digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Major Online Poker Room Caught Cheating

poker-king.com — Absolute Poker, one of the major online poker rooms, has been caught cheating. Allowing some players the ability to see other people's cards. Absolute had issued a public statement denying the claims after an internal investigation but then provided self incriminating evidence to an outside researcher that implicated them beyond any doubts.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • senatorkevin, on 10/18/2007, -2/+36More detailed information can be found at:
    http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat ...
    • aliengoods, on 10/18/2007, -11/+10I played for free on AbsolutePoker, but never played for any cash as there were a few people who got a little too lucky a little too often. This only confirms my suspicions.
      • thenewnoise, on 10/18/2007, -11/+8Why would some cheat at play money? It's just a bunch of retards who have no idea what they are doing.
      • JaredXM, on 10/18/2007, -1/+10I think he was saying he didn't play for real money as he suspected people of cheating.
      • Puttzy, on 10/18/2007, -14/+4you are a complete 'tard. Learn to play poker and stop blaming your "bad beets" on cheaters. If someone was cheeting why the hell would they be on the free side of things. Think before you start making up stories that make you fit in.
        • alittleroy101, on 10/18/2007, -2/+17Stay away from bad beets! They'll give you the *****.
      • ngmcs8203, on 10/18/2007, -2/+2Wow! Everyone online is a cheater! This has only happened at the highest levels of poker. Big money tournaments like the ones that this guy and ZeeJustin multi-accounted in. Someone in your run of the mill quarter/half dollar game is not cheating. It's the fact that you cold call 3 bets with A/3 off suit out of position time and time again that makes you lose money.
    • drstock, on 10/18/2007, -0/+15Even more info at: http://www.absolutepokercheats.com/
      • Winters, on 10/18/2007, -0/+13Haha! That really is a TERRIBLE name for a watchdog website.
      • Markpdotcom, on 10/18/2007, -2/+3Sounds like a Smirnoff ad! :D
    • SkippyDoorknob, on 10/18/2007, -1/+3What's the online equivalent for flipping the table over and pulling your six-shooter? Sending goatse to the other payers?
    • 5urr3al5am, on 10/18/2007, -0/+1rigged - all someone has to do is record the results of each hand for a time, maybe two - or three hours, and then show that statistically speaking that so many big hands should not show up in 8 out of 10 hands
    • mV0G7, on 10/18/2007, -1/+2I have been getting ***** in AP cash games for way too long. All my money is coming out of there as we speak. This is exactly the confirmation I needed.
  • heyleroy, on 10/18/2007, -8/+15summary here as well:
    http://www.natarem.com/
    • PhoenixAvatar2, on 10/17/2007, -0/+2Thanks for that, it's the only one that got through my office blacklist.
    • bloaded, on 10/18/2007, -0/+1thanks for posting one that I can understand
  • blorc, on 10/18/2007, -4/+10eDrama is the best. Always a great read.
  • Woecip, on 10/19/2007, -44/+29Anyone surprised? I mean really? Who is stupid enough to throw money away on these stupid things?
    • Klak, on 10/18/2007, -11/+11people like me making over 10k a year on them
      • Antialias, on 10/18/2007, -9/+17and people win the lottery too, that doesn't mean it makes sense for the other 99% to play.
        • arghargh, on 10/18/2007, -4/+3Good retort!
        • firechill, on 10/18/2007, -7/+18If you think poker is a game of luck, you are ignorant of the game. Do you think it's luck that you see so many familiar faces at the final tables of the World Series of Poker year after year? Here's a tip: Never compare poker to the lottery or any other common casino game for that matter.
          • Dizik, on 10/18/2007, -1/+10What I think you really meant to say was: "Why does this still seem like gambling to you? I mean, why do you think the same five guys make it to the final table of the World Series of Poker EVERY SINGLE YEAR? What, are they the luckiest guys in Las Vegas? It's a skill game, Jo."
        • bigmike7, on 10/18/2007, -4/+8Okay, so here's a tip: never waste your time and money playing online poker unless you're a finalist at the world Series poker tournament year after year. Unless of course you have a super-user account with a sleazy off shore online poker outfit.
        • SouthsideIrish, on 10/17/2007, -0/+1Hmm...how did those players start off? Online poker. The were winning there, before they were winning in Vegas.
      • iashraf, on 10/18/2007, -1/+3How much time do you spend on these sites a day? Then we can determine if it's worth it...
        • Klak, on 10/18/2007, -1/+3like 2-3 hours, but i dont play high stakes and im on the very low end of people that make money on poker
        • dougmc, on 10/18/2007, -1/+6Well, if it's fun, then it matters less how much time it takes ...
    • danevahey, on 10/17/2007, -4/+2Pretty much every college male under the age of 25 (myself included unfortunately)
      • frickafracka, on 11/12/2007, -19/+4your girlfriend likes giving me oral when you are on one of your famous "poker" nights. keep playing though. she's pretty good!
    • vertinox, on 10/18/2007, -2/+10I dunno why people have dugg you down. Online gambling is kind of dubious mostly because of the lack of regulation like a real casino would face. Its not like you can see the code for the software either to make sure you aren't being cheated. Of course people win, but I'd rather take my chances at a real casino because at least they have to try to cheat you.
      • Markpdotcom, on 10/18/2007, -1/+3Having worked at a gambling website I can tell you all that the poster above is very very right. Not only that, our "boss" had a biggest losers list, people who were invited back time on time again to lose more money. He would literally laugh at people who were throwing away thousands per day, after he had given them free credit to play. To one unfortunate member, he suggested signing up for some more credit cards, so he could continue to play. An awful industry that I'm glad I am out of now.
    • jayhawk88, on 10/18/2007, -1/+2Agreed. I love this statement from the article:
      "I feel that it's important to report on this story, as it has big implications for online poker as a whole."
      Yeah namely that your entire farking industry is suspect now. If it can happen at one site it can happen at any of them. What defense does any other online poker site have besides "Oh we would never do that"?
  • trevorjez, on 10/19/2007, -3/+168if people cheat at video games when no cash is involved - should we really be surprised there's cheating in online poker?
    • card51short, on 10/18/2007, -7/+8the game makers dont' cheat at their own game though...do they?
      • Dizik, on 10/18/2007, -0/+15I dunno, why don't you ask the guys behind EVE Online.
    • sirloin, on 10/18/2007, -1/+2Surprise.. er no, it is too easy to do from the inside.. but if they got caught doing this in vagas, they would be 6 feet under for tarnishing the industry.
      Should be we upset yeah?? cause free games tend to not invest teh protections neede to comabt cheating, but games for money are very very very hard to cheat at and should be.
      This is also supposed to be a money making enterprise, these people had a proffitable system but they got greedier, problem is, ever other legitamate gambling biz on the net will take a hit do tot he greed of these a-holes

      we know the odds are set so that we lose
      But we expect that when we know the rules, they are following the rules.
  • iashraf, on 10/18/2007, -18/+23Poker in real life is much more fun anyway. Poker sites suck!
    • objectcode, on 10/18/2007, -7/+35online poker kind of takes away the point of poker
      • samnmax, on 10/18/2007, -9/+3Huh? How? If you think poker is only about trying to watch people's tells, you are very mistaken. The more important 'tells' come from the actions players perform in the game, not their body language. Even more importantly, being able to estimate odds and perform moves that maximize your expected payoff are the way to win poker.
        • spudhead, on 10/18/2007, -3/+12Poker is about giving your buddies grief about their last drinking binge, their last attempt at cooking, and the latest ball games. Poker isn't about staring at an LCD.
        • crestfall, on 10/18/2007, -0/+1Where does money figure in? Many final table players at WPT and WSP got there through Internet satellites, and walked away with tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions of dollars. Some of these satellites are freeroll.
    • raynar, on 10/18/2007, -10/+3You poker, you brought her. ZING!
  • dupswapdrop, on 10/18/2007, -22/+14I don't play the video poker machines at the casinos because they cheat, why would I play poker on line?
    • koroviev, on 10/18/2007, -7/+3to play poker?
      • vertinox, on 10/18/2007, -0/+3Why would you play poker against a computer? Its a math game so statistically you will loose against an AI. Even if it doesn't cheat it knows what cards have been played way better than a human can. For all you people digging the GP down, your just throwing your money into a black hole. Play poker with humans who don't cheat.
      • IphtashuFitz, on 10/17/2007, -1/+1Any video casino game relies at the most basic level on random numbers if only to shuffle a deck of cards. The gaming regulators in Las Vegas, etc. all have very strict requirements for random number generators. There are only two or three companies in the US that build RNG's for use in casinos.
    • IphtashuFitz, on 10/17/2007, -3/+4Actually the video poker machines at mainstream casinos like those in Las Vegas or Atlantic City are highly regulated. Even though at the most basic level they run off of random number generators, the devices generating those random numbers have to be fully auditable. Not only do they need to shut themselves down if accessed by unauthorized people, they need to be able to report a list of the random numbers they generated. This lets auditors recreate the exact behavior of the games that were played to ensure they're running properly. After all, they're just computers.
      • eclectro, on 10/17/2007, -0/+3Actually there have been a couple of investigative TV shows on this subject. The fact is that the software has gotten so complex that regulators have admitted that they do not know how it works. And there have been documented cases of companies programming these machines to cheat. At the time, those machines were 'highly regulated' too. So there really can be know promise of fairness with these things (outside of the fact that they are designed to take your money).
  • masterm1nd, on 10/18/2007, -7/+4Anyone know what county the servers are in?
    • mpulcini, on 10/18/2007, -1/+6Kahnawake Reservation, Quebec, Canada.
    • tavman, on 10/18/2007, -4/+4Costa Rica, I believe.
    • ngmcs8203, on 10/18/2007, -0/+4The Kahnawake Reservation hosts most of the big online poker rooms.
  • farksucks, on 11/05/2007, -11/+96Hmm, lets see. I think I'll go gamble on some company's gaming website located outside of US jurisdiction, where there is absolutely no penalty for them cheating bigtime. Yeah. Sign me up.
    At least in Vegas you have the Nevada Gaming Commission that makes sure all the games arent rigged.
    Online, you have nothing. If I was running a big gaming website in Costa Rica you can bet your sweet ass I would cheat all of my customers and rob them blind, as long as they were dumb enough to keep coming back.
    • card51short, on 10/18/2007, -1/+11then you would get exposed and shut down eventually...takes a long time to build up trust and customers
    • rossnyc, on 10/18/2007, -4/+6Full Tilt Poker and Pokerstars are reliable, safe and run by good people.
      • cobrabyte, on 10/18/2007, -6/+2FTP is just as rigged as Absolute. Pokerstars would be the only one that I would recommend to people.

        Most players at FTP know it's rigged.
        • rossnyc, on 10/18/2007, -2/+1FTP is run by Howard Lederer and Phil Ivey to name a few...highly doubt those guys would ever allow any form of cheating on their site.
          • SuperCow1127, on 10/18/2007, -1/+2They run it, or they're sponsored by it?
          • c0baltfish, on 10/18/2007, -3/+0Sponsor, but I think that some of them actually do some of the design and programming work. Jesus has a PhD in Comp Sci so I wouldn't be surprised.
          • c0baltfish, on 10/18/2007, -2/+0digg me down for clicking submit comment 2x
        • c0baltfish, on 10/18/2007, -0/+4For those of you not familiar with the online poker scene, anyone who complains about online poker being rigged (with the ironic exception of the players featured in this article) is a terrible player. Guaranteed, they have no game.
        • jahurt, on 10/18/2007, -0/+0c0baltfish : I wish I could give you more than one digg
    • Wolfcaster, on 10/18/2007, -1/+10hmm, lets see. Online poker can't be located in the US cause it's illegal, and there is a huge penalty for cheating. Now Absolute is absolutely bankrupt, if they had followed the rules they would still be making massive profits, most poker sites are smart enough to realize that reputation is everything.
    • robdiggity, on 10/19/2007, -2/+17"If I was running a big gaming website in Costa Rica you can bet your sweet ass I would cheat all of my customers and rob them blind, as long as they were dumb enough to keep coming back."

      This really says more about you than the people who keep coming back.
    • SouthsideIrish, on 10/18/2007, -0/+3Well, that would be nice, but you government made it illegal to do that, didn't they. Be nice in the computers were regulated, and in this country, but that isn't happening. Now, we will have the war on online poker.
      • sirloin, on 10/18/2007, -0/+1"If I was running a big gaming website in Costa Rica you can bet your sweet ass I would cheat all of my customers and rob them blind, as long as they were dumb enough to keep coming back."

        That you are stupidly cutting yourself out of a greater amount of cash. You can gut them in the short run, but with a god rep, you could raid their wallets for life. There is a reason why vegas does so well. Problem is you dont see gambling as a scam already, which it is.. the odds are already against you but that doesnt stop people from playing. thing is there are supposed to be just that. "odds that you will lose" not that "you are assured to lose"
        You can make money hands over fists with online poker, it is ridiculous the ammount of money you can make, the only reason at all to cheat your customers is manac greed. insanity.
  • KidTechno, on 10/18/2007, -7/+7Damn... should've gone all-in....
    • raynar, on 10/18/2007, -4/+2thats what she said
      • tizz66, on 10/18/2007, -8/+2Shut the hell up with that stupid goddamn meme. That's like the 15th time I've read that today, and not once has it been funny.

        In soviet russia, relentless use of the same meme sucks.
        • xtc46, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2THATS WHAT SHE SAID! (while in soviet russia)
  • evg87, on 11/05/2007, -6/+40The servers are located in Canada.

    And this is a big deal because this is the first case of cheating in online poker since its boom over 4 years ago. Nothing like this has ever happened before.
    • krets, on 10/18/2007, -3/+30Well, no one has been caught doing it before.
    • Antialias, on 10/18/2007, -14/+4Are you kidding? there's fairly major news stories every couple of months about this sort of thing.
      • rossnyc, on 10/18/2007, -1/+12where? please direct me to these monthly stories of rampant online poker cheating.
    • Lukesed, on 10/18/2007, -1/+8It first happened nearly a decade ago, only it was possible for anyone to cheat who new how (they were using a sequential time-based random munber generator to deal), not just people with inside help.
    • ngmcs8203, on 10/18/2007, -0/+6Try again my friend. Look up ZeeJustin, thev0id, etc.
  • cmuwriter, on 10/18/2007, -7/+9This is why I'll never play hold em' online for real money.
    • dan222555, on 10/18/2007, -5/+4What because of the 1/1000000 chance you run into some cheating? You're probably just as likely to run into someone cheating in a casino...
    • caban, on 10/18/2007, -1/+2I guess he means it's safer to play stud since the cheating happened in Hold'em games.
      • dan222555, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2Most amateurs don't even acknowledge other forms of poker exist, let alone know how to play them...
        • xtc46, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2really? because hold'em was one of the last ways I learned to play poker (I suck at all things poker related) and am far less than even an ameture.
  • Lukesed, on 10/18/2007, -2/+10If the people who were given the access had been the least bit discrete they would never have been caught. I'm talking folding to a minimum raise after the river when you have a straight and thousands in the pot. Nobody would ever do that unless they either got a tell from you or they were cheating.
    • yojiffyskippy, on 10/17/2007, -0/+1Greed is bad which is why most people get caught. However, for each person that gets caught, there are a lot more that never get caught.
    • Swarms, on 10/18/2007, -0/+0So we have: 1) "most people get caught" and 2) "there are a lot more that never get caught" Wouldn't that equal "Most people never get caught"?
      Sorry, replied to wrong person.
  • xmichael, on 10/18/2007, -1/+6This guy is banned from nearly every "real" poker room in Costa Rica for trying to cheat, there is no doubt he would be cheating online!
  • therealrico, on 10/18/2007, -4/+4well glad, I only put 50 bucks on this site, and realized I sucked at poker, and realized I might as well just spend my money rather than lose it gambling.
    • Lyph5, on 10/18/2007, -2/+2Ignoring the fact that Poker isn't 'gambling' here..

      You could say that you're spending your money on the game. When I buy a $60 game for my PC and I beat it, I don't consider that $60 wasted.
      • card51short, on 10/17/2007, -2/+5no poker is gambilng but it's a game of skill...not just luck
      • cmuwriter, on 10/18/2007, -0/+3Yeah but if you buy a game for $60, then lose, you don't have to pay another $60 to play it again.
      • ngmcs8203, on 10/18/2007, -0/+3I spent many quarters as a kid trying to beat Double Dragon at my local arcade. Is that considered gambling since I kept pumping quarters into it?
  • Deuce2High, on 10/17/2007, -8/+3This article is also on DIGG and has slightly more information on the subject.
    http://www.digg.com/offbeat_news/Absolute_Poker_Ch ...
    • ronaldinho, on 10/18/2007, -1/+1Woah chill, we know you are on Digg 24/7. We have a life you know
  • cornerback42, on 10/18/2007, -6/+4I played at Absolute poker. I want my money back if there was proof of cheating, it's not fair to give the players a great sense of gamesmanship and security only to pillage people's money. This is about as bad as a pyramid scam. Think about the millions upon millions of transactions and dollars that were funneled into that site. What a sham, if this turns out to be true. Class Action?
    • card51short, on 10/17/2007, -0/+2this is 100 times worse than a pyramid scheme
    • Wolfcaster, on 10/18/2007, -0/+5Class Action? you need to take an international law class
      • cornerback42, on 10/18/2007, -0/+1Geez sorry it was a passing comment. Didn't really research it just kind of said how I felt. I'll look into it.
    • ngmcs8203, on 10/17/2007, -0/+2And this guy was not playing in your nickel and dime games. Unless you were playing in $1000 tournaments.
      • bross55, on 10/17/2007, -0/+0lol all the cheating occurred at stakes 5/10+ relax you werent directly affected. sorry no money for you.
  • goofyballer, on 11/10/2007, -11/+30Online poker is still fairly safe. PokerStars had a professional player and writer (Lee Jones) running their poker room for a long time and their customer support is very impressive; Full Tilt Poker is owned by professional poker players. The issue here isn't about "online poker is rigged", but rather about the fact that players were trusting their money to crooked executives. If you follow the link in the first comment, it's been shown since the Poker-King article was posted that people as high up as the CEO at Absolute were involved in the cheating (you may have to return to the forum index since the information has been consolidated into a new thread for brevity, but this was just revealed today).
    If anything, I think this is proof that online poker needs to be legalized and regulated to protect consumers. Millions of people are going to play anyway, so it's in the interests of the people for the government to at least try to make it safe for them.
    • mandarin, on 11/10/2007, -5/+4Bwahahahahahahahaha
      Greed doesnt give a crap about being professional
    • Klak, on 11/10/2007, -1/+6finally someone who knows what theyre talking about
    • Jomwilli, on 11/10/2007, -6/+3Dude, we're all computer nerds in here. We don't really believe in the poor man's tax, or the tax for people who aren't good with basic statistics also known as gambling. The House always ends up winning in the end, best not to start playing.
      • miamia9, on 10/17/2007, -0/+1Dude, if you're good, since poker is a game of skill, the house doesn't always beat you in the end.
      • goofyballer, on 10/18/2007, -1/+6Poker is a beatable game. Unlike blackjack or whatever house game where you're playing against the house, poker rooms will take a portion of the pot (generally 5% up to $3 online, or 10% up to $4 or $5 in casinos) to make money. That's why "online poker is rigged" theories are generally baseless - the house makes money regardless of whether you win or lose, so it isn't in their best interests to rig the game. These executives thought it would be in their best interests to cheat players, but it looks like they got caught.

        To win at poker, you just have to play well enough to beat your opponents at the table and overcome the slight disadvantage caused by the rake. It's not "gambling."
      • Wolfcaster, on 10/18/2007, -4/+7What a moron, poker isn't played against the house
    • yojiffyskippy, on 11/10/2007, -1/+2"Fairly Safe" ? Is that like almost pregnant?
    • dan222555, on 11/10/2007, -1/+2Well said. Cheating in online poker is extremely rare and this is just an isolated incident that says nothing about the security of all online poker sites.
  • kamikaze87, on 10/26/2007, -8/+52Maaaatt Daaamon.
  • firechill, on 10/17/2007, -1/+3it was only a matter of time until something like this happened. I would assume this is rare though.. Many of the bigger companies probably realize cheating wouldn't be in their best interest.

    I've been playing online for 3 years and never really felt as if a player was winning so much that he or she would most likely be cheating. It becomes obvious with enough experience (especially in online play where it is more difficult to get a "tell" on a player) that someone would be cheating.
  • ryberg31, on 10/18/2007, -5/+0I was just thinking the other day if there was a trainer out there that could open up the table so you can see everyone's hand, then this happened......crazy
  • MrFunions, on 11/10/2007, -9/+32Anybody who knows anything about programming should know better than to play on online poker sites.
    • Dunge, on 10/18/2007, -2/+6Where's the link between programming and poker?
      • Dax420, on 10/18/2007, -1/+2Because every card is a variable and is stored on the server. Which is connected to the internet. Do the math.
        • caban, on 10/18/2007, -1/+5Just like the money you have on your bank account is a variable on a server connected to the internet.
          Nothing is 100% safe...cheating happens in B&M games at well, at the stockmarket, with sportsbetting, in stores, in business agreements...etc, etc.
          I do get a nice extra income from playing online and I'm not a degenerate gambler so if I stop winning I would not keep playing and paying for it, regardless of if the reason would be cheating or not.
          So the maths is quite simple...as long as it's adds up to a positive number I'm happy to play.
          But I would stay away from Absolute for sure. They hardly had a stellar reputation before this incident either and I never played there and don't think I ever will..
      • yndy, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2actually, Dax420 is not accurate - the reason programmer's don't trust 'online' or even 'computer' gambling (include those vile little quater poker draw machines all over Vegas) is that they know how hard it is to simulate actual 'random numbers' with a computer... and so most coders cheat and get by with the bare minimum when it comes to having to code 'randomness' in.
        Unless you're running a massive algorithm that determines the random number based on variable random user inputs, you run up against a more 'predictable' pattern. (Note the word "more" there - it's not hyper-predictable, just more than non-mechanized means.)
        See, when you're dealing with an actual human dealer, your odds of certain combinations decrease as compared to a computer program.
    • yojiffyskippy, on 10/18/2007, -2/+1and anyone that has ever used a Cheat Code for a game (console, computer, etc) should also know better.
      • nawhead, on 10/23/2007, -0/+0and anyone that knows anything about programming would know the difference between using a cheat code for a console/computer game and cheating on protected client/server systems like online poker or something like WoW. What you think happened didn't happen. read the friggin article.
  • sixsicsix, on 11/10/2007, -1/+37This is gonna hurt all online gambling sites....
    • bross55, on 10/18/2007, -1/+0no. If anything this is good in the long run as it will force other legit sites to step up their security and ensure this won't happen there.
  • cultist667, on 11/10/2007, -21/+18Anyone who gambles online is a total fool.
    • miamia9, on 10/18/2007, -6/+9tell that to all the people making 5 and 6 figures playing poker.

      anyone who makes baseless comments about playing poker online is a fool.
    • tdelet, on 10/18/2007, -9/+2Amen.
    • nihilite, on 10/18/2007, -2/+10I gamble online. It's called tdameritrade.
    • dan222555, on 10/18/2007, -2/+7If you're good at poker why wouldn't you play online and make money? If I can make $10-20 a week playing low stakes poker online and I get enjoyment out of it why am I going to pass that up? I think I'd be a fool if I didn't play...

      In addition, a distinction has to be made between poker and other forms of gambling. Poker involves more skill than any other form of gambling out there. No one's denying there's luck involved, but there is a considerable element of skill there as well. Poker players rely on much more than just chance to make their winnings. You can't equate gambling by playing something like roulette, to playing poker.
    • Vosem, on 10/18/2007, -0/+1Exactly, if you're good, then play. My buddies and I have made several thousand over the last few years playing on-line. That's nothing if you look at all the people playing in the WSOP who qualified through on-line poker tourneys. A LOT of people make decent incomes this way. Yeah there are always going to be people who try to cheat or risks, but in the long run, I've won significantly more than I've lost.
  • JSager, on 10/19/2007, -5/+36The reason (intelligently run) poker sites have no reason to cheat is that they make a lot more money over time by running an honest business. Those twenty five cent a minute per table rakes add up really fast if you have a good client base... and the moment you're caught cheating, your client base drops to zero.
    • firechill, on 10/18/2007, -1/+2I totally agree with this. Good point.
    • miamia9, on 10/17/2007, -0/+0yes. while a couple of rogue idiots at absolute decided to make a few extra dollars, sites like stars and full tilt raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars PER DAY have no incentive at all to do stuff like this. The repercussions of being caught like absolute did are enormous.
    • masonreloaded, on 10/17/2007, -0/+2True - a straight poker site is a good business, but a crooked one could let you make ten times as much. As long as you don't get caught.
      • miamia9, on 10/18/2007, -0/+1This is retarded. You could insert pretty much anything for "poker site" in your comment and it'd be true. Change the wording a bit and use Enron, for example.
    • yojiffyskippy, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2It doesn't take a crooked site, all it takes is a crooked employee.
  • frostbyt, on 10/18/2007, -7/+0I hope everyone quits that poker site then their servers crash. Next when they are driving home from their cheating jobs they drive into a lake filled with leaches and maggots.
  • card51short, on 10/18/2007, -3/+3wow casinos are stupid to cheat...they make so much money no matter what!
    Just shows how greedy some people can be...be legit and make a few million a year...or go corrupt and try to make 20 million right away
  • dan222555, on 10/18/2007, -7/+1Pfft...Absolute Poker is a joke. Full Tilt is where it's at...
  • Qenton, on 11/10/2007, -8/+3Why regulate online gambling. If people are going to do it anyway. I say let them be ripped off. Easier, less government over-site and it is fun to read about something like this. Also since this is illegal we don't have to worry about ripped off people taking it to court.
    • miamia9, on 10/17/2007, -0/+1Ok this is ridiculously wrong on so many levels:

      1) Playing poker online IS NOT ILLEGAL.
      2) Why would you not want government oversight? Especially to you, clearly not a poker player, oversight = extra tax money in the 8 figure range per year I'd imagine.
      3) Why would you want people to get ripped off for doing this honestly? That seems like an incredibly short-sighted, and frankly mean perspective.
      4) Playing poker online IS NOT ILLEGAL.
    • clintons4sharia, on 11/12/2007, -1/+0Amen, Qenton! This is like asking the government to protect drug smugglers from rival gangs. To internet gamblers: either be the best cheater or stfu.
  • idc5, on 11/10/2007, -3/+1They're not going to waste their time on the lower limit tables, but it's still wrong
  • linksus, on 10/18/2007, -1/+6Humm i cant see why they need to cheat anyway.

    If your a popular site you will make a fortune just from the small house rake on each table..

    Thats normal practice on many sites . IE: pokerroom.com

    Every one has betted £50 so the house takes a small lets say £0.50 from each player for the use of the site..
  • 1jaxstate1, on 10/18/2007, -10/+1After RTFA, they haven't been caught doing anything. Seems like someone who got beat suspects he was cheated. Guess his pocket aces got cracked.
  • Deuce2High, on 11/10/2007, -1/+2http://www.poker-king.com/poker-king-articles.php? ...
    Seems like this newer article on Poker King has even more information.
  • BlackJackJester, on 10/19/2007, -2/+2Something sortof like this happened to me on pokerstars, except I have no way to prove anything. basically, I was playing in one of the free tournaments (I don't like wasting money on online poker, but playing is fun sometimes). A guy who I sat at a table with went all in every hand, and he ended up winning about 19/20 of the hands. He eventually got knocked out through his antics, but that was a no money game. The next week, I checked out the leader board for the million dollar tournament, and he was #2. Could be coincidence...
    • n3demonic, on 10/17/2007, -0/+0It could be just that the guy wanted to blow off his playchips to keep him sane. A few times I've played the playmoney tables in pokerstars and I use the playchips that I have to go all in often so I don't have the temptation to do it in a money game. I did win one free money tournament going all in almost every hand. I have pictures as well. I didn't cheat of course!
  • Flushnasty, on 11/10/2007, -1/+8Ive been playing on Ultimatebet, Bodog, fulltilt and pokerstars for years. In all those years Ive only come across one person who I felt was cheating. Online poker is not a scam, (although im sure scamers are out there) go to sharkscope.com and look up flushnasty48 under pokerstars. Proof its possible to make some money :)
  • Error601, on 11/10/2007, -2/+3It sounds like it could be a programmer's back door. It would be simple to set yourself up a special account with a couple extra flag switched and then get an accomplice to enter the tournament. It sure wouldn't be the first time someone has cheated at a casino.
  • albedoa, on 10/18/2007, -4/+1I think it's important that you don't comment if you know nothing about gambling or online poker. You're diverting the focus from an obviously corrupt poker site to the online poker industry as a whole. This is not the first indication of Absolute's incompetence, only the most newsworthy.

    There are sites that are universally trusted by players. There is no chance of something like this ever happening at those sites, and there is no way such a breach would be handled with this much negligence and denial. The fact that it happened at one site which was already known for their dishonesty is more of a reason for online poker to be fully regulated than ignored.
    • dkm201, on 10/17/2007, -0/+1LOL APOLOGIST!
    • mithrasinvictus, on 10/17/2007, -0/+1Agreed, it is a clumsy way to cheat and a clumsy way to run a poker system and i'm sure most companies would be more adept at at least either one.
      Since the cat is out of the bag, you might as well discuss the general accountability issue if you want to allay fears.
      Is there actually a system with which players/organizations can statistically verify that a certain site is operating honestly or is their universally being trusted by players based solely on reputation?
    • clintons4sharia, on 10/19/2007, -0/+1albedoa's comment brought to you by the Gambling Portal Webmaster's Association...
  • o0joshua0o, on 11/10/2007, -1/+17If you run an online poker business, credibility is your #1 asset. If you lose that, you lose everything.
    • sixsicsix, on 10/17/2007, -0/+2yep. after this, who in their right mind is gonna put good money in their site. AP is done.
      • tcmeb, on 11/12/2007, -0/+0Actually, from what I've read at pocketfives.com, their business hasn't been impacted significantly.
  • bcecka, on 11/10/2007, -3/+5If poker software writers really wanted our trust they would become open-source. Until they do I'm sticking with play money or a game in my kitchen where I can see the deck.
    • clintons4sharia, on 10/18/2007, -0/+0You might as well ask virus writers to go open source. The online gambling industry and botnet herders are controlled by organized crime cartels.

      I assumed this was common knowledge to people with digg-level internet savvy...
  • n3demonic, on 10/18/2007, -3/+34*** POCKET CARDS ***
    Dealt to AUTOSMOKE [7c 4h]
    Dealt to OBV_DONK [Js 5h]
    Dealt to POTR0AST [6h 4c]
    Dealt to POTRIPPER [Ks Qd]
    Dealt to POKERME420 [10d Qs]
    Dealt to JINXY_MONKEY [Ah As]
    Dealt to CLOVER777 [Kh Jd]
    Dealt to SCARFACE_79 [7s 3h]
    SCARFACE_79 - Folds
    CLOVER777 - Calls $300
    OBV_DONK - Folds
    AUTOSMOKE - Folds
    POTR0AST - Folds
    POTRIPPER - Folds
    POKERME420 - Raises $450 to $600
    JINXY_MONKEY - Raises $1500 to $1800
    CLOVER777 - Folds


    He folded KQ preflop without knowing that there would be a raise by the person holding pocket Aces. That's enough damning evidence right there.
    • exoendo, on 10/19/2007, -4/+5not really, not by itself. KQ is not that great of a hand. Especially if you are out of position.... which this doesn't say where he is at in relation to the button
      • OpinioNate, on 10/19/2007, -0/+7You can tell where he's at. Scarface_79 acted first which means he's UTG (under the gun), therefore Potripper is on the button (Pokerme420 and Jinxy are small and big blind, respectively). KQ is definately worth a raise on the button in an unraised pot.
      • Instaa, on 10/18/2007, -0/+1When the guy is playing every single hand and then folds KQ on the button when there is just a caller, that is pretty damning. Look at this one as well:

        Stage #896642899 Tourney ID 1883389 Holdem Multi Normal Tournament No Limit $50 - 2007-09-12 21:41:57.004 (ET)
        Table: 13 (Real Money) Seat #2 is the dealer
        Seat 3 - POTRIPPER ($27047 in chips)
        Seat 4 - POTR0AST ($8423 in chips)
        Seat 5 - POKERME420 ($12715 in chips)
        Seat 7 - DZ00NUTS ($7749.50 in chips)
        Seat 8 - KOOLKEITH13 ($8445 in chips)
        Seat 9 - SCARFACE_79 ($10002.50 in chips)
        Seat 1 - BIGREDAK86 ($8491 in chips)
        Seat 2 - JOSIAHW ($7057 in chips)
        POTRIPPER - Posts small blind $25
        POTR0AST - Posts big blind $50
        *** POCKET CARDS ***
        Dealt to KOOLKEITH13 [Jh Kh]
        Dealt to SCARFACE_79 [6c 10s]
        Dealt to BIGREDAK86 [3h 4h]
        Dealt to JOSIAHW [9h 6h]
        Dealt to POTRIPPER [Qc 10c]
        Dealt to POTR0AST [9c 4c]
        Dealt to POKERME420 [Qh Jd]
        Dealt to DZ00NUTS [4d 3d]
        POKERME420 - Raises $200 to $200
        DZ00NUTS - Folds
        KOOLKEITH13 - Calls $200
        SCARFACE_79 - Folds
        BIGREDAK86 - Folds
        JOSIAHW - Folds
        POTRIPPER - Calls $175
        POTR0AST - Folds
        *** FLOP *** [8d 6d 3s]
        POTRIPPER - Checks
        POKERME420 - Bets $250
        KOOLKEITH13 - Raises $850 to $850
        POTRIPPER - Raises $5700 to $5700
        POKERME420 - Folds
        KOOLKEITH13 - Folds
        POTRIPPER - returned ($4850) : not called
    • centerblack, on 10/19/2007, -4/+3afk. eating dinner, taking a piss, taking a phone call, falling asleep, ***** up and hitting the wrong button. There are reasons why KQ would be folded.

      I'm sorry but this isn't evidence, it's all just speculation. How about the guy with K J who folded FIRST. I guess he's cheating too.
      • caban, on 10/17/2007, -0/+1Maybe you should look at the complete HH and then judge the evidence?
        Any single hand could be explained in a variety of ways...but looking at whole tournament like this is hard to explain with fluke or misclicks.
        The odds against it is astronomical.
        • centerblack, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1And by the same token, people should stop posting single hands and trying to declare them obvious proof that the guy was cheating.
      • jakobahman, on 10/18/2007, -0/+3KJ didnt fold first. He limped and the folded to a raise and a re-raise. Folding KJ utg is a better play anyhow...
        • centerblack, on 10/24/2007, -0/+1True, I thought 'scarface' had the KJ.
    • jakobahman, on 10/18/2007, -0/+1missclick.
    • MikeL123, on 10/18/2007, -0/+3He played over 90% of hands he was dealt. As far as I know, the only times he folded preflop were when there was a player with JJ-AA, or the first two hands in the file, before user #363 sat down to observe the table. Certainly, he could have gone to the bathroom or misclicked. But given he also folded preflop in an unraised pot when KK was after him, and literally played over 90% of hands he was dealt... it looks pretty suspect.
    • screensnot, on 10/19/2007, -0/+4Check out hand 14.

      PR (Potripper) is UTG and dealt 84o. There are two 8s and two 4s in the other players hole cards (leaving one 8 and one 4 in the deck). The BB is dealt KK (a hand that will almost certainly raise, and would not easily be bluffed). There is a KJ behind him, increasing the odds of a raise. But PR limps in. After the inevitable raise, PR folds.

      If you knew the other players hole cards, and were thinking clearly, you wouldn't invest a dime in that pot. Would you?
    • dave6, on 10/18/2007, -1/+0Everyone seems to be missing the real problem with this hand history. The fact that everyone's hole cards are visible at all proves that this came from a disreputable poker site. Any legitimate poker room has strict controls on who can see hole cards. It's only a subset of employees with a need to know (e.g. the security department). There are occasional exceptions if players specifically give their permission, but there's no way this file should be floating around the internet, period.

      BTW there are many reasons why a good player would fold KQ offsuit here. KQ looks good, but doesn't play well with deep stacks. These guys have over 100 big blinds. Depending on the table, a good player could definitely fold here. Now if he folded KK or QQ, I'd obviously be a lot more suspicious.

      edit: here's the stack sizes. They're important in tournaments.

      Stage #896736109 Tourney ID 1883389 Holdem Multi Normal Tournament No Limit $300 - 2007-09-12 22:54:58.001 (ET)
      Table: 13 (Real Money) Seat #4 is the dealer
      Seat 5 - POKERME420 ($10495 in chips)
      Seat 6 - JINXY_MONKEY ($10165 in chips)
      Seat 7 - CLOVER777 ($3665 in chips)
      Seat 9 - SCARFACE_79 ($9916 in chips)
      Seat 1 - AUTOSMOKE ($6664 in chips)
      Seat 2 - OBV_DONK ($6695 in chips)
      Seat 3 - POTRIPPER ($38774 in chips)
      Seat 4 - POTR0AST ($39160 in chips)
      POKERME420 - Posts small blind $150
      JINXY_MONKEY - Posts big blind $300
      *** POCKET CARDS ***
      Dealt to AUTOSMOKE [7c 4h]
      Dealt to OBV_DONK [Js 5h]
      Dealt to POTR0AST [6h 4c]
      Dealt to POTRIPPER [Ks Qd]
      Dealt to POKERME420 [10d Qs]
      Dealt to JINXY_MONKEY [Ah As]
      Dealt to CLOVER777 [Kh Jd]
      Dealt to SCARFACE_79 [7s 3h]
      SCARFACE_79 - Folds
      CLOVER777 - Calls $300
      OBV_DONK - Folds
      AUTOSMOKE - Folds
      POTR0AST - Folds
      POTRIPPER - Folds
      POKERME420 - Raises $450 to $600
      JINXY_MONKEY - Raises $1500 to $1800
      CLOVER777 - Folds
      POKERME420 - Calls $1200
      *** FLOP *** [10h 10c 9s]
      POKERME420 - Checks
      JINXY_MONKEY - Bets $1800
      POKERME420 - Calls $1800
      *** TURN *** [10h 10c 9s] [5c]
      POKERME420 - Checks
      JINXY_MONKEY - Checks
      *** RIVER *** [10h 10c 9s 5c] [8d]
      POKERME420 - All-In $6865
      JINXY_MONKEY - All-In $6535
      POKERME420 Collects $20810 from main pot
  • fictionalOne, on 10/19/2007, -5/+2Did anyone else notice that at the end of all the articles on this website is a link to join Poker Stars. Kind of fishy!
    • albedoa, on 10/17/2007, -0/+2That link is there automatically, and it points to a well-trusted poker site. Even if he manually entered it, the owner knows that his story is being dugg like crazy, and he gets a kick from every signup that uses that link. He'd be crazy not to have it there. Do you see why?
    • khaos4k, on 10/17/2007, -0/+0Those are at the bottom of every article. This is not just a move by PokerStars if that is what you're implying. Even the NYT has picked this story up. All of the evidence was gathered by forum members at 2+2 and pocket fives. PokerStars had nothing to do with this investigation.
      • fictionalOne, on 10/17/2007, -0/+1I'm not saying that the story is not true, just that credibility is lost when an ad for a competitor is placed right below each article. It is similar to attack ads, just not quite so "in your face." My theory in general; all online poker sights have the capability of schemes and scams, especially if they are based overseas without proper litigation or government oversight (which is just about all of them). If you are dumb enough to trust your money to an overseas gambling sight, than you might as well give your money to that Nigerian prince.
  • bclinton, on 10/17/2007, -2/+1Intertops Poker is a site that I always suspected of cheating. I have seen many questionable hands. Been involved in a few too. Like calling an all in after a long long pause and hitting 2 runners to win the hand. Oh well, lesson learned.
  • xmichael, on 10/19/2007, -1/+6Don't forget Absolute Poker owns Ultimate Bet!
  • Gnarx, on 10/18/2007, -5/+1This wont' change anything, EVERYONE who goes to even real life casinos KNOW the casinos make money and they are destined to lose. yet they still gamble and feel they can win.. no matter what the odds are against someone they always feel they are special and can come out on top.. you could say in the tournament lobby (One player in this tournament may be able to see everyone's hole cards) and i guarantee you the tourney woudl still fill up lol
    • AlMightyBob90, on 10/18/2007, -0/+3Poker doesn't involve playing against the "house" therefore they have no advantage. It's player vs. player so the only way the casinos can profit is from taking a small rake from each pot. Screwing with the players knowingly is just counter-productive as AP are finding out.
  • xmichael, on 10/19/2007, -0/+12"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
  • vonskippy, on 10/18/2007, -6/+1PT Barnum sends out a golf clap to all you morons.
  • RabidAngel, on 10/19/2007, -0/+8Can anyone confirm that Absolute Poker and UltimateBet are owned by the same group of people?
    • mxmj, on 10/18/2007, -1/+4Yes, they are. Absolute bought UB a while back.
  • bclinton, on 11/10/2007, -7/+6I cant confirm it but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night....
  • chrisc3, on 10/18/2007, -6/+1Online has, and always will be rigged. They seem so shady in terms of ownership, software updates, and players. "action software"
  • lotar732, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2Here is a link illustrating the tournament. If you play Hold'em at ALL... you know for a fact that he is cheating, or so incredibly lucky and perceptive that he could have predicted the Rockies winning the pennant at the beginning of September.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FczbS7FiWSM
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.