
Postle wins: $1500(150bb)
I also did the same thing for pots he lost
Example: postle loses $100 in bomb pot (-1bb)
If $4500 session win is equivalent to winning 215BB, that means the average BB for the session was 4500/215=20.93. But you're saying that hand 1 had a $100BB, hand 2 had a $30BB and hand 3 had a $10BB: that's an average BB for the 3 hand session of (100+30+10)/3 = 46.67. There is a massive difference saying the session averaged a bb of 20.93 vs 46.67. In other words, the hypothetical 4500 profit can either be 215BB's or (4500/46.67)=96.42BB's: that's a rather large discrepancy.
jal300 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:42 PM   #8917
soapdodger
adept
 
soapdodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: baath time
Posts: 984
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawdude View Post
I am never going to accuse any specific player of cheating without evidence. As far as I am concerned, everyone really is innocent until proven guilty.

Without in any way making such accusations though, I would certainly recommend that people scrutinize all poker streams. If this could be done at Stones, that means it's possible it could have been done elsewhere. And it could be done by a player better at covering his or her tracks than Postle. People should certainly have second thoughts about playing in live streamed games until we find out exactly what happened here and how it can be prevented in the future.
know what you're saying, but seems the big problem here is PokerGFX software wasn't really conceived for commercial use. For that reason it was a cheap entry into low-budget streamed poker, unlike the bespoke versions used for other streams. In the particular case of Stones, their lack of protocols generally made an even softer target. It is possible of course, but cheating would be very unlikely for any stream absent of both of these factors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenicide View Post
Proving Mike Postles Guilt In Two Sessions.

I decided to go through two of Mikes cheating sessions and record my findings...
Great effort Xenicide! didn't think you had it in you building up more of these would be great. Also think breaking down MP's river play, as discussed above (and possibly his pre-flop play, particularly in certain positions), will prove illuminating too.

It should most clearly illustrate....

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcb08 View Post
There's a difference between being on a heater and playing perfect poker.
soapdodger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:42 PM   #8918
Eponymous
Photoshop Comic Genius
 
Eponymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: How many letters do we have for thi
Posts: 4,572
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenicide View Post
Pretty sure you just proved my point. Obvoiusly his std deviation isnt 150bb/100 in the sample thats because hes cheating. His std is some absurd number that doesnt make any sense.
But we can't just change the std dev to something much lower just because we're assuming it's possible only by cheating, or else we've made our desired conclusion one of the assumptions of our analysis. We have to show that even given his high-variance style of play, it is still unlikely that the mean (his win rate) is possible without cheating -- that so many positive results (winning sessions) could happen within that sample size by chance (i.e., without cheating).

And our best predictor of the std dev of the population (his long-term results) is the std dev of the sample. We have to assume that his long-term style of play would be the same or at least similar to the way he's playing in the sample, so the std dev would be similar. So I don't think it makes sense to apply a smaller std dev of a more conservative style of play to him for this analysis.
Eponymous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:43 PM   #8919
Xenicide
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 223
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jal300 View Post
If $4500 session win is equivalent to winning 215BB, that means the average BB for the session was 4500/215=20.93. But you're saying that hand 1 had a $100BB, hand 2 had a $30BB and hand 3 had a $10BB: that's an average BB for the 3 hand session of (100+30+10)/3 = 46.67. There is a massive difference saying the session averaged a bb of 20.93 vs 46.67. In other words, the hypothetical 4500 profit can either be 215BB's or (4500/46.67)=96.42BB's: that's a rather large discrepancy.
What? why are you grouping hands together and trying to make an average? thats not how you look at it each hand is different. I didnt add any numbers up in terms of $, every hand was added in terms of big blinds so total profit at the end is not measured in $ its measured in bbs
Xenicide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:44 PM   #8920
a dewd
Pooh-Bah
 
a dewd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: west of the easternmost pt up north
Posts: 3,915
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind On My Mind View Post
....My focus here is to provide great information to this thread and i have done that greatly.....
Facts.

Thank you for your effort and work.
a dewd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:49 PM   #8921
Xenicide
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 223
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eponymous View Post
But we can't just change the std dev to something much lower just because we're assuming it's possible only by cheating, or else we've made our desired conclusion one of the assumptions of our analysis. We have to show that even given his high-variance style of play, it is still unlikely that the mean (his win rate) is possible without cheating -- that so many positive results (winning sessions) could happen within that sample size by chance (i.e., without cheating).

And our best predictor of the std dev of the population (his long-term results) is the std dev of the sample. We have to assume that his long-term style of play would be the same or at least similar to the way he's playing in the sample, so the std dev would be similar. So I don't think it makes sense to apply a smaller std dev of a more conservative style of play to him for this analysis.
are we really going to debate whether or not 150 is a high std dev for a winning 9 max player?
Is this high enough for you? still not convinced hes cheating?
It takes 250bb/100 std dev just to make him 1 in a million with a 60bb/100 w/r

Last edited by Xenicide; 10-17-2019 at 09:04 PM.
Xenicide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:59 PM   #8922
jal300
journeyman
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 326
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenicide View Post
What? why are you grouping hands together and trying to make an average? thats not how you look at it each hand is different. I didnt add any numbers up in terms of $, every hand was added in terms of big blinds so total profit at the end is not measured in $ its measured in bbs
Based on your post (#8895); you are representing the session's profit as a summation of BB's won/lost. But you also stated that BB is different depending on if the pot was normal pot, bomb pot or straddle pot. I'll go back to my tire analogy: if a big blind is one car tire in one instance and one set of car tires in another instance; adding up number of BB's when BB is something different each time presents issues in consistency. Saying someone is 14 BB's tall when BB can mean 4 inches, or 12 inches or 6 inches all at the same time (i.e. same session) doesn't really tell people anything other than someone is 14 BB's tall: you can't relate it/compare it to anything when BB is not static. If you are going to translate a session's profit into # of BB's won; you probably should average out what the session BB was as opposed having each hand (potentially) having a different BB and simply calculating session profit to be a summation of non-consistent BB's.

Here's a rather simply example:
- 2 hand session
- Hand 1, $100 straddle, MP wins 1BB
- Hand 2, no straddle/no bomb, MP loses 1BB

If session profit is the summation of BB's won/lost, MP made zero BB's, was he even for the session? Hand 1 he wins $100 and Hand 2 he loses $3 for session profit of $97. So now, because BB is different in each hand; zero BB profit is equivalent to $97 profit? A person need not be a statistician to realize something isn't right here.

Last edited by jal300; 10-17-2019 at 09:14 PM.
jal300 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 09:06 PM   #8923
wiiziwiig
old hand
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 1,407
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by soapdodger View Post
know what you're saying, but seems the big problem here is PokerGFX software wasn't really conceived for commercial use. For that reason it was a cheap entry into low-budget streamed poker, unlike the bespoke versions used for other streams. In the particular case of Stones, their lack of protocols generally made an even softer target. It is possible of course, but cheating would be very unlikely for any stream absent of both of these factors.
I also heard Poker GFX was not intended for commercial use and believed it, until I listened to the podcast. It simply isn't true. It is intended for multiple use cases, like a swiss army knife, that doesn't mean it isn't intended for commercial use. Their are many measures and safety precautions built into the software, but when the person you have to protect against is the guy actually running the damn thing, that is where the problem occurs. What this really shows is that there needs to be stricter rules and regulations in place for all live streams. I recommend giving the podcast a listen since they go over all of this in depth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by soapdodger View Post
Great effort Xenicide! didn't think you had it in you building up more of these would be great. Also think breaking down MP's river play, as discussed above (and possibly his pre-flop play, particularly in certain positions), will prove illuminating too.
I agree, it is a great effort by Xenicide, but I also think he shouldn't throw around phrases like "mathematically impossible", he shouldn't be so adverse to critique or suggestions, and he shouldn't imply his findings or stats alone will prove Postle guilty in a court of law. Other than that, there's no harm in crunching numbers to see what comes out.
wiiziwiig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 09:09 PM   #8924
Xenicide
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 223
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jal300 View Post
Based on your post (#8895); you are representing the session's profit as a summation of BB's won/lost. But you also stated that BB is different depending on if the pot was normal pot, bomb pot or straddle pot. I'll go back to my tire analogy: if a big blind is one car tire in one instance and one set of car tires in another instance; adding up number of BB's when BB is something different each time presents issues in consistency. Saying someone is 14 BB's tall when BB can mean 4 inches, or 12 inches or 6 inches all at the same time (i.e. same session) doesn't really tell people anything other than someone is 14 BB's tall: you can't relate it/compare it to anything when BB is not static. If you are going to translate a session's profit into # of BB's won; you probably should average out what the session BB was as opposed having each hand (potentially) having a different BB and simply calculating session profit to be a summation of non-consistent BB's.
You are telling me if I play 1000 hands with my friend dave at 1/2NL
and beat him for 10bb/100
Tomorrow we play again except this time we raise the stakes to 2/5
I beat him for 10bb/100 again
You are saying the two of these things are not the same thing?
sorry dude im not debating this anymore.
Xenicide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 09:13 PM   #8925
soapdodger
adept
 
soapdodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: baath time
Posts: 984
Re: Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiiziwiig View Post
I also heard Poker GFX was not intended for commercial use and believed it, until I listened to the podcast. It simply isn't true. It is intended for multiple use cases, like a swiss army knife, that doesn't mean it isn't intended for commercial use.
ah ok, fair enough, haven't listened to the pod. Think I heard that from Berkey? If i was looking for similar behaviour, i'd still start at PokerGFX powered streams though...


Quote:
What this really shows is that there needs to be stricter rules and regulations in place for all live streams. I recommend giving the podcast a listen since they go over all of this in depth.
Agree 100%
soapdodger 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 06:16 AM.


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