Joined: Mar '11
Location: Canada
Age: 44 (M)
Posts: 1490
I think the bottom line is, Poker stars runs something like 10 thousand tables at one time. If each table runs around 100 hands per hour, that means that excluding the 24 tables the "cheaters" were running, that means 100 hands x 9976 = 997600 hands vs maybe the 1000 hands "the cheaters" were allegedly able to play. That means that the "cheaters" had maybe 1 in 10,000 chance of hitting the winning hand.
Is it cheating? Nope. TONNES of people were 24 tabling at the same time. Is it unethical? Maybe. I'd say it's borderline. But really, how many other people were doing the same thing?
Joined: Mar '09
Location: Greece
Age: 47 (F)
Posts: 14136
So this isnt a collusion right? When you cooperate with another player in the same table. And they didnt do it in one table but in 24 lol And still its not a collusion. They could permit the play but deny the prize!
How more obvious you need it to be when some players cooperate in order to win money in online poker. Isnt that one of the definitions? Here is a copy paste from Wikipedia for one of the definitions of Collusion. "Collusion is two or more players acting with a secret, common strategy. Some common forms of collusion are: soft play, that is, failing to bet or raise in a situation that would normally merit it, to avoid costing one's partner or friend money"
Joined: Mar '11
Location: Canada
Age: 44 (M)
Posts: 1490
Posted by Mober: So this isnt a collusion right? When you cooperate with another player in the same table. And they didnt do it in one table but in 24 lol And still its not a collusion. They could permit the play but deny the prize!
How more obvious you need it to be when some players cooperate in order to win money in online poker. Isnt that one of the definitions? Here is a copy paste from Wikipedia for one of the definitions of Collusion. "Collusion is two or more players acting with a secret, common strategy. Some common forms of collusion are: soft play, that is, failing to bet or raise in a situation that would normally merit it, to avoid costing one's partner or friend money"
Isnt that what they were doing? no?
No.They weren't specifically targetting a player(s).
Joined: May '09
Location: India
Age: 37 (M)
Posts: 4873
Posted by Mober: So this isnt a collusion right? When you cooperate with another player in the same table. And they didnt do it in one table but in 24 lol And still its not a collusion. They could permit the play but deny the prize!
How more obvious you need it to be when some players cooperate in order to win money in online poker. Isnt that one of the definitions? Here is a copy paste from Wikipedia for one of the definitions of Collusion. "Collusion is two or more players acting with a secret, common strategy. Some common forms of collusion are: soft play, that is, failing to bet or raise in a situation that would normally merit it, to avoid costing one's partner or friend money"
Isnt that what they were doing? no?
apparently pokerstars said they dont consider it against the terms of promotion and will make changes in future to avoid it. 'winners' got their money
Joined: Feb '08
Location: Switzerland
Age: 34 (M)
Posts: 210
Posted by retribution: I think the bottom line is, Poker stars runs something like 10 thousand tables at one time. If each table runs around 100 hands per hour, that means that excluding the 24 tables the "cheaters" were running, that means 100 hands x 9976 = 997600 hands vs maybe the 1000 hands "the cheaters" were allegedly able to play. That means that the "cheaters" had maybe 1 in 10,000 chance of hitting the winning hand.
Is it cheating? Nope. TONNES of people were 24 tabling at the same time. Is it unethical? Maybe. I'd say it's borderline. But really, how many other people were doing the same thing?
You forget the part where they insta fold on purpose. Let's say it takes 2 seconds for deal+fold+blind time, so 2 seconds per hand : 30 hand per minute : 1800 hand per hour. 1800 hand per hour x 24 tables = 43200 hands per hour. Of course they would use the fold hotkey shortcut, which will insta fold for every table popping up. No time wasted.
Anyway SuperNoob said it, PokerStars decided to give the prize but will change the rules in the future.
Joined: Dec '09
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 42 (M)
Posts: 2087
i would say its cheating just because it was clear they were working together on it, there is nothing wrong with playing 24 tables and retribution if you think thats borderline no idea why you think HUDs are fine but folding every hand untill the that is pretty shady dealings
Joined: Mar '11
Location: Canada
Age: 44 (M)
Posts: 1490
Posted by Flippedchips: i would say its cheating just because it was clear they were working together on it, there is nothing wrong with playing 24 tables and retribution if you think thats borderline no idea why you think HUDs are fine but folding every hand untill the that is pretty shady dealings
Huds provide data you have available to you. Period. HUDS are in no way cheating. If they were, don't you think poker rooms would get rid of them?
Joined: May '11
Location: Canada
Age: 34 (M)
Posts: 979
theres nothing pokerstars can really do about it unless they prove there was some type of collusion which is near impossible but i bet they wont leave that loophole next time haha
Joined: Dec '09
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 42 (M)
Posts: 2087
@ retribution i dont think they are cheating never said they were but it does give unfair information on opponents if they dont use them because no matter how good you are at watching the table you are you can not take in all that information and have exact percentages for every move. Hmmm does this deserve a period?
Now that I see the math, I understand better how this happened. Thanks for that. The cheating aspect was never in doubt. They burned the other players who were playing normally and they had to work together to gain that type of advantage. Looks like they had the probability factor swing to their favor...man they were lucky.
