And i say payout the bettors. The biggest hand in question is the QQ vs T7. Lighting has not struck twice but several times.

And while I have a gut feeling stars will uncover something, I wouldn't make Stars the final decision on this matter. To much Poop has hit the fan for any reasonable judge to just take the happenstance theory. Jalex first had a smell but now this whole thing reaks.

I will say to the bettors. There should have been a much more structured line taken before shipping your monies. The judges weren't even appointed. I liked how the slaughter was persistant about the webcam but i think he was almost the last person to ship money. In any case gl to the bettors and I'm glad that Jalex has made his contributions to this thread.

Now gimme some more damn popcorn Jalex. I'm eating this **** up.

--Starrazz

this thread officially killed my hourly and doomswitched me.

Twice?

I'd say it struck a few more times than that if you count ROSeeker/Nostagica (being the same person) voicing support for OP in both names in the thread.
ROSeeker/Nostalgica most certainly appear to be the same person on Stars.
the 2 people that are believed to have chip dumped, buddy lists on other poker sites, removing names AFTER them being outed in a laughable yet pathetic attempt at covering up the associations.

It's a whole **** STORM of coincidences.

+1 on the hourly but no doomswitch here.

and Ronald.

and this
Edit: In B4 the 40 post count saids OP is innocent and we are all crazy

As for the idea of Gary's friends being cheaters but not Gary, I say: Follow the money. Who stands to benefits from what they did? Gary.

People are in prison all across America because they stood to gain financially from the nefarious actions of others.

"Your Honor, I know nothing about the duffelbags of hundred dollar bills in my trunk. Just because some scummy drug dealers hid them in my trunk for safekeeping doesn't mean I had anything to do with it."

I should clarify, right now I think the bettors won. I don't think discussion is over.

Since it was the 3rd party 00doug who removed himself from the buddy list's, its completely plausible and even proper for him to try to cut his name out of this situation. Assuming he's innocent and considered that his friends have integrity, he was trying to defend them. It's exactly what a lot of people do. That is not evidence of wrongdoing.

The only true outstanding evidence is the RoSeeker/breeez land RoSeeker/StoppedClock

Along with RoSeeker's multi-account 2p2 and this thread and multiaccounting poker sites, he's a confirmed scumbag and most definitely guilty.

But this does not mean 100% that Gary is guilt. He could see that his friend is about to lose huge $$, think zomg I can cover for him without Gary's knowledge, which puts Gary in a super ****ty spot right now. While this (inadvertent on his part) collusion would make him lose the bet, he wouldn't have necessarily lost had his friend not interfered on his behalf, as his last 1k hands or w/e were played basically trying not to lose.

Btw, Gary has come off quite well itt; while it might be unlikely, I could plausibly believe that it wasn't his fault. In this case, it might end up being a ****ing expensive lesson to not have friends that are scumbags.

Only things I know are

1) Gary should not win this bet
2) RoSeeker should get banned from lots of things

so in this situation, you are saying roseeker is doing this without gary's knowledge, and dumping $600+ through the good of his heart to help out his friend?

cmon, do you really think thats plausible?

I think he'd be doing it with the expectation of getting it back assuming that Gary would have been okay with it.

I think the likelihood of this is about 20%

I think winning the prop bet by $19.50, which earns me 8 large, is the exact OPPOSITE of being in a "super *****y spot."

(I know you agree Gary is a losing cheater, and I know you clarified it by saying "right now," but they were counting on no one discovering what jalex so heroically discovered).

The wierd thing about all this is that Gary had odds, like someone else said, to take this bet at 3:1 given the EV of a player losing at the rate Gary loses. He stands to gain +EV in the long run playing this fair and square. The collusion was only brought in toward the end when it was obvious he was not going to win it running away, which would have been the obviously preferable option. Knowing you have that option in the backpocket ups the odds considerably, especially when you figure that its highly unlikely anyone is ever going to find out, lost in a sea of 30K hands.

this is very plausible. with other leaps of logic that people have made itt is this really the most farfetched thing you've read here? please

sigh people need to stop posting these comparisons.

ROM, these actions that you took, either by themselves or put together, did they help you win a propbet you were stading a good chance to lose? Did it come right at a time where it looked like you weren't gonna make it and were going to lose a decent chunk of change?
Did they or did they not HELP you to win money from some people based on results of some activity which encompasses all those actions (for which you gave probabilities) ?

if not, then your comparison is worthless and so are the others


it doesn't help if you're combatting alleged logical fallacy with more logical fallacy

While I agree with almost all of what your saying, here is where I don't.

Gary has not come off quite well itt:
-He's a losing player at 1/2
-Saids to all of us I'm on a big downswing but if I can some how put up $2500 of my money to do a challenge then I can become a winning player.
-All that Gary has to do is win money during a massive 30k hand multitabling session in under 24hrs.

Mini-cliffs just a bit paraphrased:
-Gary: Oh and btw, even though it standard for all prop bets to have a web cam, I won't.
Bettors:Why not Gary?
Gary:Hmmm...
Gary:Ah hah. My internet is slow. Thats why ok. So i MAY have one.
Bettors:Ok then maybe you'll have one so I'll ship me monies right now to your friend the escrow.
Gary: (so easy imo)
Gary: Ok guys I still needs some more action
Final Bettor: I will book it but I need a webcam
Gary: My internets is slow. (please ship. plz)
Final Bettor: are you like pursuing SNE? how is your internet slow?
Posters: Yeah man just Justin.tv it.
Gary: (oh damn!) (what do i say now)
Gary: ok i will put a webcam but i can't help it if there is a technical problem and no webcams. (me smarts. i will pull the chord in hour 2) (this is easy)
Final Bettor:Shipping the monies. But I RESERVE THE RIGHT TO PULL MONIES WITH NO WEBCAM
Gary:(oh damn batman! not so easy anymore) (oh I gots it)
Gary: Ok internet webcam will be up 100%
Gary: (I never said it will be aimed at my laptop where I chats.) hehehe
Chatters: Hey Gary let us see whats on your laptop
Gary: Scram! Don't you see i'm busy. I have monies being shipped to me.
Chatters: Why were you on that phone call just before that suspicious dump?
Gary: More Red bulls. **** who needs sleep.
--30k hands played
Garry: Ship me the monies
Bettors:Not so quick
Bettors/Judge: you had some suspicious hands we need to look into.
Judge: During that session, we have THREE players who have ZERO history at $200nl show up, and they lose a combined $1411 to the player.
Gary: no don't bother. I'll just do another quick 30k hands.
Jalex: Not so quick buddy. I ownz me own bizness.
Jalex: Something smells funny here. Don't you worry 2p2ers i'm owning this thread from here on!
Gary: Really guys I can just play another 30k hands its not that big of a deal
Jalex:TWO of these three players are PROVEN to have a connection to one of your friends
--**** hit the fan and Gary spazzes out.
Roseeker: Give Gary his money Jalex!
Jalex: What! I know you aint talking to me mo fo! Where were you on the night of! Nevermind I have my agents working on this.
Jalex: Ah hah. I knew you were up to no good.
Roseeker: I'm a good person. I do goods. I'm not multi-accounter.
--Roseeker gets owned by Jalex
And we haven't heard from Gary since....

in all honesty this should prob. end in a push given the current evidence. still waiting for more evidence obv.

time to pay the bettors.

LOL Welcome back to the thread, NoMeansRo!

...NO WAY OP GETS PAID.

Judge +1

Pretty good summary

OMG, Title should be edited to something, just anything to get more readers in here, had no idea this was going on.

So cliffs for the last 8-9 pages or so is that there is a lot of evidence suggesting dumping, and no official decision has yet been made, correct?

sick bump

I think some people are having trouble understanding the point I am putting across- which was precisely that people have trouble understanding probability. I was demonstrating how you couldn't compare the two situations in my example.

For the record, I have a Maths degree (UK) and was a Maths teacher for eight years. I do know what I'm talking about. There is no "logical fallacy" in my post.

(And I explained all of this above too, in post 1736.)

...Is it 350...?