**** 30k hands in a day + profit on 200nl 6m prop bet*** [See confessions of cheating. MH] - Page 63

im certainly not arguing that and neither is jalex. no one is arguing that the HH alone indicates chip dumping. can you not read? no one is arguing that the T7o hand alone couldn't have happened versus a random donk. read that sentence a few times, maybe it'll sink in.

you saying it doesn't make it so
once again, someone even ****ing ran the numbers on how likely it was that breeezzzz/stoppedclock (or whatever his name is) would both choose to play on that day. read that sentence a few times, maybe it'll sink in.

(funny thing? i was the one that corrected him on that obvious lapse in logic and only one other person confirmed, pretty silly how everyone knows this to be the case yet no one recognized this instance.)

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:28 PM

#1553

KeanuReaver

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,505

Quote:

Originally Posted by yanknpull

PokerStars is not going "to find Gary clean". They may determine that they have no evidence of wrongdoing, but that is not the same thing.

thats fine, edited

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:30 PM

#1554

jalexand42

Hypothetical Ubermonkey

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 5,390

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeanuReaver

as for maliciousness, you're trying to convince people that gary is guilty. this is pretty clear and your research has lead you to that conclusion. that's perfectly fine...but most people do not have this point grasped, and you have not been trying to correct them. allowing people to have a logical misconception of the situation is deceitful, being deceitful to further boost your cause to find gary guilty is malicious.

i genuinely believe if people were too really grasp this point, that breezzzz could be literally anyone (since that QQ vs T7o hand isn't unheard of for NL200) and all that this entails that people would see this case is farrrr from guaranteed guilt.

snipped last paragraph and added underlining for emphasis.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalexand42

Post # Lucky 7.

Okay, here's my summary....sorry for lots of posts, but I can't imagine trying to put all that crap in one post.

First off:

Let me reiterate that I have no vested interest in this, other than I hate cheaters.
I will NOT accept any money for doing this, so don't even ask. If someone wants to ship something, go donate something to charity in my name. :P
This was about a day's work for me after it unfolded, BUT there are a TON of things that I didn't look at that could turn up more information. Ultimately, I think we're at the point of diminishing returns.

So, in summary we have:

A player with the following results at $1/2 NL - 737k hands, -$18,316, -.62 bb/100.
Out of the blue? he decides to put up $2500 of his money to do a challenge that he can win money during a massive 30k hand multitabling session in under 24hrs.
During that session, we have THREE players who have ZERO history at $200nl show up, and they lose a combined $1411 to the player.
TWO of these three players are PROVEN to have a connection to one of the players friends before poker.
Gary three bets with total bajunky against two of these players.
Said friend is active in this thread advocating his friend's case. One of friend's stakee's is also active in this thread, and has a connection to one of the suspicious players, neither of them volutarily are up front about their connections to this player - Nostalgica did admit to a vague relationship over PM to Blackize when asked.
Individually none of the hands are damning, but together? The fold of QQ to the minraise against a 78% fish? Really?
There's other nit picky ancillary crap, like the fact that Gary initially didn't want to setup a web cam, the tone of certain posts, etc.

Personally, I think it's IMPOSSIBLE that all of the above 'coincidentally' lined up to just look suspicious. I think there's very little doubt there was foul play going on. If it had just been breeezzz involved, I would have argued for a push - with the additional two players, IN MY OPINION there was something nefarious going on.

Just remember, it is going to be IMPOSSIBLE to prove this short of them admitting it, or Stars showing up with more proof (which I've asked them to look for).

Occam's Razor imo.

This is all my opinion, I'm not hiding anything that supports either side and I've done the best I could to find evidence. I don't hold any of the money, but if I did, I'd return the money of the folks that bet against Gary and hold Gary's money pending hopefully some involvement from PokerStars.

PS: Sorry for the drama, I spent alot of time on this, so that added some fun to make up for the boring parts.

Bolding & Underlining added for emphasis.

You wanna tell me where my liability to correct droolers in BBV ends after I clearly posted what you are accusing me of not doing LAST NIGHT IN MY SUMMARY.

Maybe you should go back and re-read my posts?

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:34 PM

#1555

ra]\\[dom

adept

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 923

Quote:

Originally Posted by yanknpull

PokerStars is not going "to find Gary clean". They may determine that they have no evidence of wrongdoing, but that is not the same thing.

So, guilty until proven innocent?

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:34 PM

#1556

optionsguy

veteran

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 3,123

jalex, how many buyins have you punted away from tilt enduced by this thread?

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:34 PM

#1557

GetHighRM125

old hand

Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 1,937

haters on jalex need to GTFO!!!

this dude has spent countless hours of his own time looking into this w/o any compensation or any personal benefit and then people come in here bashing him...??

there is obv some issues here so the people saying "pay gary his money" or "gary lost give the money to the bettors" also need to gtfo

jalex has spent more time then anyone on this and no money should be moved until the judges have made a clear decisions

also lol at the people being accused showing no effort at all to depend themselves. If this was me and I was innocent I would be doing everything I possibly could to clear my name. Not just for the money reasons but for my reputation as well...

just my .02

mad props jalex... well done sir

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:35 PM

#1558

yanknpull

centurion

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 151

Quote:

Originally Posted by ra]\\[dom

So, guilty until proven innocent?

No,

Just leaves the judges with the evidence that they already have to make a decision with.

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:36 PM

#1559

krmont22

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 8,078

this is awesome

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:37 PM

#1560

jalexand42

Hypothetical Ubermonkey

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 5,390

Quote:

Originally Posted by optionsguy

jalex, how many buyins have you punted away from tilt enduced by this thread?

Thank God I'm on a break from poker.

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:41 PM

#1561

KeanuReaver

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,505

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalexand42

snipped last paragraph and added underlining for emphasis.

Bolding & Underlining added for emphasis.

You wanna tell me where my liability to correct droolers in BBV ends after I clearly posted what you are accusing me of not doing LAST NIGHT IN MY SUMMARY.

Maybe you should go back and re-read my posts?

yeah i think im fully tilted
that's not even ****ing close to what im trying to get across

maybe i just suck at explanation, i don't know.

breezzz could be anybody, breeezzz could be anybody, breeezzzz could be gary's 2nd cousins best friend, breeezzzz could be gary's friends roommate, breeezzzz could be gary's old classmate, breeezzzzz could be a long time ssnl poster, breeezzzz could be the sister of gary's coworker, breeezzzz could be the father of one of gary's facebook friends, gary could have coached a guy that knows breeezzzz, gary could have chatted with a guy that stakes breeezzzz, etc. etc. etc.

done with the thread, hopefully if more bets end like this people will stop allowing bbv action into their prop bets.

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:46 PM

#1562

jalexand42

Hypothetical Ubermonkey

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 5,390

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeanuReaver

breezzz could be anybody, breeezzz could be anybody, breeezzzz could be gary's 2nd cousins best friend, breeezzzz could be gary's friends roommate, breeezzzz could be gary's old classmate, breeezzzzz could be a long time ssnl poster, breeezzzz could be the sister of gary's coworker, breeezzzz could be the father of one of gary's facebook friends, gary could have coached a guy that knows breeezzzz, gary could have chatted with a guy that stakes breeezzzz, etc. etc. etc.

No **** sherlock until we found the connection from breeezzz to RoSeeker, who happens to be a really good friend of Gary's. _SAME_ thing for StoppedClock. You're all up in arms that about one little tiny piece of individual evidence, when EVERYONE has all along said that it alone could have been totally random, prior to finding that link.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeanuReaver

done with the thread, hopefully if more bets end like this people will stop allowing bbv action into their prop bets.

Good go back to werewolf and quick cluttering the thread.

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:50 PM

#1563

RoSeeker

banned

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 6,008

Quote:

Originally Posted by GetHighRM125

also lol at the people being accused showing no effort at all to depend themselves. If this was me and I was innocent I would be doing everything I possibly could to clear my name. Not just for the money reasons but for my reputation as well...

Oh my GOD. I have done so, furiously, or did you miss all my posts. I said I wouldn't post again until Stars replied, but I just skimmed the last page and saw this and apparently Jalex missed the post where I replied to his set of questions (or not?). I've defended myself PLENTY, but right now it's the same arguments being thrown back and forth over and over and over again. There's no use arguing now until Stars is done with their investigation.

Also, how ridiculous this person says an innocent person would shut up, be unemotional, and distance himself from the thread only replying with facts when necessary, and then someone says I'm not innocent because I'm not trying to furiously clear my name...

Except of course, I WAS, and I have said NOTHING but the truth, and I explained EVERY "shady" thing that I saw was brought up, all that can be backed up with the thousands of posts I've made on not just this forum but others, which jalex has found. The timeline of my changing to the second account was also confirmed by Blackize, that I only started using this account AFTER I received/replied to his PM, and before then had no intention of using this. After almost a hundred pages, I get sick of it + it's EASTER, okay, I have a life too, so I stopped posting for half a day and people say I disappeared?

Look, I SWEAR, no more posts on this thread until star contacts us. I am not "disappearing".

So chill the hell out. I am sure we will get our answers, but we have to wait, and I just can't be bothered right now. This thread is tilting the f- out of me.

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:52 PM

#1564

Dmark17

grinder

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 412

Wow at this thread! Jalex the job you have done is amazing just wanted to chime in and say I am so glad we have people like you in the community that actually take the time to do things like this. Also I wonder how many iq points above the average poster itt you have.

Quote

03-24-2010 , 04:52 PM

#1565

zachvac

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 13,775

ok you reposted this so I figured I'd point out what I (and I think Keanu?) are trying to say:

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalexand42

A player with the following results at $1/2 NL - 737k hands, -$18,316, -.62 bb/100.
Out of the blue? he decides to put up $2500 of his money to do a challenge that he can win money during a massive 30k hand multitabling session in under 24hrs.

That he can play 30k hands and 25%+ of the time win was the actual bet, and as has been pointed out someone with his overall winrate (I think they just used overall because it was way closer to 0 than -.62) this bet was +ev for him, even ignoring the fact that he'd been running bad plus this was weekend when likely tables would be softer. So these 2 are literally pointless and absolutely no evidence at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalexand42
During that session, we have THREE players who have ZERO history at $200nl show up, and they lose a combined $1411 to the player.
TWO of these three players are PROVEN to have a connection to one of the players friends before poker.

Finally some stuff that matters, but that people have misinterpreted. The odds of this happening are not the odds that they in particular did it it is the odds that on a given Friday night microstakes regs with at least a friend of a friend connection to Gary would take a tilt-shot and end up playing the same tables as Gary and losing most of their money to Gary, keeping in mind that Gary is on a lot of tables. But still I think this is the most damning evidence right here because even the odds that any 2 random micro grinders would take shots that high and would happen to lose it to Gary is pretty damn low. For fun I looked at my top 10 for my last 30k hands and it has regs and fish but no micro grinders, although idk if me playing the hands over much longer than 24 hours would make a difference. So this is extremely valid if you do make sure to qualify that the fishy part is that microstakes regs would do this, not that two particular friends of gary would. Although I guess you can further say it gets even more suspicious when the friend link between Gary and these people appears in this thread attempting to cover stuff up and lie until a mod forces him to admit both accounts are his and he actually does know those people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalexand42

Gary three bets with total bajunky against two of these players.

As much as I love the word bajunky I did mention this earlier that unless you can show that it was part of the collusion (or even speculate), this evidence is just about as strong as saying they were wearing the same color underwear that day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalexand42

Said friend is active in this thread advocating his friend's case. One of friend's stakee's is also active in this thread, and has a connection to one of the suspicious players, neither of them volutarily are up front about their connections to this player - Nostalgica did admit to a vague relationship over PM to Blackize when asked.

Agreed that this should be considered fishy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalexand42

Individually none of the hands are damning, but together? The fold of QQ to the minraise against a 78% fish? Really?

He's 20-tabling and it's near the end of the bet. Maybe he didn't see the HUD? Sorta just playing devil's advocate on this one because I honestly don't know why he would do this whether he was or wasn't colluding. A lot less fishy to just have guy with hand that beats QQ just shove there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jalexand42

There's other nit picky ancillary crap, like the fact that Gary initially didn't want to setup a web cam, the tone of certain posts, etc.

This is actually pretty big too. I mean essentially he didn't play this bet with a webcam because it wasn't used at all. If he had pointed the webcam at the ceiling would that have been satisfactory? It served about the same purpose (unless people just wanted to jack off to him). You could almost say bettors win just for that.

Quote