Absolute Poker is absolutely rigged. (New evidence, near certain proof its rigged).

[lojo]

A little 'time travel' and reset would work... hand is dealt to phantom players, recalled to server, read by employee, sent to real players... hole cards seen.

...hole-card access was described to me as a backend tool called "Servman" that wrote the hand histories before hands were completed...

Pretty close

 

[mussy]

UB too?

Posted by gank on pocket5s.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

to original post. :


Well, I guess I have become the reporter everyone trusts to talk about what goes on behind the scenes while protecting my source's identity, as I have been contacted by and had a long conversation with an employee at UB who wished to shed light on the company. Again, I will protect my source and not be releasing his/her name to anyone, ever.

I will list the all the important points from the conversation as best I can.

1. It is possible to have upto 25 usernames registered to 1 players name on UB, they know about this and are ok with it as a company.

2. If someone does have multiple accounts, even if they are registered to the same name and use the same IP address, they are permitted to play at the same table, cash games and sitNgos and tournies. UB knows about this, and are OK with it.

3. Although my source is not sure if hole cards could be seen during the hand by a superuser account, my source does know that as soon as a hand is over with, UB personell has access to see everyones holecards even those that didnt go to showdown. This has been used by some UB higher ups at times while they were playing. Not a direct form of cheating, but definitely an unfair advantage if the person has access to this while playing.

4. A higher level executive was fired not to long ago, because her 19 year old son, who she got a job at UB, was caught cheating games at the UB office. It is unclear to my source if holecards were able to be seen during the hand, but it is a possibility. He definitely was cheating customers somehow, maybe a cobination of the above things mentioned at the very least.

edit: Another close, reliable source has just talked to me and told me "the woman's son had "administrative access" which let him see hole cards." and that the source "wouldn't be surprised if administrative access still exists" The person went on to say "there's also evidence that at least a couple months ago AJ (Green) was overseeing day to day operations"

5. Chris Welch, a former employee of Pokerstars, was brought on board by UB to help clean up the site. He figured out the problem was that they were using a version of the software from 1998 that had security holes in it(i.e. no security firewalls were/could be put in place) that couldnt be fixed without a complete overhaul of the software, which was estimated at costing 6 million dollars. UB decided it was not in their best interests to upgrade the software.

6. My source also voiced their concern for my safety for vocalizing these points.

I bring this to light because I feel that this is the important stuff that our community needs to be aware of.


[End of quote]

(The edit in the middle of the text was made by gank in his original post.)

 

[lojo]

Mussy, it can be dangerous to only have one source, without coroberating evidence you could be held liable for libel or slander.. please be careful.

3. ...my source does know that as soon as a hand is over with, UB personell has access to see everyones holecards even those that didnt go to showdown. ...

Supports my theory of AP, a loop, a mirror, (servman?).

 

[jetset]

Interesting that this triggers questions about Absolute Poker's sister site, too.

I wonder if they share offices and other physical facilities? Perhaps Nat Arem at 2+2 can comment on that following his visit to the AP set-up in Costa Rica.

Mussy, is Gank a moderator or part of the ownership of PocketFives? Or is he simply one of the posters at PocketFives?

 

[jetset]

I've just been over to PocketFives to have a closer look at that thread, and for balance I have to re-post the following.

This is further down in the thread, where one of the PocketFives guys checks out the Chris Welch aspect of Gank's post.

This is the response from Chris Welch:

Hi Matt

Thankyou for your note the only comments I will make are these

1 I am a marketing guy , I led global marketing for Stars and was poached to lead the global marketing for a company that worked for UB. I had no input into technical areas as this was not my area of expertise. Thus the comments regarding me and UBs technical side are frankly laughable !!

2 I left shortly after the passing of UIGEA in December 2006

3 In my short time working with UB everyone I met was in my eyes open and honest and I have zero doubts as to to integrity of the management or the software.

4 UB have since merged with AP with most of the prior management of UB leaving. I cannot comment on the current team as I do not know them.

5 I have worked in marketing in gaming for over 7 years and have over that time read on various forums about integrity. Speaking as an insider I have seen nothing even remotely dubiuous, why bother to fix something that makes millions playing it straight? Clearly there is always scope for bad apples to not play fair but I can't comment because I don't know the facts.

I am happy for the above to be posted in full

Regards

Chris Welch
Managing Director Europe
Centrebet.com
Odds-Casino-Poker

 

[lojo]

What's your take on this Jetset.. or is expose enough? It's a hard line to walk.

 

[jetset]

I'm not sure what to make of this latest rather melodramatic post from Gank, but I do know that when I see one allegation in a post rebutted I tend to look askance at other accusations in the same post - human and suspicious nature I suppose.

Let me put it this way; Chris Welch's response and the question mark it raises over the veracity of the information is enough to make me hold for now on publicising Gank's revelations on AP's sister website.

That said, I remain suspicious of the manner in which AP is handling this crisis and the questions that remain unanswered - for example the diversions around the personalities involved in management, AJ Green, Scott Tom etc etc.

The Poker News interview with Nat Arem still leaves these questions hanging in the air, although Part 2 may be less cautious and start naming names.

There's still way too much releasing of 'unofficial' and unsourced information to selective media for my money, and the focus appears to be more on damage control than transparent and open company communication on this debacle.

One point in Welch's response is revealing - that when Ultimate Bet was merged with Absolute Poker the majority of the UB people whom he vouches for left the merged companies. To me, that means that the shadowy and thus far unidentified figures in charge of Absolute Poker are also presumably running things at Ultimate Bet.

Bearing in mind all that has passed in recent months, that gives me pause for thought.

 

[mussy]

Yes, I can see that gank's post has to be treated with some caution now. The Welch response was not there when I read the thread last night, I believe. I haven't been to pocket5s yet this morning, I've come here first.

gank is Brett Jungblutt, he has a WSOP bracelet. While I accept that this does not make him automatically reliable, it at least means he isn't just some untraceable kid with a grudge who is making it all up. And I have seen him described on 2+2 as a respected pro, or some such phrase. At the very least, though, his source's reliability on the technical side has been brought into question. And this does make me wonder about the rest of it.


EDIT: To answer the question asked by jetset, as far as I know gank is simply a poster on pocket5s, I'm not aware of him holding any position there.

 

[mussy]

Having said all of which, I find point 5 in Welch's post rather perplexing.

5 I have worked in marketing in gaming for over 7 years and have over that time read on various forums about integrity. Speaking as an insider I have seen nothing even remotely dubiuous, why bother to fix something that makes millions playing it straight? Clearly there is always scope for bad apples to not play fair but I can't comment because I don't know the facts.

The 'why would they fix the game?' argument clearly holds no water now. And from this paragraph, he almost appears to be in denial about the whole AP scandal, and its importance to the future of the industry he is in.

 

[pokeraddict]

One point in Welch's response is revealing - that when Ultimate Bet was merged with Absolute Poker the majority of the UB people whom he vouches for left the merged companies. To me, that means that the shadowy and thus far unidentified figures in charge of Absolute Poker are also presumably running things at Ultimate Bet.

This is why I can't understand why some players and affiliates say that playing at UB is OK but AP is not. I seem to recall that this exit of management was common knowledge a year or so ago. We all know the now guilty cheaters played on UB, why would it be shocking for cheating or other shady activities to occur on UB?

 

[jetset]

This quote from Chris Welch's response to Gank - or it may have been an earlier post by someone else - on another thread on the forum (these multiple threads do make for confusion) is also interesting:

QUOTE: 1. It is possible to have up to 25 usernames registered to 1 players name on UB, they know about this and are ok with it as a company. UNQUOTE

One poster said that he had played on multiple accounts, although not at the same table and another said that, as a holder of multiple accounts he had been blocked when trying to play at the same table (ie attempting to play two positions using different account names at the same table.)

But getting back to the central thrust here, I would have to say that I agree that if UB has the same executive management that initially handled the AP crisis in such a suspicious manner, and continues to leave dangerous questions publicly unanswered, it should make one cautious around UB too.

 

[pokeraddict]

UB used to allow you to have up to 3 accounts until shortly after AP took over. People would create new accounts and often get rakeback if they did not have it before as it seems UB security was always behind the curve. I've never heard of the 25 number though. I know AP software did not allow people from the same IP to sit at the same table, at least the earlier versions. I seriously doubt this was changed as it would have sent a red flag up to the programmers.

 

[GaryWatson]

erm..scary thought. Im not happy with players allowed to create multiple accounts on different skins. I guess most do it for bonuses but its still an uncomfortable thought. Multiple accounts on the same site? No reason whatsoever. Maybe a name change, if that, but thats it. AP/UB have proved they have a superuser lack of integrity. Many of us will walk away from online poker in disgust. There are more people entering the game than leaving. AP/UB will use their inhouse affiliates and their newly found link power to profit from this sad situation. We all know they are dishonest but we keep giving them exposure. AP/UB = Pure greed

 

[GaryWatson]

UB used to allow you to have up to 3 accounts until shortly after AP took over. People would create new accounts and often get rakeback if they did not have it before as it seems UB security was always behind the curve. I've never heard of the 25 number though. I know AP software did not allow people from the same IP to sit at the same table, at least the earlier versions. I seriously doubt this was changed as it would have sent a red flag up to the programmers.

Again, that would open up a new can of worms. If a player has an account, more than likely it has been created through an affiliate. Now if the player goes for rakeback they have been ushered via a rakeback affiliate. Sites do not want to pay extra bonuses unless they have to. AP dont even honor charity. Now if a player is allowed to open an extra account (up to three). What would be the reason for it other than inhouse theft (stealing off existing affiliates)

 

[pokeraddict]

AP actually changed the 3 UB account rule. UB claimed you would always be tagged to your old affiliate but many found this was a way to get rakeback.

They weren't the only ones that allow you to have multiple accounts. For example some Cryptos will let you do the same thing but will not let you double dip bonuses or do anything else suspicious.

I have 3 accounts at UB and 5 accounts at AP. I had an account when I entered their prop program, 3 accounts in their prop program (at the time they would only let us play 4000 hands a week per nickname) and an account I was allowed to open for rakeback after I stopped propping.

OTOH opening up more then 1 account at Stars or Full Tilt will get both accounts locked.

 

[DoverPro]

Vegas 24/7 / Absolute?

Vegas 24/7 seems to be the same room as Absolute.

So I am assuming the same cheating applied to me when I played the room as a Vegas 24/7 player.

I quit playing both sites when I first heard the news about Absolute. I am signed up for both rooms, although strangely enough I seemed to win at Vegas24/7 a lot, and seldom at Absolute.

 

[pokeraddict]

VegasPoker247 is a skin of AP. They are owned by others and the biggest difference is that AP does not allow that skin to access the bad beat jackpot tables.

 

[mussy]

Sklansky post

David Sklansky has posted about AP on 2p2. In my view it is pretty much the worst post anybody has made on the subject yet. Perhaps I was just hoping for too much from him.

He clearly isn't moderately aware of the facts, hasn't even bothered to look at the hands on YouTube, or better still in that HH viewer, and seems breathtakingly complacent about the whole situation.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[pokeraddict]

I have to agree and I mod at 2+2. His first posts were joking about the whole thing and then they vanished. IMO he does not represent the opinion of 2+2.

 

[jetset]

Update

TOP ONLINE POKER ROOMS REACT TO ABSOLUTE POKER DEBACLE (Update)

Poker rooms say there is no real-time exposure of hole cards on their sites

Despite the paucity of progress reportage from Absolute Poker on investigations into the tournament cheating scandal that has engulfed the company for the past three months, it continues to be the subject of intense player discussion and media coverage.

After first denying that there was a problem when the player community exposed the cheating, Absolute Poker later admitted that a flaw in its software had enabled a company consultant to view other players' hole cards and win up to $800 000 unfairly. The company's Kahnawake licensing jurisdiction, which has ownership connections to the firm, ordered an investigation into the incident by Gaming Associates, which is ongoing.

This week the respected editor of Poker News, Earl Burton conducted an informal survey of major online poker sites, asking specifically if a reprise of the Absolute Poker debacle would be possible on their sites. Not surprisingly, the unanimous answer was "no."

Burton asked the sites if they had security or software procedures in place to prevent outside players from looking at hole cards, together with policies on employees playing on the sites, procedures for investigating allegations of irregularities and vigilance with regard to "out of the ordinary" play.

"Site staff responded within a few days, and what they said indicated that many of them are concerned about what occurred at Absolute," reports Burton.

Full Tilt Poker replied in an e-mail that went into great detail regarding the site's fraud prevention mechanisms.

"We wish to assure you that keeping our games safe and secure is of paramount importance to Full Tilt Poker," said a company security and fraud spokesman. "Our software was developed on this principle, and we continue to work to ensure this is the case. Due to the potential security risks, we made sure there was no way for a user, internally or externally, to see another player's hole cards in real time.

"We do store hole card information, though not in real time, so our Security and Investigations Team can later review any suspicious or questionable activity. In over three years of dealing cards, there has never been a security breach on Full Tilt Poker."

Full Tilt's security team continually monitors the site for potential issues, too: "We work hard around the clock to ensure the highest integrity and security of our games. Rest assured we investigate any suspicions from our players that someone may be using prohibited software on our site. Our security team is working 24/7 to ensure our players are playing in a fair environment."

PokerStars was adamant that what happened at Absolute could not occur on its site, advising: "We recognize that the online discussion may make some people generally doubt the security of other online poker sites. PokerStars' software was developed under strict security controls. Here are some facts about the PokerStars software and its development.

"In the early days of software development, the concept of having a program that could view hole cards live in order to help testing was discussed. [We] explicitly decided against that idea, specifically to avoid any potential problems like the one that is being discussed in the forums. That decision stands, and no such software has ever been developed in PokerStars software to view hole cards live in real time.

"PokerStars does record all of the hole cards in all real-money hands. This is an important tool to help us investigate fraud and collusion. However, this information is not accessible to anyone until after the conclusion of the hand; it is not transmitted to our database until all action is completed and the pot has been awarded.

"To be clear: Nobody at PokerStars can see or know the hole cards of any hand in progress. Nobody in senior management, none of the software developers, no support representatives. Nobody at all."

He then revealed the method PokerStars uses to manage changes to software, to reduce the risk of it being compromised internally.

"All software updates are reviewed by several people before being deployed. All sensitive changes are also personally reviewed by the chief software architect to help ensure they are stable and secure. In our company history of more than six years, we have had no indication of any breach that would allow anyone to see the hole cards of other players.

"We are aware that there are some programs that claim to make it possible to see other players' cards. We have investigated many of these programs and have not found any that do what they claim to do. Some of them are actually malware programs that compromise the security of whoever installs the software. But mostly they are simply scams; attempts to steal money from people who believe incorrectly that they will get a competitive edge. In truth, they do not compromise PokerStars security.

"We have a large team of Poker Specialists in our Support Team who review all suspicious situations and escalate to the Game Security team if they find anything, which in turn will escalate to the senior management team if any serious problems are found. The security and integrity of our games is of paramount importance to PokerStars."

Absolute Poker's sister site, Ultimate Bet, commented: "Ultimate Bet has been dealing cards on the Internet since the year 2000 and we have implemented strong safety measures to ensure the trust and security of our customers.

"We take the security of our system at Ultimate Bet very seriously. Whenever you access our web site or game any confidential information passed between us is encrypted. Our web site uses secure server technology to ensure that when you perform a cash-out, access hand histories, make deposits etc., your communications are protected using the same technology as online banking sites. All communications between your computer and our servers are also encrypted using public/private key encryption. These keys are changed frequently.

"Please rest assured that we follow up on any wrong playing offenders."

 

[KellyBlend]

Absolute Poker active and ongoing investigation

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Absolute Poker active and ongoing investigation

The Kahnawake Gaming Commission's investigation into the Absolute Poker situation is active and on-going. The Commission's agents, Gaming Associates, are in the process of finalizing its audit of AP's operations and will be submitting a report to the Commission of its findings. The Commission will review this report and decide the appropriate course of action. To avoid the possibility of jeopardizing its investigation, the Commission will not comment on this matter until such time as it has reached a decision. The Commission expects to receive a final copy of the audit report by December 7, 2007.

Mohawk Territory of Kahnawake
22 November, 2007

 

[petkaymad]

Newb to the site here and happy to have found this site.

In light of all the goings on at AP, do people think users should avoid the Blackjack section of AP as well?

 

[Casinomeister]

Newb to the site here and happy to have found this site.

In light of all the goings on at AP, do people think users should avoid the Blackjack section of AP as well?

Avoid them as much as possible. It's not only the software malfunction that is under scrutiny, but their business ethics as well.

And anyone still advertising for these guys has a major screw loose.

 

[lots0]

Can you believe this???

Absolute Poker will be hosting a charity tournament on Saturday, December 1 at 20.30ET, to support the ONE Campaign to make poverty history.

Right after I read this, I had mixed feelings... I wanted to laugh... then I wanted to cry and now I just feel disgusted...

Absolute Poker "doing" a charity event for the poor.... Does anyone think this is really going to buy AP respectability after being caught red handed cheating players and then their lame efforts to cover up their cheating?

The advertisement for this AP charity event did not even have a link to www.one.org the organization that AP is supposedly helping out with this charity event. I think most webmasters will understand the import of NOT giving a link to a site your supposed to be helping out...

I guess the ethically challenged management at AP has decided that they can buy forgiveness by tossing a few coins to the poor.

 

[pokeraddict]

They don't exactly have a great rep when it comes to paying charities in a timely manner either.