Online Casinos - Casinomeister Logo Online Casinos - Casinomeister

Go Back   Casinomeister's Online Casino and Poker Forum > The Amazing World of Online Casinos and Poker Rooms > Casinomeister's Poker Room

Notices

Casinomeister's Poker Room Here you can post your experiences with online poker rooms - good or bad.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 17th October 2007, 09:49 PM
Mousey's Avatar
Resident Rodent
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Up$hitCreek
Posts: 2,000
WTGs: 0
WTGd at 2 Times in 1 Post
Thanks: 1,500
Thanked 1,522 Times in 858 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 7929
Rep Power: 67
Mousey has a reputation beyond reputeMousey has a reputation beyond reputeMousey has a reputation beyond reputeMousey has a reputation beyond reputeMousey has a reputation beyond reputeMousey has a reputation beyond reputeMousey has a reputation beyond reputeMousey has a reputation beyond reputeMousey has a reputation beyond reputeMousey has a reputation beyond reputeMousey has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casinomeister View Post
That's good news. It looks like they've finally woken up to smell the coffee. Bringing in a qualified third party is what they needed to do a few weeks ago.

It's beyond me why they weren't all over this when the news of this first broke out. From the beginning, it's been handled very sloppily. It's like they don't know the meaning of good public relations.
AP probably thought this situation would just 'go away'. I mean, we've all heard : "it's rigged" regarding one casino or poker room or another so much over the years we hardly pay attention anymore. However, the players deserve the credit for staying on this, digging deep, and being bull headed enough to make AP see the light.

Someone asked me other day if I thought AP was rigged. To be honest, I don't understand the hand histories well enough to be certain in my own mind either way. However, with as much as I've read, and seen about this... I do think something is hinky and it's well past time that AP took it under serious consideration. AP should have brought in a 3rd party weeks ago. It was obvious (to most of us) early on that this situation was not just a case of a couple of losers crying 'rigged!' because they got beat.
__________________
Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 17th October 2007, 10:20 PM
Banned User - repetitive violations of posting rule 1.1
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,128
WTGs: 0
WTGd at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 3,554
Thanked 1,816 Times in 1,217 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 15
Rep Power: 0
lojo is on a distinguished road
What happens if the GA audit shows that it is not possible to breach security, but the hand histories show that it is statistically 'impossible' for the plays to have occured any other way?

Quote:
Specifically, Absolute Poker has requested that Gaming Associates conduct a thorough and extensive review of Absolute Poker’s practices and security systems to determine whether it is possible for any person, device, program, script or other means to see hole cards thereby gaining an unfair advantage.
Time will tell, I guess.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 17th October 2007, 10:53 PM
GrandMaster's Avatar
Meister Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,197
WTGs: 1
WTGd at 2 Times in 2 Posts
Thanks: 138
Thanked 669 Times in 392 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 3631
Rep Power: 48
GrandMaster has a reputation beyond reputeGrandMaster has a reputation beyond reputeGrandMaster has a reputation beyond reputeGrandMaster has a reputation beyond reputeGrandMaster has a reputation beyond reputeGrandMaster has a reputation beyond reputeGrandMaster has a reputation beyond reputeGrandMaster has a reputation beyond reputeGrandMaster has a reputation beyond reputeGrandMaster has a reputation beyond reputeGrandMaster has a reputation beyond repute
Then you have to decide, whether it is more impossible that someone breached security or was given privileged access, or that someone just happened to play so extraordinarily well.
__________________
"The voice of reason"
http://mb.winneronline.com moderator
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to GrandMaster For This Useful Post:
lojo (17th October 2007)
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 17th October 2007, 11:05 PM
lots0's Avatar
Meister Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: My own private Idaho
Posts: 1,163
WTGs: 1
WTGd at 8 Times in 8 Posts
Thanks: 629
Thanked 701 Times in 380 Posts
Nominated 1 Time in 1 Post
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 3542
Rep Power: 33
lots0 has a reputation beyond reputelots0 has a reputation beyond reputelots0 has a reputation beyond reputelots0 has a reputation beyond reputelots0 has a reputation beyond reputelots0 has a reputation beyond reputelots0 has a reputation beyond reputelots0 has a reputation beyond reputelots0 has a reputation beyond reputelots0 has a reputation beyond reputelots0 has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
What happens if the GA audit shows that it is not possible to breach security, but the hand histories show that it is statistically 'impossible' for the plays to have occured any other way?
Everyone has just been assuming that the hand histories that have been posted in public are correct. After looking at the email in question, I am just not convinced it is an actual hand history record from AP.
__________________
Cheaters Suck...
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to lots0 For This Useful Post:
lojo (17th October 2007)
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 18th October 2007, 04:02 AM
pokeraddict's Avatar
Webmaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Black Hills of SD
Posts: 1,396
WTGs: 0
WTGd at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 129
Thanked 455 Times in 231 Posts
Nominated 1 Time in 1 Post
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 2603
Rep Power: 45
pokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandMaster View Post
Then you have to decide, whether it is more impossible that someone breached security or was given privileged access, or that someone just happened to play so extraordinarily well.
The 15 standard deviations from the norm answers that for us I think.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to pokeraddict For This Useful Post:
lojo (18th October 2007)
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 18th October 2007, 04:03 AM
pokeraddict's Avatar
Webmaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Black Hills of SD
Posts: 1,396
WTGs: 0
WTGd at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 129
Thanked 455 Times in 231 Posts
Nominated 1 Time in 1 Post
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 2603
Rep Power: 45
pokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by lots0 View Post
Everyone has just been assuming that the hand histories that have been posted in public are correct. After looking at the email in question, I am just not convinced it is an actual hand history record from AP.

What's different? Have you found hands with the same hand #'s that are different? Are hold cards different? Boards?
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 18th October 2007, 04:06 AM
Banned User - repetitive violations of posting rule 1.1
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,128
WTGs: 0
WTGd at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 3,554
Thanked 1,816 Times in 1,217 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 15
Rep Power: 0
lojo is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokeraddict View Post
The 15 standard deviations from the norm answers that for us I think.
For the layman (statistical idiot like me) how many zeros, or what does that number look like again? thx
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 18th October 2007, 07:56 AM
halfway to busto
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Edinburgh, Kenmore, DC and beyond
Posts: 257
WTGs: 0
WTGd at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 10
Thanked 139 Times in 57 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 815
Rep Power: 18
BBKPoker is a splendid one to beholdBBKPoker is a splendid one to beholdBBKPoker is a splendid one to beholdBBKPoker is a splendid one to beholdBBKPoker is a splendid one to beholdBBKPoker is a splendid one to beholdBBKPoker is a splendid one to behold
Quote:
Originally Posted by lojo View Post
For the layman (statistical idiot like me) how many zeros, or what does that number look like again? thx
# If the total deviation from the mean is +/- one standard deviation, then 68% of the cases will be included.
# If the total deviation from the mean is +/- two standard deviations, then 95% of the cases will be included.
# If the total deviation from the mean is +/- three standard deviations, then 99.7% of the cases will be included.
# If the total deviation from the mean is +/- four standard deviations, then 99.99% of the cases will be included.
# If the total deviation from the mean is +/- six standard deviations, then 99.9996% of the cases will be included.

Can you imagine what happens when we get out to 15? It is so improbable that it is functionally impossible.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BBKPoker For This Useful Post:
lojo (18th October 2007), pokeraddict (18th October 2007)
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 18th October 2007, 08:06 AM
pokeraddict's Avatar
Webmaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Black Hills of SD
Posts: 1,396
WTGs: 0
WTGd at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 129
Thanked 455 Times in 231 Posts
Nominated 1 Time in 1 Post
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 2603
Rep Power: 45
pokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond reputepokeraddict has a reputation beyond repute
I didn't do the math, I was just posting what the math experts at 2+2 had come up with.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to pokeraddict For This Useful Post:
lojo (18th October 2007)
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 18th October 2007, 09:13 AM
jetset's Avatar
Meister Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 10,350
WTGs: 0
WTGd at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 870
Thanked 2,928 Times in 1,380 Posts
Nominated 7 Times in 2 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 15619
Rep Power: 161
jetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond repute
This story is now starting to break in the mainstream press (we issued an update on it yesterday incorporating Absolute's latest statement), and it should be noted for the record that GA is part of the Kahnawake set-up as an exclusive testing agency.

QUOTE from IGN:

Following the emergence of allegations concerning the propriety of Absolute Poker's operations, the Kahnawake Gaming Commission (KGC) said it intends to investigate its privately-held licensee.

In a written statement issued this afternoon, the KGC indicated that it will employ an independent third party, Gaming Associates, to conduct the audit.

"This week's allegations of impropriety have been brought to the attention of the [KGC]," said KGC Commissioner David Montour. "We have appointed experts to conduct a thorough audit of all circumstances, provide findings and recommendations to the commission.

"The audit will not be restricted to examining theories circulating in Internet chat rooms and fora," Montour added.

Factually, little is known about why the investigation is being undertaken though rumors of fraud and collusion have been linked to the operator. But in a brief conversation with IGN, Montour stressed that, presently, the allegations remain precisely these--allegations.
__________________
jetset
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to jetset For This Useful Post:
Casinomeister  (18th October 2007), jod5413 (18th October 2007), lojo (18th October 2007), pokeraddict (18th October 2007), tennis_balls (18th October 2007)
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
interesting colluding poker bots article REOdeathwagon Poker Complaints 11 13th November 2007 05:26 AM
UK pub poker to screen on SkyPoker jetset Casinomeister's Poker Room 0 4th August 2007 01:06 AM
Unique Gambling Articles for better SEO manman For Sale/to Buy 0 20th June 2007 03:14 PM
European survey jetset Casinomeister's Poker Room 0 9th February 2007 01:12 PM
Poker BIG BUSINESS - Enjoy the article jmildstone Casinomeister's Poker Room 2 17th March 2005 04:00 PM


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0
© All Rights Reserved, 1998-2008
Inactive Reminders By Mished.co.uk