Major Absolute Poker Issue

[pokeraddict]

More food for thought, I also posted this at 2+2 (with typo fixed):

Here is a piece of the puzzle I don't get.

Obviously the cheats know they got caught, either by 2+2, AP or both. Even if AP was not in on it if the funds were confiscated then they are in on it now. One of the following happened:

1. AP let them keep all the money and unlocked their account. This is doubtful since nobody has seen any of the accounts play all week.

2. AP seized all the funds but lied to us about it, keeping a nice chunk of change. Basically this makes them in on it.

3. AP makes some sort of deal with the cheat(s) to keep them quiet.

4. An AP insider was in on it and AP helped to cover it up.

5. AP was the cheat all along.

If AP really did not find anything then why have these accounts not been seen?

After I posted this another poster makes a great point saying that if these accounts have really been found not guilty wouldn't they have immediately come back to the tables since they have proven they can win hundreds of thousands of dollars a week? Obviously AP's response doesn't add up.

[pokerfun0000000]

LOTS0:

You are either mentally retarded or a shill for AP.

Period end of story.

Honestly, could someone be this stupid?

[chuchu59]

Originally Posted by pokerfun0000000

LOTS0:

You are either mentally retarded or a shill for AP.

Period end of story.

Honestly, could someone be this stupid?

I dont think we should say that he is a shill without ample proof and I am sure he isnt a retard either. Obviously though, his views, especially on Pokeraddict, are a bit over the top and he should stop being so thick-skulled.

[SlotsWizard]

Lots0 is a no-BS, opinionated kind of guy. We aren't all going to agree on everything. I happen to feel that AP is up to no good here, and just because Lots0 disagrees with me doesn't mean I'm going to bash him.

Now can we move on and try to keep this thread about Absolute...

[WholeBean]

Hello everyone,

I don't usually post much but this topic is so interesting I have to ask a question. I'm confused about the use of the term chip dumping. I've always thought it meant one person was dumping chips from a compromised account or credit card to his/her legit account so as to be able to transfer the funds off site. I don't understand much about poker tracker, but are you using the term to indicate dumping in order to alter poker tracker stats? Are they dumping the chips to one another?

A nitty technicality, I know, but if anyone could answer this I'd appreciate it.

Thanks,

WholeBean

[GaryWatson]

Originally Posted by WholeBean

Hello everyone,

I don't usually post much but this topic is so interesting I have to ask a question. I'm confused about the use of the term chip dumping. I've always thought it meant one person was dumping chips from a compromised account or credit card to his/her legit account so as to be able to transfer the funds off site. I don't understand much about poker tracker, but are you using the term to indicate dumping in order to alter poker tracker stats? Are they dumping the chips to one another?

A nitty technicality, I know, but if anyone could answer this I'd appreciate it.

Thanks,

WholeBean

Yes chip dumping is too offload cash from a suspicious account.

The poker tracker is a use to track play but can be useful to detect patterns of play. It offers a more accurate stats overview. I dont really know much about poker tracker and its stats but apparently some of it has shown up patterns that would suggest chip dumping and an inside advantage.

Im only really going with my own hand analysis to determine the AP case

[pokeraddict]

The hand histories are really what shows the chip dumping. In these HU sessions one of the cheats would cap every street and fold either when he was down to his last few chips that would put him all in or for 1 bet on the river. Of course a nut player might play like this but a nut player is going to win a few hands along the way or get folded to. The dumper lost $55,000 in that session.

[WholeBean]

Good replies but I'm still confused about the "chip dumping". Are they dumping the money to each other in order to confuse the poker tracker stats or is there some reason they need to move the money from one account to another just to be able to withdraw? As far as AP is concerned the accused accounts are legit, and therefore they should be able to do their own withdrawals. Seems the site will not clamp down on chip dumping unless there is some usual kind of fraud, credit card theft and account hacking. I don't understand why they need to chip dump. Has anyone looked at the chip dumping to see if all the money is going to the same player account? I guess they would do this so that if the cheating accounts get locked the account that they dumped to can still offload the money??? Is that the case here? Did all or most of the dumping go to the same account or a small number of other accounts?

Thanks for anyone who has looked at the data and can answer my questions.

WholeBean

[GaryWatson]

Personally I think the chip dumping resulted after a panic.

The panic was that they had a ridiculous winning edge, as illustrated by poker tracker stats.

I dont know how many account they were dumped to.

AP stated there was no chip dumping. Fair enough, they dont want people to know their security has been compromised.

Apparently the investigated accounts were dumping during the investigation. It makes me wonder who they where investigating. It makes me wonder if the security team were playing poker and missed what their advanced algorithms missed. It just makes me wonder.

[WholeBean]

O.K. Here’s my nitty argument: Stop using the term chip dumping for what has happened. Chip dumping indicates a specific type of fraud. Chip dumping is a violation of a site’s terms and conditions because it is directly related with credit card fraud and account hijacking (correct me if I’m wrong). From what I’ve seen posted here the accused accounts have lost money intentionally to random opponents, not chip dumping. Although something suspicious is going on, losing money on purpose probably does not violate a site’s terms and conditions.

I hope you agree. The use of the term is inflammatory and detracts from the original accusation of hole card cheating.

WholeBean