And? Both can be true. The fact that the onus is on yourself to protect yourself doesnt make cheating a non-issue in poker.. In fact it makes it a bigger problem because normal people dont have the means to do anything about it without risking criminal prosecution. But not surprising that you are unable to hold two thoughts at the same time.

What an absoutely garbage analogy. If a skydiving tour company didnt have normal precautions in place leading to a fatality then you would have every reason to blame the company. The fact that skydiving is a risky endeavor changes nothing.

Didn’t say it was a non issue and you should also notice that I’m not telling people to go out there breaking legs, seems like you struggle with reading comprehension. Not surprising.

I was told to not bring up online in this thread, but I think it's fair to respond here.

-I acknowledged that the company may be 100% at fault, but they could be 50% at fault, maybe less.

-Litigation may be successful even if the company is not 100% at fault.

-A good lawyer can work magic given the opportunity, everyone should know that.

-The fact skydiving is a risky endeavor has everything to do with it. I could have made a similar analogy with driving, but the risks pale in comparison. Also, the utility value of driving far exceeds any utility gained from skydiving.

-The potential customer may feel pressure from friends who claim the experience far outweighs the risks. Yet this logic is flawed because the friends experiences are purely anecdotal, and do not change the inherent risks of skydiving.

-A prospective customer who dismisses the risks of skydiving because the company claims "100% safety record", "state certified" or other puffery is not doing their due diligence. That is, the customer should realize skydiving accidents can happen beyond the control of anyone.

-Not every endeavor results in death. I use skydiving as an example because some people can easily deal with getting defrauded, while others will avoid the possibility at all costs.

You and scotch and anyone that liked this post is just admitting they aren’t smart enough to beat online games.

Or they don't enjoy them bc they're boring as hell.
Or they don't want to put the work in (different than not being smart enough) needed to overcome all of the cheating RTA etc.

If you don't think there is MASSSIVE amounts of cheating online you're insane. That doesn't mean the games aren't beatable. But they're beatable for small win rates over mass volume.

To be fair, it shows everyone where PokerHero77 is coming from, and it tells everyone how seriously to take their posts.

Yup, that was a bizarre little rant. Vast majority have no desire or need to do it. The fact that there is massive cheating going on is just the cherry on top.

FFS, please stop posting your views on the amount of cheating in online poker in this thread. I cannot believe I have to threaten temp-bans but here we are.

I think rooms that are taking rake should have some responsibility to provide a fair environment.

You do realize the skydiving company is 100 percent responsible to make sure their equipment is up to par

What exactly does this mean? You mentioned it and someone else said the WSOP might do that. Removing the actual rail from the table wouldn't accomplish anything except having a lot more cards hitting the floor, so I'm sure that isn't what is meant, but I can't figure out anything else.

I don't get the distinction here. In any game I have ever played, almost all the regs are bad. Maybe occasionally a new person will come in who is slightly worse than the bad regs, but my profit certainly doesn't depend on it. And a lot of the bad regs are the ones who use their phones all the time. Some even do because they are business owners who have to take care of some business at the table. If they weren't allowed to use their phones at the table, the best case would be that they would constantly be stepping away from the table, making the game worse. Worst case they don't play nearly as often or stop coming in at all, which would make my game die. I don't want "regs" to stop playing poker; they're the people whose money I'm winning.

They mean a rail as in people watching from the sidelines

I've always thought it was crazy that people at the WSOP final tables can walk away from the table to talk to their family or friends. That's just asking for trouble, especially when the action is being shown live or on short delay.

In most regular rooms the tables are so close together that there isn't much room for others to be watching the action closely.

My casino will not allow you to wear pods anywhere.

Is this in USA? What happens when the person tells the casino those pods are their hearing aids?

A ring is meant to be worn on your finger. Taking it off to “position it” somewhere on the felt or rail is counterproductive and IMHO suspicious, The whole idea of a camera ring is that it appears to be innocuous jewelry that fools players into thinking you are just wearing a ring. If you become the guy who always takes your ring off and positions it around you whenever you play, it’s inviting attention.

And it’s counterproductive because if you want to position a camera that way it’s far better to put it into a fake phone, book, etc that players commonly have on the rail. It’s less suspicious and the camera/processor/radio can be far more powerful and it would be far cheaper to make. Same for a fake chip stack so you can have it on the felt without suspicion, which could work for cash games.

This all just points to how impractical a camera ring or bracelet would be. You could make them more effective by covering them with lenses so it gets a full 360 degree view no matter how they are oriented so the view angle needed would always be visible as long as not obscured by hand/finger. maybe the tiny lenses could be made to look like a jewelry pattern wrapping around the bracket/ring to make it entirely innocuous. But this would need some super sophisticated software to keep focus on intended targets as the hand moves. And even more challenging, your ring/bracelet is real time processing massive amounts of data from all the cameras to compress over Bluetooth. It would have a battery life of minutes at best and likely run hot enough to burn your wrist or finger.

So this is to say jumping through all these incredibly expensive and difficult hoops to monitor some of the cards of one or two players is ridiculous. Most especially since in live poker you already have a free tool for picking up some of your opponents cards that’s totally innocuous, your eyes. In live poker almost every day I tell sone player to do a better job of squeezing their cards because I can see one or more of them without even trying.

I think you are overestimating the cost and technology available. Pinhole cams with a wide field of view are incredibly small and can be concealed in just about any object. The video shown on Berkey's podcast showed many of the cards dealt to the 3-9 seats. Would seem like having perfect information against even one or two opponents in a big hand is worth the effort as evidenced by the large number of people involved in this ring.

The Genie has been out of the bottle for a long time now.

Seems like a great business opportunity for some smart folks to develop Detection Systems and Counter measures.

And LOL on anyone who thinks banning phones / tablets / laptops from folks using them at the Table is going to happen, or would be good for the game(s). Most of the under 40 crowd has 2 to 4 phones and are playing online poker and/or looking at the pron.....

Think back to when Cell Phones became prevalent and Poker Rooms did ban them from being used at Tables and/or were strict on making a Player leave the Table to take/make a call. It was not long before the Rooms just gave up.

I’ll watch video to see if there are any reasons that would make my analysis wrong but you are missing the point that we aren’t just talking about a pin hole camera. You need a processor, a battery and a radio too. Fitting just the processor, battery, radio and some basic sensors in a wearable ring with decent battery life cost millions to develop for my previous company. A pinhole camera is orders of magnitude more data than our sensors generated, increasing costs further.

You can’t have a weak radio. Even if this ring can be built having it drop 100% of frames wherever the receiver is more than 2 feet away or something metal is nearby reflecting signals and causing errors would make it worthless.

And then you ignore is the problem of aiming the camera. Are you going to hold your hand in one identical position down on the felt every single hand played? Or set your ring on the felt every time you play, that’s not suspicious at all.

Again putting camera in something significantly larger than a ring or bracelet makes it far easier to engineer and gives you a much higher quality camera to boot. My Bluetooth ring is only a few millimeters thick, that’s a ridiculously bad focal length, and a ring as thick as an iPhone would look ridiculous and obvious.

Ok, watched the video. The pinhole camera is huge compared to a ring or even a bracelet. It’s at least an inch long and far too thick for a ring. And it has to lay on the felt, so it’s perfect as a key fob. There is zero reason to try to shrink it into a ring and then have to explain why you always have to take off your ring and keep it on the felt.

When Robbie appeared on shows after her scandal did she still have the water bottle on the felt?

As mentioned here before, using a shoe will solve a few problems.

Berkey mentioned that the cheating scandal occurred at Parx as well. Does anyone here know which game? I hope it's not the 3k NL...