k thnx

Don't reason with starrazz, he's solid.

Wait a minute. I still don't understand how roseeker/nostalgia being a multi accounter has anything to do with if op cheated, only connection here is op knows the multi accounter and roseeker/nostalgia acted shady in the thread + he has connections to some people who lost money to op. All this is interesting but theres still nothing here that implicates op of cheating and mostly just how shady roseeker is.

QFT, I am most certainly biased but the judging is terrible;

and lol@probabilities, you are doing it wrong.

attempting to un-derail thread debate

It's 100% certain that the propbet has been botched by cheaters. The only thing left to debate is if OP had any knowledge or involvment.

What motives did he have to cheat on the propbet?

First, he's a losing player and he's down a ****load of money. Personal gain and greed, the most classic motive. He'd like to see this bet succeed.

Second, it's not a sure bet by far. Assuming he was playing 30k hands as he would normally, then it might be slightly +EV. Under the conditions of the bet, which is a huge grind requiring a lot of tables, dividing his attention completely, while he already sucks at poker to the point where he cannot beat the rake normally, it is definitely not +EV. He's probably playing worse and worse the more money he burns as well, as there has to be tilt involved in his huge losses.

Did anyone else have a motive? If Gary sold action and did not reveal this, they would have an incentive to dump to him. He could have also simply offered them a cut to help out if everthing was going tits up.

They like Gary, see he's going busto, and want to intervene, but at significant cost to themselves. I don't know, but they must really love Gary to dump hundreds of $ to him. That's a stretch for micro grinders.

IF there was side action going on, and his associates tried to fix the bet in Gary's favor to their gain, we would have heard from the people who took the other side of the bet by now, right? There's nothing wrong with people placing side bets, so why wouldn't they come forward since they have an interest in a fair outcome as well.

IF Gary's associates liked him that much, where by now it's clear they cheated to help him, why not just come forward and clear Gary's name by admitting their guilt? They have nothing more to lose, but they could help out their friend instead of dragging him down.

Unless of course Gary got them involved and now they're pissed.

People who keep insisting on chalking this up to coincidence are being completely naive. If anything, we're lucky that the cheaters were so sloppy and stupid about it, or else we would have never known.

The side debates over probability and judges are just mucking up the thread with useless ****. All the reasonable people here don't need to argue these topics ad nauseam.

Just read approx 1000 poasts, eyes bleeding, severe headache. My diagnosis?

Occam's razor < Jalex's razor

I think this would do the opposite of clearing him.

It would be realllllly funny if Gary has a side bet with someone, that the 2+2 community would uncover the cheating lmao

This. People are acting as if this is some definitive proof of Gary cheating, but all it says is that RoSeeker lied about something unrelated to the prop bet (which he's already done).


I also still don't understand why, if StoppedClock and breeezzz were just playing 200nl to dump chips to Gary, then:

- Why does StoppedClock drop a stack to someone else before playing with Gary?
- Why does breeezzz, supposedly a solid 10nl grinder that is just dumping to Gary, go play 100nl HU after dumping?
- Why does breeezzz 4bet/fold to funkeemonkee in this hand, when Gary isn't even on the table?
https://www.**********************/r...ash=5861175577

Not sure who's naive here...

\/ \/ \/ \/

This kind of thing has been mentioned a few times and though it seems self explanatory to most of us, it seems like some people don't get it. Gary, Roseeker and pals, knew for a fact that players who lost money to him would be checked out. They can't just have a guy land on his tables, dump a few stacks him and get up and leave. The guy might as well come in and type I am now going to 'chip dump' in chat to Gary if that was the plan. So what has to happen is that anyone who dumps has to go and donk off a stack or two on another table so as the chip dumping won't be 100% transparent and obvious. Do you really think if Gary organised chip dumpers to help him out he would have them just dump stacks and leave?? He would have to be an complete utter half-wit to do that.

dude its 1400$, living expenses for a month. noone's going to do that as a favour for someone else without their knowledge, if there was cheating gary is must culpible

Ok, so if that is the case, then why does he shove T7o into Gary's QQ instead of raise/folding a bunch of hands? Seeing a showdown means (a) Gary might lose, and (b) people see something unusual. Wouldn't he have to be a "complete utter half-wit to do that?"

+1

sigh....

read the thread imo and he just explained what is basically self explanatory to most of us but lets make it easier to read.

BECAUSE IT NEEDS NOT TO BE OBVIOUS.

DUCY now?

I will say, its hard to disprove a negative when all evidence, obvious or not obvious, is 'obvious'.

ugly boy
ugly story

,
Come on Jalex! Bring the goods.

If he was continuously raise/folding to dump to Gary it would be plain obvious when he was checked out. Loads of raise/folding and not going to showdown would standout a mile.

(a) Of course he could lose, but he's a 5.3-1 favorite to win, excellent odds he would take all day long if he needed it to win a prop bet. People are generally overjoyed to get allin with an overpair vs undercards.
(b) Seeing no showdowns is just as unusual. The best, and time honoured, strategy for chip dumping is to dump stacks and then try and cover it up by donking off some more randomly.

Looks, it's the standard method of dumping cash, it's been happening for years. When people get hacked and lose their roll how do things play out.....the hacker goes onto their account and dumps off cash to his chosen account(s) and also dumps a certain amount to randomers to camouflage what would otherwise be a straight up obvious chip dump. It's just the way it's done and has always been done.

Btw, I don't doubt they were raise/folding a few times so as to get more cash to gary, but to use it as their sole strategy would be ridiculously easy to spot.

this is boring now , just pay the guy , and maybe learn from the fact that betting hundreds of dollars across a forum with strangers is not a good idea . you know you have all been hustled so just accept it and learn from it .

cliffs? Was gary paid, or investigation continueS?

well what happened was that after she was so hurt from being dropped into the lake by her raper, she needed immediate attention. What luck. The family on a vacation had a mother that is a practicing nurse. She was brought back to health but left with emotional scars for life.

we can't prove anything, so he's guilty. hum.

define prove?

OP is from UK, standard of proof in UK for tort claims like this is balance of probabilities. On the balance of probabilities OP is guilty and therefore loses.

I believe in US small claims courts the standard of proof is a preponderance of the evidence, which amounts to the same thing, which again means OP is guilty (to this level of proof) and therefore loses.