I've never seen so many smaller arguments fit all into one thread, but of course I've never read a thread as long as this through before. A public forum isn't the best place for a trial (which is what this seems to have turned into), especially since clearly biased people on both sides (those implicated and those with money on the line and the associates of both of these parties) keep interjecting with opinions that they would obviously hold based on their stake in the issue. Many posters in this thread should take a logic class, as logically fallacies are flying around like crazy in here, but this is pretty par for the course in an argument in BBV.

Since Stars will almost certainly not have any sort of proof one way or the other, it's going to come down to a judgement call by the judges (shocking, I know), which is why there are judges in the first place for a bet that should be cut and dried (did he win $ over 30k hands in 1 day). Whatever the judges decide should be final, accepted, and if you don't like it then either:
A. Get judges that you feel are more qualified or reasonable next time or
B. Don't bet a prop in which you won't accept the decisions of the judges.

As for me, I'll be sitting here with my popcorn waiting for the next bomb to drop.

Hrm...really? There are way way wayyyy more microstakes games running at all times than any other limit. The player pool at microstakes is huge.



Alright maybe this is possible, but that's not really the point. You're talking about a couple random people from the largest player pool on stars, who happened to get coached by someone who acted really strangely in this thread, who happened to lose money in a very strange way to the OP who needed it at that exact moment. Now we're getting closer to really-unlikely-to-be-coincidence territory.

Anyway I'm just restating what everyone else has said. Really looking forward to the PStars findings.

I think a movie should be made about this.

this is just so entertaining

when this is over, i hope ppl dont distrust prop bets too much.

What's in it for OP?

So these three accounts suspected of chip dumping lost a total of 1.4k to OP, as well as losing to other players during their sessions (could someone please check just how much they ended down altogether?). I mean, let's say they lost 2k total, and would surely get at least double their money back by any agreement - assuming they could somehow be convinced to take part in **** like that in the first place - OP would be left with just 3.5k profit IF he succeeds.

That's not a lot of money for a nl200 player, certainly not enough to risk losing the prop, getting caught cheating, or having an accomplish spill the beans. Don't you think he would've gone for more than 7.5k with this bet if he was guilty?

Except all that all the coincidences in this thread are relevant to the situation.

3betting offsuit junk from the SB/BB shouldn't be removed as evidence because it is a standout statistical anomaly. Other cases of collusion and cheating have been uncovered in the past based on statistical anomolies in pt/hem.

• He 3bet offsuit junk from the SB/BB twice out of 30K hands
• He 3bet suited junk about 7 times as freqeuntly
• He has unsuited junk 3 times as often as he has suited junk so he actually 3bet suited junk 21 times as frequently as unsuited junk from the SB/BB
• So it's fair to say that those two 3bets with unsuited junk are an anomaly.
• Suspicions of chipdumping were raised after one of these two hands - the 3bet with 86o.
• Combined with the fact that this hand is a statistical anomoly in HEM it warrants a further investigation. It could still just be a coincidence so let's move on to the next step and see if that throws up any more 'coincidences'.
• It turns out that this 86o hand was against a microstakes player with next to no history at 1/2 (he shortstacked 1/2 for 19 hands 9 months ago).
• jalex discovers that this player is a friend/student/stakee of OP's friend Roseeker who has been been acting shady on this thread posting under two accounts in support of the OP.
• The player involved in the other anomalous hand (j8o), stoppedclock is then examined.
• It turns out he has the exact same background as breeezzz. No history at 1/2, friend/student/stakee of Roseeker, lost most of his money to gary out of all players he played that day.
• Of the couple dozen players breeezzz and stoppedclock played that day, they both lost the most to gary with hands that look very suspicious when combined with the fact that they are connected to him - allin pf with QQ vs T7o, c/c a A99 flop with KJ and cr the J turn, allin on K river. One of them lost a stack to gary just when he needed it to win the bet.

Can someone check how many players breeezzz and stoppedclock against that day? Then we can find out what the odds were of both of them losing the most to gary out of all the players they played.

The hands breeezzz lost when shortstacking 1/2 back in June 2009 were all standard shortstack stuff. He is also a nit at his standard stakes - http://www.**********************/st...NL-6-Hold%27em
This incident is the first time he has ever jumped stakes and flat out spewed off cash, with by far the most of it going to gary just when he needed it.

Why hasn't breeezzz come in here and explained himself seeing as how there have been 60 pages of people accusing him of chipdumping. All we've heard from him is one cautious response to a pm from blacksize. He has tons of posts in bbv, he has been on 2+2 every day for the last few days so he obviously has been reading this thread. If people were slandering my reputation and calling me a cheat I would be in that thread in a heartbeat setting them straight as would the rest of you. So where is he?

It might be small at high stakes but it is certainly not small at lower stakes. Since I stopped playing full time I have donked a bit now and again for fun on ipoker .10/.20 and .25/.10. I have about 90K players in my database. And pokerstars is alot bigger than ipoker. There are probably a couple of hundred thousand microstakes players on stars, and thats just at NL cash games.

People should stop saying 'its not that much of a coincidence that he happens to be connected to the players under suspicion' - With the size of the player pool in the microstakes games on stars, the odds are actually very small that gary would end up being connected to two random microstakes players that showed up on his tables to spew off cash just when he needed it to win his bet.

Originally Posted by NoMeansNo View Post
There is nothing that can be proved against gary, just pay him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoMeansNo View Post
I've yet to see anything in this thread that that would disqualify gary, imo. The judges fail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoMeansNo View Post
shut up
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoMeansNo View Post
GARY WINS TEH BET, GO HOME LOSERZ
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoMeansNo View Post
We are on your side Gary, F'k these lying slanderers.

QUIT SPAMMING AND MAKING IT SEEM LIKE YOU'RE SOMEONE NEW CHIMING IN. OK OK YOUR VOTE COUNTS, ROSEEKERNOSTALGICAMILITIARUSHAGARYNEVILLENOMEANSNO DUDE.

Again, this is flat out wrong as I've pointed out various times. Again, you (and previously the judges) are skewing the information to your advantage.

You do not have my 30k hand history database. Only me, Jalex, and blackize do.

[ ] Statistical anomaly
[x] Statistical anomaly based on skewed evidence

Hands Stakes Net Start End
29871 $1/$2 NLH (6-max) $139.95 Mar 19th - 6:00am CDT Mar 20th - 12:53am CDT

According to an independent tracking source, Gary should lose the bet based on failure to complete the number of hands required to win the prop bet. Personal tracking applications can be manipulated to show or hide hands. If Gary has completed the requisite number of hands during the specified time period, then I'm sure it will be no problem for Pokerstars to provide to the judges the hand histories of all hands played during the 24 hour period.

It is not flat out wrong. You have only 3bet offsuit junk twice out of 30K hands from the SB/BB.

You posted up another graph with a different filter where it shows you 3bet more unsuited junk when you take into account the SB/BB/BU. That is just trying to muddy the waters, as the filter under discussion is 3betting from the SB/BB.

Evidence is not skewed. Seeing what someone 3bets with from the SB/BB is a standard filter to use. It threw up a statistical anomaly with you 3betting 21 times more frequently with suited junk compared to unsuited.

Wrong again. You'll never see why though and you're not a judge so I don't really care tbh.

I think ptr misses some hands.

In 91 minutes FLAT. LOL.

Explain why I'm wrong so. All you say is I'm wrong or 'learn to count', you haven't once actually pointed out where I'm wrong in my statement.

Maybe it did and maybe it didn't. At least it's not a biased source.

On a lighter note, here's that breeeze guy's view on chip dumping: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...66&postcount=9

epic

i do have a semibusy life but it tried to keep up with this thread but since pg 70 its simply gotten to fast for me lol. r there any cliffs for what has happened as the last page i read, jalex had contacted stars and they agreed to investigate. is that where we are still?

thanks

After that Nancy Drew realized that the gas station owner had been the killer all along and had just been helping her out to cast suspicion on the fruit picker. As she ran out of the field to alert the police, the gas station owner hit her over the head with a wrench, and proceeded to rape her. Then he slit her throat, tied bricks to her ankles, and threw her in the old pond by the water tower.

Neither is pokerstars?? Pretty sure Gary forwarded the emails containing the links to the HH's played during the 24H period to the judges.

wins thread

FYP

I fail to see how this can do anything but make everyone who participates in a prop bet in this forum feel entirely better that not only do they have their best interests in mind, but an entire community of degens is willing to argue any minute detail on either side of the bet in order to help the reality of a situation come to light. I am honestly impressed at the level of detective work going on in this thread. Obviously there is the trolling/ranting of randoms, but in general the discussion has been interesting and I think it helps the legitimacy of these prop bets in a huge way.