What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy casts another employee in holiday campaign. view!
youtube.com/bestbuy0 - Jarice Brodie has done some cool things in his life. Next: Best Buy’s holiday campaign.
157 Comments
- reeder, on 10/20/2007, -0/+40Nothing can beat a determined group of critical thinkers.
- senatorkevin, on 10/20/2007, -1/+39Whoa, I completely misread your message and thought you were saying that looking at hand histories has no way of determining if cheating was involved. My bad!
- LowROI, on 10/20/2007, -0/+34This isn't really news to the poker community. Those of us who have been following the story for a few months have known that something was awry. An infinite agression factor on the river is completely unheard of, almost impossible.
Basically, the player never EVER called on the river, always raised or folded. He was never wrong, if you bet 50 000 dollars with 8 high, he'd insta call with 9 high. No effort was made to even try to hide the fact that he could see the hole cards.
To make a gaming analogy, he had blatent wall hacks, and made hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process. - slasherx, on 10/28/2007, -0/+25Cliffnotes here: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat ...
- Mrage, on 10/18/2007, -0/+24A big "thanks" to all the folks continuing to take time out of their days to get to the bottom of this.
- Jpays, on 11/05/2007, -2/+21GG asolute poker
- SiNN4R, on 10/18/2007, -1/+17If you're suprised by this you are not too bright. This is why we shouldn't have moved online poker out of the US. We should be able to regulate gaming ourselves.
- xmichael, on 10/18/2007, -0/+15Don't forget Absolute Poker owns Ultimate Bet!
- ImOscar, on 10/18/2007, -18/+33Most claims that online poker is rigged are ridiculous and have no basis in facts. I don't understand how after looking at the hand histories and other relevant info any poker player could try and dispute the claim that cheating has occurred here.
- honeymustardn, on 10/18/2007, -0/+15Two groups?
- WolverineBlue, on 10/19/2007, -0/+13In the future, you may want to include a "but" or "however" between opposing statements.
- cornerback42, on 10/18/2007, -0/+13Actually going after the little stuff (think OfficeSpace) would be much less obvious then trying to nail big players. Most players that are playing with 200/400, most likely know how to play poker and play it well. Skimming a $10-$100 pot off a smaller game 100 x a day is going to net you serious cash without being obvious. I think your kinda wrong here on this one.
- scrimaxinc, on 10/18/2007, -0/+11I must have put a decimal point in the wrong place....I always ***** up on some mundane detail.....
- ImOscar, on 10/18/2007, -0/+10Youtube video of it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FczbS7FiWSM (Part 1 of 4). He's obviously not cheating, he's just psychic of course!
- inactive, on 10/18/2007, -0/+10lol donkaments
- ImOscar, on 10/18/2007, -0/+9I think I used too many negatives for people to grasp while skimming Digg comments. Read my comment again.
- inactive, on 10/18/2007, -0/+9The author says that there will be prison time. Sure. Because they're in the U.S. and all, right?
- keyme, on 10/20/2007, -0/+8And what lesson did we learn today?
DON'T gamble money when the "entropy" is generated at a remote location. (Like a game server?) - albedoa, on 10/20/2007, -1/+9No.
- scabbers, on 10/20/2007, -5/+13I naturally assumed all online gambling was crooked.
- marm0lade, on 10/18/2007, -0/+7I see what you did there. Guess I need to slooooow down when I'm reading.
- xmichael, on 10/20/2007, -0/+7"Also Absolute has since issued a statement that Scott Tom has not worked for them for a year, and they are conducting an “independent” audit into the situation. We will see if anything comes of this. "
This is not true, Scott Tom is the CEO - khaos4k, on 10/20/2007, -1/+7A poker bot would actually be a very poor player. Super predictable and unable to think.
- irvman21, on 10/20/2007, -0/+5You know people outside the US can read Digg, right?
- ngmcs8203, on 10/17/2007, -0/+5That's the exact reason why a lot of online poker players did not want this to be true. Everyone is going to use this for an excuse more than they already are.
- marm0lade, on 10/18/2007, -1/+6Except for now there is proof that is is rigged, or rather the host site is cheating. You really think Absolute Poker is an isolated incident? Highly doubtful.
- minoss, on 10/20/2007, -0/+4Yea, no one hand is proof of cheating but when you see he never made a SINGLE post-flop mistake in hundreds of hands it becomes extremely obvious. This isn't even close to disputable.
- Azuroth, on 10/17/2007, -1/+5I prefer to think Office Space.
- inactive, on 10/19/2007, -0/+4I cant speak for all sites because Ive only played on fulltilt and pokerstars but for the most part if your a good player you WILL MAKE MONEY in the long run. Check for yourself! go to sharkscope.com and look up players flushnasty48 (myself) and 15lbsnuts (brother) on the pokerstars network. Were no pros but we've both have made thousands. (and thats just sng tourneys) There may be cheaters out there, Ive certainly had suspicions but its MORE then possible to make some cash playing poker online. If your consistently losing money stop blaming the websites or cheaters.......maybe you just suck. Your more then welcome to msg me and test your skills :)
- Zipko, on 10/17/2007, -1/+5It's not like there isn't other fraud going on. I'm convinced the software is rigged to show more high value hands than normal. I've seen drawing hands complete far more often than they should statistically. It's not hard to see the motivation behind this either; The better your hand, the more money you put in the pot, and the site's take is a percentage of the pot.
- smithro1984, on 10/18/2007, -0/+4It was a tournament not cash table
- wokethebears, on 10/18/2007, -0/+4online gambling is actually not illegal
- benitojuarez, on 10/18/2007, -4/+8this is already on the front page.
- inigomntoya, on 10/17/2007, -0/+4I think the government should keep their nose out of my business and let me use my money the way I want to.
- champsampson, on 10/18/2007, -0/+4Im in ur computerz, stealing ur hole cardz!
- Terr01, on 10/18/2007, -2/+6You were a victim of Digg's Crappy Comment System. This link'll work.
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/t ... - marm0lade, on 10/18/2007, -4/+8I'm really not surprised at all that this happened. I play online poker here and there, $5 and $10 tournaments, and you would not believe some of the ***** that goes on. Hands that get played that would NEVER get played in a real casino, miracle river cards, and not just to me either, I see it happen to other players all the time. I have no doubt that online poker sites fix games, one way or another, to make sure no one ever wins too big.
- Chickenlip, on 10/20/2007, -1/+4"If that is the case, I hope whomever “accidentally” sent the file gets their proper hero’s welcome in the end."
When are journalists going to learn how to use who and whom properly? - FatShady, on 10/17/2007, -0/+3Yeah, because the best way to drive out corruption is to get the government involved.
- tynansanger, on 10/18/2007, -0/+3Great, all we need is more fuel for online poker players who catch a bad break and assume the site is rigged. It's Tim Donaghy all over again.
- davidrools, on 10/17/2007, -0/+2I think you should try to phrase your sentences so they're easier to understand by not put two contrasting sentences together without some sort of transition (e.g., "but," "however," etc.) That's just good writing. It's not diggers inability to grasp a slight negative.
- Gabberwok, on 10/20/2007, -0/+2None of the sites can be hosted inside the US.
- threadless01, on 10/18/2007, -4/+6Now I have good excuse at why I always lose! I've been cheated!
- MiDri, on 10/17/2007, -3/+5Think Superman 3...
- lalalalamppost, on 10/20/2007, -2/+4If you're gambling on a video game run out of Costa Rica, you are an idiot and deserve to have your money stolen by fraud. Seriously. They only think more stupid than that is whining to the Internet after you get ripped off.
- pt4117, on 10/17/2007, -0/+2How do you know nothing like this has happened before? It could happen all of the time; maybe a site owner just skims a little every now and then.
If the security was so good, and they did everything in their power to prevent this then why was it so easy for someone (even someone inside) to see all of the whole cards? You would think that they either wouldn't have this option, or they would have a million alarms go off if it ever happened. - stgeorge, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2Because there are no laws anywhere outside of the US... it's a barren wasteland of lawlessness and naked Neanderthals. Yeah, something like that.
- Grumby24, on 10/17/2007, -0/+2"I've seen drawing hands complete far more often than they should statistically"
Oh really? Do you use Poker Tracker to be able to document this? Over how many hands are you speaking? BTW, anything less than a 30k hand sample is not statistically significant. I have a huge database of all of my hands from online and there are no statisical anomalies. - ROHFan, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2Hey, it's theredpill, legendary 2+2 forum troll.
- inactive, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2Pokerstars makes more then enough money of rakes. They would be stupid to risk thier credibility. Ive certainly made a profit on their site.l
-
Show 51 - 100 of 162 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is