Ultimatebet and Absolute Poker - why are they still around?

lol I see there commercials on Tv this is not a gambling website free play only what BS ..:what: from the begining they start to scam ya as far as the poker pros who endorse these scamming sites i agree wth many bloggers to ban buying thier books dvd's etc.. wow what a way to go to rip off people with all these gambling websites and no one can do nothng about it but Btch and gripe what a penalty to risk for millions of dollars..:mad:


I'm guessing they are advertising the .net site which is only play money. I would think they would hope you would punch in .com by accident.
 
I was just thinking about Ultimatebet and Absolute Poker's cheating scandal that has been covered in just about every nook and cranny on the Internet, not to forget just about every major publication to include 60 Minutes, and I'm wondering why are they still in business?

Was it because they had a such a huge player base which permitted them to weather the storm? Have they pushed their marketing efforts offline? Chipleader still seems to be hanging in there via affiliates. Any clue on why they seem to be so resilient?

Bryan, you might as well ask why people are still replying to spam emails...


For myself... I've quit playing poker online...

If it's not the sites themselves cheating, it's players/bots colluding.

Just came back from Reno... had some very good days at the TABLE... very very unlike the losing streak I had going online.

After playing online and getting regularly beaten over the last couple of years, I thought I had lost my poker... But after playing at some live tables... I know I have not lost it...
I am never playing online again.

I am now in the process of dropping all the poker rooms I used to promote. I will no longer promote online poker.
 
For myself... I've quit playing poker online...

If it's not the sites themselves cheating, it's players/bots colluding.

What stakes / limits were you playing online? And what poker sites do you believe cheating is occurring at? (if you don't mind me asking...)
 
What stakes / limits were you playing online? And what poker sites do you believe cheating is occurring at? (if you don't mind me asking...)

IMO collusion by software and by human teams is going on at ALL the online poker rooms at NL tables at all Blind levels.

There are far too many ways to create a software program that will collude that the poker rooms can not detect. Or have a group of people colluding by phone.

And most poker rooms don't care to do more than lip service to stopping collusion by Bot or by human teams... after all Bots and colluding teams pay Rakes too.
 
IMO collusion by software and by human teams is going on at ALL the online poker rooms at NL tables at all Blind levels.

There are far too many ways to create a software program that will collude that the poker rooms can not detect. Or have a group of people colluding by phone.

And most poker rooms don't care to do more than lip service to stopping collusion by Bot or by human teams... after all Bots and colluding teams pay Rakes too.

Whilst I'm in no way trying to devalue your concerns or say you should not be worried or try to convince you to play poker again (stupid game imo), collusion for the most part is very small edge stuff and VASTLY more likely to get screwed up by the colluders than anything else.

There are some spots where collusion is a real concern - say in a PLO game where a bunch of colluders might be on Skype sharing all their holecard info, that's obviously pretty serious edge - or tourney players who play in teams and who are very talented at...well both playing and cheating...and the 'leader' will effectively control the team in terms of organising mild dumps to players about to bust (in a tournament a stack of say 10000 chips at 600/1200 blinds is worth a HELL of a lot more than 10% of 100000 chips at those blinds).

But as someone who's played over 2,000,000 poker hands, seriously, collusion is not your main concern. This is not to say there aren't serious concerns you should be worried about, just that collusion is not one of them.

At the lower stakes, the bot issue is over-sensationalised. The absolute VAST majority of bots are breakeven or slight losers from what I'm told (and I'm told by people who *know* these things). In some ways, they're very good for the game. This is not to say that every site shouldn't be doing their darnedest to negate the bot threat - like Cake is trying to do with their anti PT3/HEM/HUD policy...because it won't be long (if those programs are allowed to continue to be used) where the bots will get VERY advanced and then you have a serious problem because they can collate tens of millions of hands of opponent info very quickly and the "AI" (not technically AI, but for want of a better term) will eventually get advanced enough to really start owning SSNL - then eventually move up higher and who knows where they'll stop, if all at (in terms of rising through the limits).

At the higher stakes, you should have valid concerns about game fairness - but collusion isn't one of them. 5 great players playing a single account at high stakes is a powerful force to battle. Or flat-out SuperUser type stuff, but conducted in such a way that they can never be caught because they're not stone-cold brain-dead retarded like the AP SuperUsers.
 
At the lower stakes, the bot issue is over-sensationalised. The absolute VAST majority of bots are breakeven or slight losers from what I'm told (and I'm told by people who *know* these things).
LOL... the people your talking too must not be the brightest bulbs...
More than one group of people are getting rich off these colluding software programs.

But as someone who's played over 2,000,000 poker hands, seriously, collusion is not your main concern.
At this time, collusion is my main concern.

I never counted every hand I ever played, so I have no clue how many hands I've played, but I been playing poker regular (home games-tournaments-road-Vegas-Reno-Tahoe) for forty years... Not to mention I was among the first people to actually promote online poker. So please don't talk down to me about poker. ;)
 
LOL... the people your talking too must not be the brightest bulbs...
More than one group of people are getting rich off these colluding software programs.


At this time, collusion is my main concern.

I never counted every hand I ever played, so I have no clue how many hands I've played, but I been playing poker regular (home games-tournaments-road-Vegas-Reno-Tahoe) for forty years... Not to mention I was among the first people to actually promote online poker. So please don't talk down to me about poker. ;)

Sorry buddy - was just trying to help. Didn't it mean it come across that way. GL with your future projects.
 
Just a couple of quick points...

One, I understand why Rob referenced Virtual in a thread relating to AP/UB. Rogue is rogue. Bad behaviour is bad behaviour. Cheating is cheating. Why do so many affiliates continue to promote Virtual Casinos? MONEY!! Why do affiliates continue to promote AP/UB? MONEY!! And as someone so astutely stated, the cheating that went on at the poker rooms didn't affect them directly...so hey, no problems. Same as Virtual. As long as the affiliates get paid, no problem. Very few affiliates or webmasters (besides Bryan), ever said a word about Grand Prive and the underage player issue (the same player they accepted deposits from, and paid out small wins..until they won big..20K or more). But when GP cancelled their affy contracts....then we have the wagons circled.

Two, I read threads on here every single day re: rigging of software. I've been playing online casinos going on nine years, and never felt cheated. But the flops, turns, rivers and assinine calls I've seen playing online poker just baffle my mind. I won't say rigged, cause I have no proof. But I don't put a whole lot of money into poker. I'm with Lots0...some of the stuff (and hands) I've seen, defy belief. Too funky for me. I'll stick to my Saturday night face to face poker games with friends. And the odd tourney here and there for fun.
 
But the flops, turns, rivers and assinine calls I've seen playing online poker just baffle my mind. I won't say rigged, cause I have no proof. But I don't put a whole lot of money into poker. I'm with Lots0...some of the stuff (and hands) I've seen, defy belief. Too funky for me. I'll stick to my Saturday night face to face poker games with friends. And the odd tourney here and there for fun.

Aiya, I hate that I'm 'defending' online poker here - I'm not really - I'm defending / explaining variance. In some ways, the nature of poker variance is such that it's a negative thing should cheating exist. It makes it almost, no it makes it TOTALLY impossible to 'prove' unless the cheaters are moronic.

First, here is a graph of 130,000 hands I played in 2007 over 4 months on 5/10nl mostly:

pokerEV1.jpg


I mean, that's pretty sick obv. You can look at it one way and say "hey, at least you're making 15/20k a month, pretty hard to complain" and that's valid - but I worked pretty hard for many, many years to get to that level of skill - neutral luck over that sample (this is purely All-in luck, and merely a fraction of the big picture) - I should have won $130,000 during those 4 months. But here's the kicker: my friend, playing same stakes, and about same volume, ran 60k ABOVE expectation for those 4 months - with almost identical all-in expectation. So we both should have gotten $130k - I got 60k, he got 195k - and 130k hands is a tiny sample. But please don't think I was sitting there thinking "oh this is cool" whistling to myself - I was certain insanity was going on, and that graph is representing sickness that 99.9% of players will never experience.

It's about to get a whole lot sicker though.

When I was a far better player, and doing a lot more volume the next year (i.e. last year), I had a graph which makes that graph look meh. I didn't mind the 2nd horrid downswing as I'd upswung incredibly hard prior so I felt it was only 'fair' - but if you're a player who just walks straight into one of those two downswings, you'd be a fool NOT to suspect the games of being rigg.

And hell, they may totally be rigged - I just don't know. All I know is variance.

And now for the sickness - I pulled / stole this graphs off a forum where they were stolen / pulled from 2+2 (apologies to the creator that I can't credit them to him - they're amazing - check this out):

Here are graphs showing expected ranges of results for 5/10PLO for players where ALL players are 6bb/100 winners (very big winners, if lower the lines would be even more insanely scattered) with a standard deviation of 140 (which was the average of the respondents participating in the study:

After 100,000 hands (note: most live players, playing every day, for decades, won't play 100,000 hands - 20-25 hands/hr, etc maths are easy to work out there):

Expired Image

Insane. 100,000 hands doesn't even allow for a readable graph, the expected lines are so skewed (each coloured line represents an individual player)

After 500,000 hands:

Expired Image

Equally skilled players, playing identical styles, just PURE LUCK - one guy will win 700k, the other wins 0. Over half a million hands. Sick.

After 1,000,000 hands:

Expired Image

Finally! After a million hands, we start to see some 'convergence'. Still about $1,000,000 difference in earnings between the LUCKIEST player and the UNLUCKIEST player. Nauseating.

After 5,000,000 hands (I don't know any online players who've played 5 million hands in their life):

Expired Image

Some nice convergence here. Even after FIVE MILLION hands, the difference between LUCKY and UNLUCKY is $2,000,000 or so. *shiver*

---------

Well, so ends the very crude lesson in poker variance. The only point I'm trying to make is that if you're in ANY part of the "unlucky" half of that side, you're gonna feel like the games aren't straight up. If you're in the bottom 1/4, you'd swear the rigg is in. Bottom 10%, I wonder why you'd keep playing....

Poker is a sick, sick game. imo.

(Clear hijack - but I got the feeling this thread had run it's course re UB/AP? If not, sincere apologies, and slap me....!)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top