46 replies to this topic

[Acid_Knight]

http://forumserver.t...ead.php?t=99247That's quite the stat-line he's got in the OP with the tiny aggression factors until he wakes up on the river...

[pocket3s]

Acid_Knight, on Wednesday, January 9th, 2008, 8:18 AM, said:

http://forumserver.t...ead.php?t=99247That's quite the stat-line he's got in the OP with the tiny aggression factors until he wakes up on the river...

RiggedEdit: I beat king?

[Fade2241]

it's been well documented that you can't trust those sites playing high limits..the fact that ppl do just baffles me

[Acid_Knight]

Fade2241, on Wednesday, January 9th, 2008, 8:43 AM, said:

it's been well documented that you can't trust those sites playing high limits..the fact that ppl do just baffles me

If it'd been well documented, then there'd be something more than intense speculation and the AP scandal.

[AcesOnFire]

Cue super thread...

[Fade2241]

Acid_Knight, on Wednesday, January 9th, 2008, 10:08 AM, said:

If it'd been well documented, then there'd be something more than intense speculation and the AP scandal.

The Ap scandal is exactly what i'm talking about! If you play high stakes on those sites you're asking for trouble, it's been documented..

[Zach6668]

Those stats don't really look anything like the AP superuser stats.For one, <3k hands is nothing, obviously. Secondly, his W$SD is only like 55%, which is much lower than the superusers were.Furthermore, that large river AF is merely indicative of a fish who is hitting/slowplaying.

[Acid_Knight]

Zach6668, on Wednesday, January 9th, 2008, 9:46 AM, said:

Those stats don't really look anything like the AP superuser stats.For one, <3k hands is nothing, obviously. Secondly, his W$SD is only like 55%, which is much lower than the superusers were.Furthermore, that large river AF is merely indicative of a fish who is hitting/slowplaying.

If you read the whole thread, it's more than just his stats.They also suggest that unlike the AP superuser, if this guy was cheating, he had enough sense not to make it as blatantly obvious as calling with T high and stuff like that.All of the comments in the thread from Trambo, CTS, Gaucho etc basically say that although it is a small sample, it's just the way he played, never paying off their big hands and making the thinnest of thin calls and thin bets and almost never being wrong. Running good is one thing, but coming out of nowhere, destroying the best players on the internet for a huge sum in a short period of time, and then having UB delete your account when the AP scandal arose is pretty effing suspicious.

[HubDub04]

I think that when the AP scandal broke, UB and AP intensively searched out for other accounts within their sites and deleted accounts without telling anyone who or what they found. I'm sure they seized millions of dollars of funds from other cheating accounts and never told anyone for obv reasons. They also probably just kept the money they confiscated too.Such bullshit.

[Sheiky]

HubDub04, on Wednesday, January 9th, 2008, 6:05 PM, said:

I think that when the AP scandal broke, UB and AP intensively searched out for other accounts within their sites and deleted accounts without telling anyone who or what they found. I'm sure they seized millions of dollars of funds from other cheating accounts and never told anyone for obv reasons. They also probably just kept the money they confiscated too.Such bullshit.

I doubt it, who else would have access to superuser capabilities apart from the AP employee?He would be incredibly dumb to sell his account abilities to others.

[krup24]

read whole thing, suspicious yes but not convinced

[RDog]

LOL.

[Zach6668]

Acid_Knight, on Wednesday, January 9th, 2008, 12:58 PM, said:

If you read the whole thread, it's more than just his stats.They also suggest that unlike the AP superuser, if this guy was cheating, he had enough sense not to make it as blatantly obvious as calling with T high and stuff like that.All of the comments in the thread from Trambo, CTS, Gaucho etc basically say that although it is a small sample, it's just the way he played, never paying off their big hands and making the thinnest of thin calls and thin bets and almost never being wrong. Running good is one thing, but coming out of nowhere, destroying the best players on the internet for a huge sum in a short period of time, and then having UB delete your account when the AP scandal arose is pretty effing suspicious.

Yeah, I was gonna come back and mention that I hadn't noticed the HHs or anything like that.I don't really care about this, though, lol.The way I've run for the last 3,000 hands, I'm suprised I'm not being charged as a superuser. Granted, I don't play high stakes.

[StupidKid]

Zach6668, on Wednesday, January 9th, 2008, 7:09 PM, said:

Yeah, I was gonna come back and mention that I hadn't noticed the HHs or anything like that.I don't really care about this, though, lol.The way I've run for the last 3,000 hands, I'm suprised I'm not being charged as a superuser. Granted, I don't play high stakes.

[x] Running good[x] Makes weird horrible calls[ ] Is always right[ ] Superuser

[Acid_Knight]

Zach6668, on Wednesday, January 9th, 2008, 11:09 AM, said:

Yeah, I was gonna come back and mention that I hadn't noticed the HHs or anything like that.I don't really care about this, though, lol.The way I've run for the last 3,000 hands, I'm suprised I'm not being charged as a superuser. Granted, I don't play high stakes.

I think for the most part, any kind of cheating is infinitely easier to spot in NL because there are so many real decision points. People call down in LHE with A high or similarly weak hands all of the time.But yeah, I saw you play last night. That guy had your number for a long time and then you finally got him. You must've forgtten to type in your superuser password before then....

[Influcted]

Hm, I don't find it extremely suspicious at all. He might just be extremely aggressive at the river, who knows?

[albasuna]

if he is a superuser... he's doing a good job at staying low because everyone thinks he's just a great player.

[Vtlaxer09]

A 9 hand just seems like a bluff with hte best hand 8 5 hand... if he puts the other guy on 2 pair.. why not bet with hte flush?

[PrtyPSux]

this is disgusting.

[SilentButDeadly3]

Maybe if this was over like 10k+ hands, but his BB/100 isn't ridiculous considering the sample size. It just looks like a guy on a rush. If he is a superuser, he's a bad one bc he has lost 18 times out of 39. Move along folks, nothing to see here.