Acid_Knight 2 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthread.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... Link to post Share on other sites
pocket3s 0 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthread.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? Link to post Share on other sites
Fade2241 0 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 it's been well documented that you can't trust those sites playing high limits..the fact that ppl do just baffles me Link to post Share on other sites
Acid_Knight 2 Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 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. Link to post Share on other sites
AcesOnFire 0 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Cue super thread... Link to post Share on other sites
Fade2241 0 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 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.. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Those stats don't really look anything like the AP superuser stats.For one, <3k hands is nothing, obviously. Secondly, his W$SD is only like 55%, which is much lower than the superusers were.Furthermore, that large river AF is merely indicative of a fish who is hitting/slowplaying. Link to post Share on other sites
Acid_Knight 2 Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 Those stats don't really look anything like the AP superuser stats.For one, <3k hands is nothing, obviously. Secondly, his W$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. Link to post Share on other sites
HubDub04 0 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 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. Link to post Share on other sites
Sheiky 0 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 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. Link to post Share on other sites
krup24 0 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 read whole thing, suspicious yes but not convinced Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 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. Link to post Share on other sites
StupidKid 0 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 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 Link to post Share on other sites
Acid_Knight 2 Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 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.... Link to post Share on other sites
Influcted 0 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Hm, I don't find it extremely suspicious at all. He might just be extremely aggressive at the river, who knows? Link to post Share on other sites
albasuna 0 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 if he is a superuser... he's doing a good job at staying low because everyone thinks he's just a great player. Link to post Share on other sites
Vtlaxer09 4 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 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? Link to post Share on other sites
PrtyPSux 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 this is disgusting. Link to post Share on other sites
SilentButDeadly3 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 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. Link to post Share on other sites
PrtyPSux 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 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.Are you serious? I've never won 45 buy ins overall in 3k hands (at least thats what I counted when I first read it, I might have misread it)...I don't know anyone who has either....let alone vs some of the best players online, and having them all say they thought it was " fishy". On top of that he deleted the acct when the scandal broke out.....It's not necessary for a superuser to be stupid, a smart one would lose some times. imo this is a huge deal if it was the 2nd case of this I wouldn't be surprised to know about more on different sites etc.. Link to post Share on other sites
ratwastard 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 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.well of course there's rampant cheating going on at almost all the sites.Hello! Link to post Share on other sites
tskillz187 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Are you serious? I've never won 45 buy ins overall in 3k hands (at least thats what I counted when I first read it, I might have misread it)...I don't know anyone who has either....let alone vs some of the best players online, and having them all say they thought it was " fishy". On top of that he deleted the acct when the scandal broke out.....It's not necessary for a superuser to be stupid, a smart one would lose some times. imo this is a huge deal if it was the 2nd case of this I wouldn't be surprised to know about more on different sites etc..QFT.I mean, if every top player that played him said it was fishy losing, I'll believe them. His stats are skewed, etc. The poker world is small, it's extremely unlikely some random dude came along on a heater and dominated the top competition on UB but not other sites then went away forever as a scandal broke out on a poker sites sister company.I think it's vvvv incriminating, but doubt anything will ever be done. Link to post Share on other sites
SilentButDeadly3 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Are you serious? I've never won 45 buy ins overall in 3k hands (at least thats what I counted when I first read it, I might have misread it)...I don't know anyone who has either....let alone vs some of the best players online, and having them all say they thought it was " fishy". On top of that he deleted the acct when the scandal broke out.....It's not necessary for a superuser to be stupid, a smart one would lose some times. imo this is a huge deal if it was the 2nd case of this I wouldn't be surprised to know about more on different sites etc..Hmm...I guess I only looked at the BB/100 and whatnot. That is ridic and def. something wrong here. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now