Saturday, September 22, 2007

Absolutely rigged

This link contains the extraordinary accusation that a bunch of players on Absolute poker could see their opponents' hole cards. (Edit: There is an updated thread here ). Accusations such as this, and online poker being 'rigged' are widespread, always untrue, and just used by losing players to justify their results. But this one is true. There is 0% chance that the players in questions don't have the ability to see all the cards at the table.

Basically, there are 3 or 4 accounts who play a beyond awful style of poker, yet never ever call down with a losing hand while at the same time never ever folding to bluffs. This includes making a call of a massive bet with Ten hi no draw on the turn, only to find that, surprise surprise, their opponent has 9 hi! This is imo probably the biggest scandal in online poker history, certainly since Planet Poker's RNG got hacked in 1999.

Some thoughts:

i) If stuff like this gets in the press, it's gonna really scare away fish from playing online poker. Selfishly, Id want it kept hush hush, but I think it's really important to have freedom of information and this chicanery should be exposed.

ii) It's going to be catastrophic for AP to admit this happened, even though the evidence is indisputable. I suspect that the accounts will be closed and AP will try to brush it under the carpet. Right now the only people that know about this are the High Stakes winners, whose business they don't really want that much. Further, they know that if they continue to have great games, people are just gonna make the assumption that the loophole has been closed, and play anyway.

iii) AP should compensate all the players who had their money stolen, whether they still have access to the cheaters' stolen funds or not.

iv) The cheater(s) is a total moron. He basically played 'perfectly' every single hand, NEVER calling down with a loser, NEVER failing to bluff an opponent who was weak, NEVER bluffing an opponent who was strong. Seriously, how dumb do you have to be to do that? This makes me think that we aren't dealing with a sophisticated computer hacker -- someone smart enough to do that (and I bet plenty of real smart folk have tried - and failed), would surely not be so dumb as to play so obviously. I would guess it's an inside job and that someone at AP who has access to the User Account settings is in on the swindle. Of course, AP will never admit this.

v) It's pretty fun to think about how you would play against these guys now. i.e. if you were playing someone who could see your hole cards and played like these thiefs, and you knew this, but they didn't know you knew this, what is optimal strategy? Could you actually be +EV?? Probably not, but it's fun to think about some of the scenarios that could come up. If you were given this omnivision, how would you play and how much money would you make? As these guys only got caught cos they were so goddamn retarded, who are we to guarantee that there aren't other people will similar superpowers, but smarter who have taken the online economy for a bunch of money?

vi) What should AP do? No one is going to trust them to come out with the full truth, seeing as that likely isn't in their best financial interests, and it seems like an inside job. Further, their support/investigations staff are a total and utter joke, people with limited smarts, knowledge of poker etc. They need to open their books up *completely* to an internationally respected auditors. Let them see *all* available evidence, work out who was involved, what the loophole is, how to close it etc. Make their report public. Invest serious time/money in making sure this doesn't happen again. Chances of this happening - 0.1% :(

-courtesy of Dean

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Strategy Post - Sort of

So this is going to be a short strategy post. One hand I played recently that a couple people who was watching me play at the time asked how I could possibly make that play at that time. So I'm just going to go through my thought process and reveal a bit about online tells.

I'm going to go through this hand step-by-step, street-by-street. Names are deleted just for privacy purposes.

PokerStars Game #12141526209: Tournament #6-6, $25+$2 Hold'em No Limit - Level V (75/150) - 2007/09/19 - 01:25:43 (ET)
Table '61613026 1' 9-max Seat #9 is the button
Seat 1: Villain (2445 in chips)
Seat 2: Hero - ME (3465 in chips)
Seat 6: - (2825 in chips)
Seat 7: - (3295 in chips)
Seat 9: -(1470 in chips)
Villain: posts small blind 75
ME: posts big blind 150
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to ME [8h 6h]
-: folds
-: folds
-: folds
Villain: calls 75
Me: checks

So this is a Turbo Sit-and-Go, blinds goes up every 5 minutes. Hero is sitting in decent shape with a M of 17, and villain is not in bad shape sitting with M of 11.

Folded around to the blinds where hero gets a free look with 6-8 of hearts. A hand that I'm probably behind with, but could make a hand with.

*** FLOP *** [Qd 7h Ad]
Villain: checks
Me: bets 250
Villain: calls 250

So hero leads out for 5/6 of the pot. For anyone familiar with PokerStars, the bet amount scroll bar goes up by multiple of the big blind, going up by 1 big blind each time the bar is clicked (unless the scroll bar is actually scrolled). 250 represents a bet that is entered manually (this is important - will explain why later).

Players usually pair their hole cards 1/3 of the time, so hero took a stab at the pot hoping he can pick up some dead money. Villain calls. So he can either be on a flush draw, or he hit the board. If he hit the board, hero is drawing very thin, even if he is on a flush draw, hero is still drawing thin.

*** TURN *** [Qd 7h Ad] [6c]
Villain: checks
Me: checks

Easy check. Hero makes bottom pair, but with villain's call on the flop, bottom pair might not be good.

*** RIVER *** [Qd 7h Ad 6c] [7c]
Villain: bets 650
Me: calls 650

The board pairs, and flush doesn't come, and villain leads for 3/4 of the pot. Notice how the bet is again not a multiple of a big blind? So that means it was manually entered (DING DING DING). Remember my bet on the flop that was manually entered to try to represent something when I really have nothing, I called his bet based on what I tried to use on him. Trying to make the bet seem strong by entering an abnormal number. In poker, strong means weak, weak means strong. Whenever playing live, if someone looks very strong, the chances are they're weak, where as if they look timid and weak, they might be strong. So with that information available to us, I make the call...and the result is

*** SHOW DOWN ***
Villain: shows [5d Td] (a pair of Sevens)
Me: shows [8h 6h] (two pair, Sevens and Sixes)
Me collected 2100 from pot

And I was correct. Now, there are times when I could look foolish calling here and having villain show a hand that beats me, so don't always a hand the same way and evaluate your opponent the same way. This bettering pattern is similar to a tell Phil Gordon alluded to in his "Little Green Book". Whenever someone makes a bet, if he chooses a small number of large denomination chip, he is attempting to not intimidate his opponent since its only a small number of chip (so he is actually strong since he tries to look weak). Versus another opponent which chooses a large number of small denomination chips, that player is attempting to look strong and intimidating by betting with a large number of chips (strong means weak) when in reality he's bluffing.

Now, that was para-phrased, but its the same idea. Keep in mind though, no matter what type of tells you pick up, there is rarely a tell (if there is one at all) that is universal. Use the various information provided to you and process them altogether and make your decision.

Sunday, September 16, 2007

APPT Seoul - Wasn't meant to be

Was actually pretty excited for this satellite, one in ten shot in getting a seat in the APPT tourney in Seoul in a couple of weeks. It seemed like I had a pretty tough table draw seeing how I recognized a couple of names and thats never a good thing. Was totally card-dead early on, combining with the fact that I misplayed a hand, I was down to 1500 from 3000 starting stack by first break. There were at least a couple of donks at the table, but I just couldn't get a hand to play against them. Won two consecutive double-up hands after coming back from break to get back to average stack. Finally picked up a hand vs. one of the donks, when I raised with AK UTG+1 and he literally pushes all in and I insta-call. He shows 77, which isn't all the surprising. Was hoping for a hand like Ax or Kx where I am in better shape, but I wasn't laying the hand down to him in that spot. He flops a set, turn gave me an additional 8 outs for a chop but the river blank and it just wasn't meant to be.

In retrospect, I could've gotten away from the AK but his range was to wide and I was a favorite against most of the hands, and definitely could've had him dominated, I don't think it made sense to fold. If it was from a couple of the other players at the table, then an argument could be made for folding, but against this one player, I think I got it in good.

So I guess my next goal is one of the EPTs as the finale in Australia conflicts with exams...

Friday, September 07, 2007

A Decent Run

I guess not being able to fall asleep could be a blessing in disguise? Got home from Destiny's at about 2am, but just couldn't seem to be able to fall asleep. So I decided to load up Stars and donk in a few tournaments and satellites. Turned into a pretty profitable evening. Took down a couple of the double shootout satellites into Sunday Million, and also finally winning some races to close out the $27 turbo SnGs. I feel like taking the past couple of months away really cleared my head in some of the decisions I am making. In a way it helped me focused more as it was getting to a point where it was a bit too much of a grind at times. Still hoping to qualify for the APPT in Seoul, Korea, and hopefully try to score a seat in one of the EPT, probably the one thats going to be in Dublin the last weekend of October. Other than that, nothing really special going on in that regards...