[Two Plus Two Publishing]

Internet Gambling
July 2000 Digest

This should be especially attractive to Paradise Poker, because it allows them to leverage their size. These methods won't stop collusion if there is only one or two games, but when there are ten at the same limit, it becomes very effective. The 20-40 guys will just have to suffer until there are enough games at that limit to bring these tactice into play. Accordingly, Paradise might want to stop spreading so many limits, to build more games at the same limit.

You wouldn't have to do all of these things. In particular, you could let people keep and play with their regular ID's as long as seating was random and the games were re-shuffled say every half hour. This would also be fair for everyone, as they wouldn't have to be worried about being randomly placed in a rock garden while the live game goes on beside them.

Comments?


  • WHERE DO THEY COME FROM??
    Posted by: Jim Mogal (mogalj@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Saturday, 8 July 2000, at 2:38 p.m.

    It takes the imortal words of Sam Grizzle to describe the competition lately in the 8/16 7 stud hi lo 8 or better at Paradise.

    I have virtually given up playing my best game, 7 stud high.

    These games vary from merely great to super fantastic. As I write this I am in a game with 6 players who have no clue.

    I've read and reread Ray Z's excellent book and often get good information from some of the experienced players over at the "Other Games" forum when i post questions.

    I haven't had time to worry about collusion and such...if it's occuring they just are doing it wrong in my games.

    If you can play 8 or better stud at all, there is no better spot than Paradise these days.


  • PARADISE POKER IS THE REAL CHEAT!
    Posted by: THE LIGHT
    Posted on: Saturday, 8 July 2000, at 5:20 p.m.

    AFTER PLAYING FOR 3 MONTHS EVERY DAY AND TALKING TO ALOT OF PLAYERS PLAYING LONGER THAN ME ON PARADISE I HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSSION THAT PARADISE POKER THEMSELVES HAVE PROGRAMMED THE OUTCOME OF THE GAMES SO THAT UNDERDOGS BEAT THE BEST HANDS AT A FREQUANCY MUCH MUCH HIGHER THEN THEY SHOULD. WHY WOULD THEY DO THIS YOU ASK? SIMPLE,THIS WAY THE BAD PLAYERS DONT BUST OUT SO FAST AND THEY KEEP THEIR CLIENTEL. THIS WAY THEY KEEP THE MONEY EVENLY SPREAD . MANY PLAYERS HAVE AGREED WITH ME AND ALSO SAY THAT IN ALL THEIR YEARS OF LIVE PLAY THEY HAVE NOT SEEN SO MANY FAVORITES LOSE TO UNDERDOGS. TRUTH REVEILED.


  • Reversing Paradise Credit Card Charges
    Posted by: Another Happy Customer :-(
    Posted on: Sunday, 9 July 2000, at 12:48 a.m.

    The header about sums it up. I'm thinking I'll just tell my bank not to pay these friendly unknown Costa Rican folks and then let the back and forth begin. What's the worst that can happen? I pay them eventually. It sounds like a freeroll. I'll naturally watch my back next time I'm in Costa Rica but hey, I've lived dangerously before.

    What do y'all think?


  • PARADISE POKER RULES!!
    Posted by: JB (juanco2@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Sunday, 9 July 2000, at 3:35 a.m.

    I have finally gotten through all of the messages that I have missed while away (no not in Vegas).... and I think that I will speak for the silent majority when I say that I think PARADISE POKER IS GREAT. I like being able to come home, pop open a Bud, prop up my feet and play some poker. After being away from it, I really enjoyed coming back.

    Understand that I live nowhere near anything that resembles a cardroom and for me this is just the ultimte luxury..... and now after reading hundreds upon hundreds of messages, the majority of them are the usual unfounded allegations. Well I am going on the record simply saying that I have seen nothing at all that would make me thinking something funny is going on and that I love playing there.

    No Ray I dont work for them either although I did ask them once if they would hire me as a prop or shill but they dont do that. With 100 tables why waste the money??

    Paradise if you are listening, YOU GUYS ARE GREAT!!! Keep it up and I am looking forward to the future, your site keeps getting better and better but no more food items, how about tournaments instead.


  • Stopping Collusion #2 - ideas
    Posted by: Darren
    Posted on: Sunday, 9 July 2000, at 4:37 a.m.

    To supplement Dans excellent post:

    1. Don't let players see their hole cards until it's their time to act - o.k. it slows the game down, but makes it hard 50% harder to send hole cards to opponents.

    2. Rather technical but stop all other tcp/ip traffic while playing planet. Stops people using IRC or IM to send messages to each other but also stops non cheats from web surfing or reading RGP! Paradise should already be sniffing client side packets for people using common protocols and watching people collude. Doesn't stop people from talking on the phone to each otherbut that at least may incurr some extra cost..

    d.


  • sorry asf software
    Posted by: quote from rst (reprint)
    Posted on: Monday, 10 July 2000, at 1:58 p.m.

    There are a number of other problems in the poker implementation that could lead to complete security compromise. We have only exploited the easiest one at this time.


  • Federal Regulation Inevitable
    Posted by: Steve Burke (sburke@loxinfo.co.th)
    Posted on: Tuesday, 11 July 2000, at 6:36 a.m.

    I enjoy reading the postings and have played at online casinos as well as Planet Poker and Paradise. Several months ago, CNN did a story on Planet Poker. It showed how some players were cheated, not necessarily by Planet Poker, but by other players having obtained Planet Poker's computer dealing formula thereby being able to track the complete deal and know what each player held and what was going to come up on the board. After seeing this, and going to the Web site that exposed PP's negligence in monitoring its site (PP did, after all, represent that it had a secure site), I challenged my VISA charges. Planet Poker never responded to my challenges and I was ultimately refunded. Had PP had a leg to stand on, my challenges would have been responded to and, most likely, the charges would have remained. I have played poker and lived in Vegas for a good part of my life and have played poker all over the world for the last 35 years. I don't mind loosing -- but I do mind being cheated (even if it is done unintentionally throught negligence such as Planet Poker).

    My point -- in legal casinos or poker rooms, gambling is regulated. Be it Vegas, California or somewhere in Europe, there is an oversight body that protects the consumers. With the internet, there is none AND there must be. If you're doubtful about the honesty and integrity of these online casinos and poker rooms, you have every right to be. For all you know, the same guys who served 10 years in a Federal prison for selling bogus oil leases or who-knows-what, are operating these places. Are you really secure handing over your money for safekeeping with some Costa Rican entity? Who do you go after if they decide to disappear with your money tomorrow? Recent Federal indictments show that the internet is not quite the "safe" and "honest" place one might think.

    Gambling on the internet MUST be licensed and regulated. Since this is practically impossible AND since the Federal government is philosophically opposed to gambling, I believe that we will see the end to internet gambling in all forms (at least within the borders of the USA)in a very short time. Without regulation and licensing, all players are at risk from the REAL Rounder's KGB types that have pervaded gambling and racketeering from their inceptions.


  • PP: High variance, or do I just suck?
    Posted by: JYC (jyccyj@mail.com)
    Posted on: Tuesday, 11 July 2000, at 7:46 p.m.

    I've been a moderate winner at various LA-area casinos (Commerce, H Park, Bike) low-limit HE for the last couple years but have never experienced "running bad" to the degree I have since playing at Paradise. Normally I would think I just suck compared to everyone else at PP but I've recently read Mason's "Gambling Theory and Other Topics" and am now tempted into rationalizing that my current $1500 loss playing 100-150 hours of 5/10 & 2/4 (which I dropped down to when I was -$1000) is due to a 3-sigma "bad run" instead of simply that the players are better than me at Paradise vs. the LA casinos. If the latter, then I should stop playing, since I have negative EV. If the players are just as bad as in LA, then I have a chance and need to ride the bad wave out. Please comment/advise.


  • Need your help
    Posted by: Poker Analyzer (poker_analyzer@yahoo.com)
    Posted on: Wednesday, 12 July 2000, at 3:00 p.m.

    This is a draft of players' statistics for hold'em as they will appear in Poker Analyzer. Please, let me know your opinion. Should other statistics be added?

    Total: yy hands

    Before Flop

    .............................................Called...Raised...Called/Folded...Folded

    with a pair................................x%.......x%..............x%...............x%

    with suited cards......................x%.......x%..............x%...............x%

    with big unsuited cards.............x%.......x%..............x%...............x%

    Other.......................................x%.......x%..............x%...............x%

    unknown (folded later) ...........x%.......x%..............x%...............x%

    After Flop

    ...................Checked...Check/Call...Check/Raise...Bet...Called...Raised...Folded

    Pair...................x%..........x%....................x%..........x%....x%.........x%.........x%

    2 pairs...............x%..........x%....................x%..........x%....x%.........x%.........x%

    Trips.................x%..........x%....................x%..........x%....x%.........x%.........x%

    4-Flush.............x%..........x%....................x%..........x%....x%.........x%.........x%

    4-Straight.........x%..........x%....................x%..........x%....x%.........x%.........x%

    Straight............x%..........x%....................x%..........x%....x%.........x%.........x%

    Flush................x%..........x%....................x%..........x%....x%.........x%.........x%

    Quads..............x%..........x%....................x%..........x%....x%.........x%.........x%

    The same for turn and river.


  • ALL ONLINE POKER PLAYERS, PLEASE TAKE A LOOK.
    Posted by: NARINDER MEHMI (n_mehmi@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Wednesday, 12 July 2000, at 10:30 p.m.

    ONLINE POKER ROOMS HAVE FEWER COSTS THAN LIVE CASINOS YET THEY DONT GIVE THE PLAYER MUCH BACK IN TERMS OF BONUSES AND PROMOTIONS.

    IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN JOINING AN ONLINE POKER ROOM WITH THE FOLLOWING UNHEARD OF BENFITS, PLEASE EMAIL ME FOR DETAILS. N_MEHMI@HOTMAIL.COM

    1ST DAY NO LOSE GUARANTEE. LOSSES PAID BY THE HOUSE.

    FREE $100 TOURNAMENT BUY-IN FOR THOSE PLAYERS PLAYING ENOUGH HOURS.

    UP TO 40% REBATE ON YOUR DEPOSIT FOR THOSE PLAYERS PLAYING ENOUGH HOURS.

    BAD BEAT $1000 CASHPOT AND SUPER JACKPOT.

    Free Wire Transaction And Deposit Charges!

    GAMES AVAILABLE: HOLD'EM. 7 STUD (FIXED AND SPREAD LIMITS AVAILABLE, ALSO HI LOW GAMES) OMAHA (IXED AND SPREAD LIMITS AVAILABLE, ALSO HI LOW GAMES).

    FOR DETAILS OF THE SITE, JUST EMAIL ME AT N_MEHMI@HOTMAIL.COM AND QUOTE THIS SITE URL SO I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE ASKING ABOUT. YOU MAY SEND ME ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

    I AM NOT THE OWNER. I'M JUST USING THEIR REFERAL PROGRAM WHICH IS AVAILABLE TO ALL PLAYERS. N_MEHMI@HOTMAIL.COM


  • A serious message to the 2+2 management
    Posted by: wildbill (wba712@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Thursday, 13 July 2000, at 3:17 a.m.

    Ok, so you people post up this acceptable policy and you seem not to enforce it! I am thorougly disgusted that you allow this certain person to harass me and others on here with stupid posts that have no reasonable importance. Further is it acceptable for people to make wild unfounded claims such as JB owning Paradise or me having some sort of involvement with the mob? I think I have made a very valuable contribution to this whole site, especially on the other sports board, but I cannot believe I have to tolerate such people that go out and attack someone's character and espouse racist and untrue remarks about foreign countries. If you continue to allow this, people that have something to contribute like me will eventually be turned off and leave.

    To prove my point, this person we all know on this site who changes his name to fit his latest slam, has been claiming that there is no extradition treaty with Costa Rica. It took me all of three clicks using Yahoo to find that he is lying because here is the treaty for anyone who cares to read it:

    www.usembassy.or.cr/exttreatyeng.html

    So are you people going to allow someone who harasses people for no apparent reason and tells lies to continue to post on here or are you going to prove you actually believe in your posted policies?


  • PP: HE Vs 7cs at low-limits
    Posted by: Sysop (a.zafari@cableinet.co.uk)
    Posted on: Thursday, 13 July 2000, at 10:20 a.m.

    In regard to the 2-4 and other low-limit games at Poker paradise, who are better the Stud players or the Holdem players? - obviously it is difficult to compare them directly but think of it in terms of how good the holdem players are compared to your average low-limit live game against the Stud players in comparison to yor average live stud game

    thanks,


  • Kyl Internet Gambling Bills From RGP
    Posted by: Tom Haley (CodeSavvy@aol.com)
    Posted on: Thursday, 13 July 2000, at 4:33 p.m.

    This post is a copy of card player writer Nolan Dalla's post on RGP regarding the Internet Gambling bills before Congress. I wonder how long the Internet poker sites stay in business if these are passed? These bills are terrifying to me.

    **************************************************************************

    Two bills on the subject of Internet gambling have been introduced in Congress. The Kyl Bill (S.692) was approved by the Senate in November 1999. The Kyl Bill was forwarded to the House and introduced as H.R. 3125, sponsored by Rep. Goodlatte. This House is currently considering implementation of certain ammendments (minor changes) in the bill. However, most observers believe the House will eventually approve the resolution. Furthermore, President Clinton is unlikely to veto the bill, meaning if the bill makes it to the President's desk before the end of his term, there will very likely be a ban in Internet gambling.

    (NOTE: Candidate Al Gore has expressed his opposition to the Kyl Bill. In the event this bill gets bogged down in committee, the bill would have to be reintroduced in the next session. Although it would likely pass both houses of Congress in the next session, there is some hope a "Gore Administration's" advocacy of freedom of the Internet and no taxation on goods and services purchased on-line would be reflected in his veto of the Kyl Bill. On the other hand, a George W. Bush Administration would almost certainly go along with the Kyl Bill, although the candidate has not taken a position on the bill publically, to my knowledge.)

    From the language contained in the bill, it appears if the Kyl Bill is signed into law, online poker games (played from PCs and through ISPs based in the United States would be illegal).

    Here are the abbreviated versions of each bill, taken from the Congressional Research Service:

    H.R.3125 Title: To prohibit Internet gambling, and for other purposes. Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1999 - Amends the Federal criminal code to make it unlawful for any person engaged in a gambling business to knowingly use the Internet or any other interactive computer service (service) to: (1) place, receive, or otherwise make a bet or wager; or (2) send, receive, or invite information assisting in the placing of a bet or wager. Prescribes penalties.

    Grants the district courts original and exclusive jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations of this Act. Provides enforcement authority for violations taking place on Indian lands.

    Exempts from liability under this Act any service provider who, after being properly notified by a Federal or State law enforcement agency that a particular online site of such provider is being used to violate this Act, removes or disables access to such site. Requires a provider, in order to receive such immunity, to: (1) maintain an electronic or written policy that requires the provider to terminate the account of a violating subscriber following receipt of a notice of violation; and (2) not knowingly permit its service to be used for such prohibited purposes.

    Authorizes alternative injunctive relief against such a provider, under certain limitations and considerations.

    Exempts providers from liability for content, furnished by another person, that advertises or promotes non-Internet gambling activities, unless the provider is engaged in the business of such gambling. Requires such providers, in order to receive such immunity, to maintain the termination policy and to not knowingly permit the use of their services for such activities as required under the exemption above. Requires the provider to take appropriate action after notice from a Federal or State law enforcement agency that the provider's service is being used for such prohibited purposes. Authorizes alternative injunctive relief against such a provider under certain imitations and considerations.

    Exempts from liability a provider who takes any action required under this Act. States that nothing in this Act shall otherwise require a provider: (1) to monitor material or use of its service; or (2) except as required by notice, to gain access to, remove, or disable access to material. Lists exceptions to the prohibitions under this Act, including certain State and multi-State lotteries and authorized horse or dog racing. Directs the Attorney General to submit to Congress: (1) an analysis of the problems associated with enforcing this Act; (2) recommendations for the best use of Department of Justice resources for enforcement; and (3) an estimate of the amount of activity and money being used to gamble on the Internet.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------

    S.692 Title: A bill to prohibit Internet gambling, and for other purposes. Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1999 - Amends the Federal criminal code to make it unlawful for any person engaged in a gambling business to knowingly use the Internet or any other interactive computer service (service) to: (1) place, receive, or otherwise make a bet or wager; or (2) send, receive, or invite information assisting in the placing of a bet or wager. Prescribes penalties.

    Grants the district courts original and exclusive jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations of this Act. Authorizes the United States or a State attorney general to institute such proceedings. Authorizes a professional or amateur sports organization whose games or athletic performances are alleged to be the basis of a violation to institute civil proceedings to prevent or restrain such violation. Provides enforcement authority for violations taking place on Indian lands.

    Exempts from liability under this Act any service provider who, after being properly notified by a Federal or State law enforcement agency that a particular online site of such provider is being used to violate this Act, removes or disables access to such site. Requires a provider, in order to receive such immunity, to: (1) maintain an electronic or written policy that requires the provider to terminate the account of a violating subscriber following receipt of a notice of violation; and (2) not knowingly permit its service to be used for such prohibited purposes.

    Authorizes alternative injunctive relief against such a provider, under certain limitations and considerations.

    Exempts providers from liability for content, furnished by another person, that advertises or promotes non-Internet gambling activities, unless the provider is engaged in the business of such gambling. Requires such providers, in order to receive such immunity, to maintain the termination policy and to not knowingly permit the use of their services for such activities as required under the exemption above. Requires the provider to take appropriate action after notice from a Federal or State law enforcement agency that the provider's service is being used for such prohibited purposes. Authorizes alternative injunctive relief against such a provider under certain limitations and considerations.

    Exempts from liability a provider who takes any action required under this Act. States that nothing in this Act shall otherwise require a provider: (1) to monitor material or use of its service; or (2) except as required by notice, to gain access to, remove, or disable access to material. Lists exceptions to the prohibitions under this Act, including certain State and multi-State lotteries and authorized horse or dog racing. Exempts from the provisions of this Act class II or III gaming activities properly conducted on Indian lands under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act or other Federal authority or with the approval of appropriate State gaming or regulatory authorities.

    Directs the Attorney General to submit to Congress: (1) an analysis of the problems associated with enforcing this Act; (2) recommendations for the best use of Department of Justice resources for enforcement; and (3) an estimate of the amount of activity and money being used to gamble on the Internet.

    ************************************************************************** **************


  • I love Paradise Poker!
    Posted by: Al
    Posted on: Thursday, 13 July 2000, at 6:00 p.m.

    I've played there, and have lost. I've lost less than the casino though!


  • newbie-needs help
    Posted by: gary
    Posted on: Friday, 14 July 2000, at 5:27 p.m.

    I'm pretty new to internet poker. I'd like to ask though how can so many players play bad hands and win? I saw a guy with 6-10 not suited called for big raises to the end. On the end he raises me. I turn over Kings and the 6-10 hit a gut shot straight on the last card to beat me. It doesn't make sense. This player did this several times, and won big money. I played big pairs and lost too much. I need help to know how to defeat these strange players.


  • I would like to know...
    Posted by: John M (jumpsetter@yahoo.com)
    Posted on: Sunday, 16 July 2000, at 3:47 a.m.

    How could anyone possibly come to a definite conclusion that someone or (especially) some Internet poker entity (ie Paradise Poker) is cheating by simply observing "many" hands?

    I guess that's why I never finished my computer engineering degree, because I couldn't analyze tens of thousands of hands simultaneously in my head. (OK, I can't even get a simple statistics problem right, but that's besides the point!) I used to know someone who had PI memorized to like 30,000 digits, but not many people I know can do that.

    But seriously, can anyone can simply observe a number of hands and come to any useful conclusion about cheating? Computer analysis would be required. Yes, there are very strange hands that occur in holdem. Funny there is no discussion about being drawn out on in seven stud!


  • Disconnections at Paradise?
    Posted by: berya
    Posted on: Sunday, 16 July 2000, at 1:29 p.m.

    Yesterday I tried for the first time to play for play money at Paradise. What I found out is I keep getting disconnected every 10-15 minutes or so. Am I going to be charged an all-in when this happens or how does it work? I know they only allow 1 all-in per 24hrs. Surely there must be more to these disconnections. Could someone please explain.


  • Paradise Responds
    Posted by: Ed Hill (winner777@aol.com)
    Posted on: Monday, 17 July 2000, at 5:14 a.m.

    Dear Ed,

    This letter is also being sent to Nolan Dalla. We would like to address some of the issues that you've raised publicly that question the integrity of our business.

    We try our best not to post publicly as most of the discussion deteriorate into flames and screaming matches, and rational discussion stops. You are welcome to post this message, or any part of it, on RGP (or any other public forum) if you wish.

    The software and operations are owned and run by Tropical Paradise Enterprises SA, here in Costa Rica. The president of Paradise Poker is Linda Seaton. Linda does not come from a poker background, but had the initiative, market awareness, financial resources and the contacts to start-up and fund the development of Paradise from the beginning. It was her foresight to assemble a team of world class programmers to work in-house allowing for a product that can be constantly upgraded and meet the ever-increasing demands of our clientele. This, in our opinion, has set us far apart from the competition. Our market share validates this business decision.

    Our company is built on having the highest levels of integrity. We have strong business relationships with well-known, prestigious firms. As an example, our corporate consultants are PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PWC). Having PWC audit our private company publicly doesn't make that much sense since we only offer poker. We do not take bets against players as our revenue comes solely from the rake; therefore, a the value of a financial audit from a client's perspective would be meaningless. If we did need them to calculate payout percentages we would have no problem in engaging them for this service, but in a 3rd party rake structure, this simply does not apply as players play against each other.

    We also have a very close and trusted relationship with our respected credit card processor, SureFire Commerce (a publicly traded company). SureFire does a great deal of due diligence on all their clients which include many other prestigious companies. Our bank in Costa Rica (Banco Cathay de Costa Rica) is also of the highest integrity.

    With respect to our marketing campaigns (that you may not have been aware of)... we launched a few targeted email campaigns. These campaigns were filtered to exclude email addresses of our current clients and RGP posters since these users are obviously already aware of Paradise and the email would have been redundant. Nevertheless, the response was very positive (as the emails were very targeted) and resulted in large numbers of new players. Future advertising includes more broad-based advertising which will include the Daily Racing Form (next month) and possibly some widely-distributed well-known men's magazines.

    We will stress again that our software deals cards 100% randomly... and we truly believe that we have the best shuffling in the world. We explain it extensively on our website. Our data-transmission security is also first rate, using industry-accepted SSL encryption.

    We have absolutely zero incentive to manipulate anything as our business is phenomenally successful as is. Why would we possibly do anything to jeopardize that? In fact, we go to great lengths to ensure that we are constantly doing everything we can to have a site of *the* highest integrity.

    Our collusion monitoring is something we are very proud of. In fact, we have given another writer for CardPlayer a fair amount of insight into our protection methods for a potential article on this topic. We are also in discussions with poker "celebrities" to possibly have them add their input into this area and ensure that from an outsider's perspective there is a recognized poker name. We have been extremely careful in not hiring or consulting publicly known US experts in this area because everything we do is based here in Costa Rica and our legal firm will not allow us to hire someone based in the US, as that could possibly be perceived as being part of the operations of the cardroom.

    With respect to winning players, we have several very well known poker players that are currently playing and winning at the site. We suspect as is typical human nature for most people, winning players do not publicly broadcast their winnings. We payout close to $200,000 a week in profit checks alone (not including the hundreds of thousands paid back to player's credit cards), and have several players that have been consistently winning (we are sure you would recognize many of these players by name).

    Taking all that into account, we would like to extend to you an invitation to visit us here in Costa Rica. A picture is worth a thousand words, and a first-hand experience many more. We will give you a tour of our operations, our ISP facilities and introduce you to members of our programming, security and support teams. We will walk you through the operations and answer all of your questions first hand. Of course, as it's our invitation, we would be happy to pick up the tab for both your flight and accommodations.

    Please let us know -- looking forward to hearing from you.

    Sincerely,

    Trevor Paradise Poker


  • Is this REALLY the end of internet poker??
    Posted by: Maven (neomaven@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Monday, 17 July 2000, at 12:04 p.m.

    I do not purport to be an expert on the intricacies of internet regulation, and especially not this Kyl Bill that is currently being considered. However, I do know a bit about computing and the internet, and here are a few of my thoughts:

    Even if this bill is passed, it will be extremely difficult to enforce. For this very reason, the regulation of content on internet sites has been very limited. The practical implications of trying to stop approximately 80 million internet users in the US from accessing any particular website are mind-boggling. How exactly does the Gov't intend to stop me from logging on to Paradise if I so choose? Indeed, how will the gov't even KNOW I am logging on to Paradise? Internet Service Providers do not constantly monitor the online actions of its users, unless they have a complaint of some sort that identifies a particular user's IP address. The inherent difficulty of enforcing any such laws are the main reason laws such as this one being considered have failed to gain much support in Congress. Just take a look at the online porn industry, which, although having been one of the few areas of internet traffic that has been the focus of the fledgling regulation of online matters, has flourished. There are thousands of violations of internet pornography laws every hour, yet I don't see anyone refraining from visiting the sites, or being arrested, or losing access to the internet. In fact, according to statistics I recently read concerning the proportion of web surfers who purchase pornography over the internet, if every violation of these internet pornography laws were actually enforced, there would be noone left to use the internet!

    Basically, the point of this post is to assure all of you faithful Internet poker players that, even if this Kyl Bill passes, I wouldn't worry too much. Paradise will still be in business, if only for its non-US customers. I know I will still be playing from the US, since I am aware of how difficult it will be to enforce this law. I will also have no ethical qualms about "breaking the law" by playing online after the bill is passed. The sole reason the US is even considering this law is because it cannot profit from these online casinos at the moment. It's not an ethical issue, if it were, then the US would not be the largest producer of gambling entertainment in the universe, and I wouldn't have the largest casino in the world in my backyard (Foxwoods).

    Comments and skewers welcome. Maven


  • Rake at the LowLimit games
    Posted by: Jonas L (hadiraja@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Monday, 17 July 2000, at 3:21 p.m.

    Is it possible to beat the rake at the 2$-4$ and 3$-6$ games at ParadisePoker?


  • Rest easy for this year...maybe longer
    Posted by: wildbill (wba712@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Monday, 17 July 2000, at 11:41 p.m.

    Well the first attempt to get the internet gambling prohibition passed fails. As I have been saying all along, despite all the ease that some people think they could pass this law...it just aint going to happen. Clinton's people said he will veto it without a doubt if it has any kind of exemptions in it and since the vote couldn't pass a majority to override a veto, you can kiss it goodbye this year. This bill with no exemptions will not even pass a simple majority vote, but politics will be played. As I said before, the sponsors probably don't care all that much if it really passes or not, all that matters is that they say to their donors and voters that they tried to protect your children and our uncaring opposition doesn't believe in that and they will earn just as many brownie points. What do these guys really care, they aren't out gambling on the net, the law doesn't affect them. To top it off they come up with more outrageous and stupid provisions all the time. Its not longer really about making laws against betting online, its about telling ISPs to cut off service to online betting sites in one bill and trying with futility to make it illegal to send money to not only gambling sites, but any country that has gambling sites in it. The Justice Department has already said right now they have no intentions of ever going out and arresting bettors for this behavior and Bush isn't running on a platform of lets put people in jail for gambling. Gore is saying he will never approve any internet restrictions. Therefore if Bush gets elected there is an outside shot of this happening : the government will officially tell you what you are doing is illegal, as opposed to now where most people figure its probably illegal, but they do it anyways. Do you see any real difference? If Gore wins suddenly I wouldn't be surprised to see a few states get bold and start doing just what people are mentioning, joning in the fray and taking their cut. In the end though, all the questions of cheating and fraud probably will never be resolved because people could still cheat with the software they use online and collusion is still possible even with the best of regulation. Even though quite a few people want to say the end of the industry is coming soon...please just think about how foolish your beliefs are. This industry never started out with any blessings from any governments and they certainly aren't worried about getting them now.


  • Kyl bill is defeated (nt)
    Posted by: Bartholemew (bart@yahoo.com)
    Posted on: Tuesday, 18 July 2000, at 12:08 a.m.

    p


  • Planet Poker Software - Cheating, Collusion
    Posted by: Willy888 (bmboy888@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Wednesday, 19 July 2000, at 12:00 a.m.

    I've been reading posts here about cheating and hacking on internet poker sites such as paradise and planet poker. I haven't really believed any of it since now that I have seen it happen first hand at Planet Poker.

    There have been way too many draw outs by players which just should not be playing their cards. And when you do have a winning hand there are at most one player and the big blind in the hand. (ie: twice it happenned that when I had a premium starting hand such as KQs, flop the nut straight and the only caller before the flop is the big blind.)

    (ie2: pocket Qs in the small blind, only one caller out there, this is very unusual in this particular game, flop A A 10, turn 9, river 8, lone player called all the way with J7.) These are only 2 examples of many.

    (ie3: player RAISED flop with Kh5h, flop one heart, turn and river heart, but he was raising before the flop, on the flop with nothing, on the turn and bet the river.)

    This is just sick. I'm not complaining because I lost since a few hundred dollars is not a large amount but I have noticed these things and want to make everyone aware. Someone or people must have some kind of knowledge about the cards to come, it just isn't possible for this to happen so OFTEN. Comments welcome.


  • Highlands Screw Up
    Posted by: Joe (JoeBlow1980@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Wednesday, 19 July 2000, at 11:11 a.m.

    Ala Poker Spot I just received an email from Highlands Poker with a ton of cc: email addressed attached. This pisses me off to no end. Highland and Poker Spot have bascialy published my private email address. (Yes I have two email addresses one private and one public for things like newsgroups.) This is the second time Highland has gotten on my bad side. When I loaded their software my computer went crazy. I'd never had a compatability problem with my Compaq until Highland. I was never able to get HIGHLAND running and finally deleted the program. There were lots of shared files left over afterward that windows would not let me delete.

    The Highland email was regarding cash outs....I've never played a single hand or made a deposit at Highland.


  • Secret to winning at Paradise
    Posted by: Incognito (jtf9@juno.com)
    Posted on: Thursday, 20 July 2000, at 4:01 p.m.

    I have found the secret to winning at Paradise Poker and will let all you forum readers in on it.

    In order to win you must order a hamburger the minute you sit down, this will gaurantee successful results.

    For example, I got AA, KK, QQ, QQ, JJ, 10/10 and AK in a two hour period and they all stood up.

    It had to be the hamburger!

    Jeff Fairey


  • Looking at both sides
    Posted by: Poker Amateur
    Posted on: Thursday, 20 July 2000, at 9:18 p.m.

    I have been playing at Paradise for a total of 432 hours now, playing the 2/4 Stud game(just learned and taking it slow), and am up approx $2300. I can see where people get their different opinions of cheating or collusion. I have no proof either way so I am staying neutral(plus if there is cheating/collusion by players, it won't be at my 2/4 game). I have heard people say that online is tougher than casino action at the same levels. If that is true, casino action must be pretty weak(I have only played a couple times in a casino so I am not qualified to say that casino action is harder or softer). Granted it is the 2/4 game, but I have seen many many bad players. They stay with hands I couldn't even imagine anyone in their right minds staying with, sometimes they suck you out on the river, but they lose it all before it is done, so I can see where people think there is nothing going on. Just lately though, I hit a stretch where I can understand how people can think there is cheating/collusion going on(I guess not really collusion because they couldn't get help from anyone else on these hands). In a span of a half hour, I lose 5 hands holding either a straight or a flush. All were drawn on the river. 2 didn't really bother me(besides losing), because they were in with a solid hand or solid drawing hand and it was the obvious thing to do. The other 3, they had no business even staying after the first 3 cards, or continuing after the 4th card. I understand that streaks, both winning and losing, happen, and I am not crying about them, but I understand how people would think something is going on when hands like that come up so much over a short period of time. But the kicker happened at the end of that session yesterday.

    I had KQ hidden with a K showing. I raised and everyone left but one person, who re-raised showing a Jd. I called and my 4th street card was an A and his was an 8c. I bet, and he called. My 5th street card was another A, his was a Jc. I bet, he raised, and the raising went to the cap. 6th street, I get another A, aces full of kings, he gets a Jh, I bet, he raises and the raising went to the cap again. On the river, I get a meaningless card, I bet, and the raises go to the cap again. I flip over my full house and he flips over 4 Jacks, drawing another one on the river. I was shocked, and not so much at losing, but that he played the hand that way. I stared at it to see if there was anything I could pick out that made him stay. I saw nothing, he had 3 clubs but drew the third one on the river. Collusion wouldn't have helped him, I was showing trip aces on 6th street and representing the biggest full house(raising on 3rd with a King showing). I don't see why he stayed from the start, especially re-raising with nothing at all, even knowing how bad some of the players are on there who stay with shit. I just wrote it down to one idiot getting a lucky draw.

    Like I said though, I have no proof and I am not trying to show proof, just showing how two different people with good common sense can think two completely different things. I can see both sides, those hands look interesting even if you can't prove anything with 6 hands. You lose a few hands like this and it is common human nature to wonder, especially if you have never seen it happen before. Was it without a doubt cheating? Was it without a doubt not cheating and just luck? since I have no proof either way, I will take the neutral stance and say it was one stupid lucky player who probably thinks he knows what he is doing and is in for a rude awakening in the future. Can't wait to see him again. :)


  • Is this Johnny Chan?????
    Posted by: Dan Spargur (arturo@keynet.net)
    Posted on: Friday, 21 July 2000, at 9:47 a.m.

    I play a lot of 20-40 hold-em on Paradise. Recently Paradise answered concerns about cheating and collusion in a post on RGP. In it they state that there are several big name, recognizable players that play regularly on Paradise. This got me thinking. Since no one plays under their real name, I could be playing in a 20-40 game with Huck Seed, Erik Seidel, Doyle Brunson and Johnny Chan! Obviously if I saw this line-up in a casino I might pass. (Unless Phil Hellmuth was there too, stuck and steaming. :-)) So my questions:

    1. Since these types of players are going to be found in the biggest games, 20-40, does this make the 10-20 or 15-30 games possibly a better choice? Yes, I know, those 5 guys probably aren't playing but you get the idea.

    2. Does anyone care to divulge what names certain pro players play under? This would make game selection a lot easier.


  • Whining and crying (paradise)...
    Posted by: Tengen
    Posted on: Friday, 21 July 2000, at 10:02 a.m.

    I've been playing poker professionally for 7 years with enough success to gain a living and even save a bit money. After I learned about internet poker I decided to give it a try even though as an experienced computer (and internet) user I understand how easy it is to collude. This has not been a problem for me so far as I've only played at the lower limit games (fear of collusions and feeling a bit uncomfortable sending loads of $$$ into South America :) ).

    My problem has been different: especially in Texas Hold'em, it seems as if the shuffling algorithm were crooked to support the loose players (ie. the looser you play, the better board cards you catch and vice versa - the tighter you're with your chips, the less you will flop). After all, it would be sensible for the card room to prevent the fish from going broke too quickly.

    Never have I had such droughts I've had in PP - I have now had more than 20 AKs, AQs etc this session yet I've not managed to connect w/ any on the flop, yet someone who cold calls my raise with Q6 or whatever (when I'm having AQ)seems to connect the majority of the time. On the other hand my big pairs seem to do ok - although my queens were just cracked by nines in a heads up match, but there's nothing odd there. I am much more worried about not being able to connect with the board with the big cards.

    Another matter thšt worries me is the absense of A2-hands in Omaha/8 - I often play hundreds (literally) of hands without seeing single ace-deuce in my hand.... I don't really play Omaha8 in real life for several reasons (low limits, slow game play)so I'm not sure how probable this is (and my calculator is 3ft away...:)), but it just does not "feel" right. However I do get reasonable hi-only-holdings - however the flops are usually all low those times.

    I would probably not have written this otherwise, but playing two tables at the same time I've not managed to connect with any card on the flop yet this session (other than once when I flopped a set to a large pocet pair) and I've played for several hours already. Actually I don't think I have won any other pots today - so it's going just like it went yesterday. I've not yet broken my real-life unlucky streak record though, but in RL these streaks seem to occure far less frequently. Actually right now I am very close to my all time one-session limit hold'em loss record (if we count it in big bets) - I just don't get any cards that co-operate with the flop...another AQ just missed the flop...

    I'll try to cry and whine some more if I've lost even more over the next month or two.


  • Let's Do A Survey
    Posted by: David Sklansky (Dsklansky@aol.com)
    Posted on: Friday, 21 July 2000, at 4:48 p.m.

    I would like as many posters as possible to answer the following question: What,in your opinion, is the probability that Paradise Poker is KNOWINGLY cheating? By this I mean they are altering the randomness of the cards (either for the benefit of friends or for the benefit of losing players to increase revenue) or they know what cards are coming and are helping confederates.

    I am not asking about collusion. I am not asking about outside players somehow hacking the site unbeknownst to management. I am not asking about an unwitting flaw in their program tha can be found and taken advantage of. I am not even asking about a renegade employee doing something behind the bosses back. I am speaking about a thought out scheme by at least some members of the owners or management, to make the game either not random or the upcoming cards knowable.

    Surely, even the more suspicious folks out there wouldn't say the answer to the above question is near 100%. Even a 10% chance would be a good enough cause for concern. But until now both the attackers and defenders of Paradise have not bothered to put a number on their degree of certainty. I think it would be usefull if those who have participated in this debate would, without elaboration, weigh in with a number between 0 an 100 percent. I won't give my number for now to avoid biasing others. I will say that one of the reasons I am asking this question has nothing to do with internet poker. In any case no one should feel reluctant to answer this question. Even Paradise themselves would probably find the results important.


  • 2nd Survey
    Posted by: David Sklansky (Dsklansky@aol.com)
    Posted on: Saturday, 22 July 2000, at 2:39 a.m.

    What are the chances that the cards are not always being dealt randomly (a) because of an error unbeknownst to Paradise or (b) because of a renegade employee? Two seperate answers please.


  • Finally! POKERSPOT is first to tourneys
    Posted by: Bryan
    Posted on: Saturday, 22 July 2000, at 3:58 p.m.

    We have all read the posts here regarding the desire for tourneys in online format. This is a huge possible payout and more startegic than the normal ram and jam games at Paradise. I'm a Paradise player myself, but when I received email from Pokerspot saying they are starting tournaments, I cheered!! I think there is tremendous possibility for online tourneys since you can easily gather 200 people with buy ins to make the winning very worthwhile! I emailed Paradise when they were going to add this feature and they said, "It's not really a priority right now."

    The only reason Pokerspot is lacking is the limit of play right now. I'm promoting this because I want to play there and there just haven't been enough games. Maybe this will change it. Check out the tourney info on their website.

    Bryan

    p.s.- I am in no way affiliated with any online cardroom other than they rake my pots :-)


  • 3rd Survey
    Posted by: David Sklansky (Dsklansky@aol.com)
    Posted on: Saturday, 22 July 2000, at 7:43 p.m.

    What are the chances the cards are known to anyone before they are dealt or right as they are dealt. This is a six part question since bothe questions should be answered in regards to, management, a renegade employee, or hackers.

    PS to Dan Hanson. It is ok to ask and answer such questions in spite of the lack of detailed knowledge by those who reply. The whole purpose of these surveys is more to ascertain gut feelings and opinions in a numerical type fashion, than to come to any conclusions about what the right answer really is. I'll have more to say about that point later.


  • Internet Poker Adjustments
    Posted by: Maven (neomaven@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Saturday, 22 July 2000, at 8:28 p.m.

    Here is a postscript from an email I sent to Mason on an unrelated topic. The postscript actually turned out to be longer than the main message, and after writing it, I thought it would be a good post for this forum.

    With regard to the recent ranting about cheating at online sites, I too was nearly bitten by this paranoia bug. I started off horribly on Paradise, losing $2000 in 70 hours of play at 10-20. This loss (not especially rare in statistical terms) was not nearly as surprising as my HUGE swings. During those 70 hours I went from -2000 to +1800 3 times; a real rollercoaster. Now, I consider myself a fairly solid player, and I keep very detailed statistics of my results. I have made a decent living playing in live games at Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun in Connecticut in the 10-20, 20-40 and 40-80 Holdem games, along with similar limits in stud. This earn reflects a nearly 1 BB/hr rate in the tougher games, and over 2 BB/hr in the weaker games, especially the 20-40 at Mohegan, which has been described by many as the best (livest) 20-40 in the country.

    Anyway, the point of all this is to show how a solid player in real-life can face several adjustment issues when playing online. I nearly boycotted online play all together, until I decided to give it one more shot---with one MAJOR caveat: conduct a very detailed analysis of my play online thus far, along with a thorough statistical analysis of my results over 70 hours. The ability to retrieve hand histories helped out quite a bit. I was amazed to find that my play during these 70 hours was anything but optimal. I saw myself calling raises with hands I would NEVER call with in live play. I also saw myself peeling cards much more often (and incorrectly) than in live play. In sum, I found my online play to be very much inferior to what I consider to be "my" game. Sometimes I even had to reread the hand history several times to be sure I was looking at the correct player!! :). With regard to statistical analysis (which is admittedly tough to rely on with only 70 game-play hours), I found that my standard deviation was more than double what it is in my regular live games. This was a sure sign that I was playing too loosely, and playing too many speculative hands (especially those with -EV). I then decided to give online play another shot, while trying to play the game I know I am capable of playing, the game I play all the time in the live games, the game that has basically paid my bills for the last 5 years. Lo and behold, it worked. I am now happy to say that after 350 hours of online play, I have made back the money I lost, and now am ahead over $8000 (more than 1BB in 15-30 and 20-40).

    The moral of this whole spiel is not to boast about my success on on Paradise, but that all of these players we see complaining on the internet poker forum on 2+2, even the accomplished pros such as Ed Hill, should take a LONG HARD look at not only their game, but also how their game meshes with the internet interface. I think some players rely on physical tells and reading of opponents much more than they realize. When they play on the internet, these tools are stripped from them (or at least dramatically diminished), and they are often reduced to playing based only on known exposed cards. This fact leads me to believe that internet poker lends itself less readily to those who play "by feel," even if these "feel" players are consistent winners in live play.

    I believe that internet poker will be good for my overall game in the long run. It has certainly helped me to tune in much more closely to how a particular opponent is playing AT THE MOMENT. Some players play well when winning but horribly when losing, some like to protect small leads, etc. etc. Keying in on these subtle changes is one of the few strategic adjustments (not relating to simple card strength) that one can make in an internet game. Like those made for individual poker games and game structures, successful play on internet poker requires specific adjustments from traditional (S&M) strategy. Anyone who thinks they can just take their regular game from the live card room to the virtual one and expect "usual" results is in for a rude awakening. I have had this awakening, and now am much better equipped to compete in the internet arena. I suggest other would-be internet card-sharks think carefully about the necessary strategy adjusments they need to make to their regular games in order to be successful.

    Just a few thoughts and anecdotal notes. I would be interested in hearing yours.

    Comments and Skewers Welcome

    Maven


  • Paranoid?
    Posted by: Ed I
    Posted on: Sunday, 23 July 2000, at 10:40 p.m.

    Background.... Computer illiterate, of average intelligence, long time poker player 20+years( 7-8 k hrs), small winner( 3-6 thru 10-20, spread limits 1-5 thru 2-20). I'd love to play poker on the internet due to the lack of choices I have in Montana but I feel impotent to decide if its safe. I read the posts debating this issue. I have been cheated in the past and I don't feel confident in my ability to decide if the games are on the square. Any sugggestions or should I avoid these games? Thank You.


  • A new survey
    Posted by: wildbill (wba712@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Monday, 24 July 2000, at 3:19 a.m.

    David,

    The one survey I think everyone thinks about that: What are the odds that at sometime in the next year (or two or three, whatever arbitrary figure you want to use), will Paradise fold up and not pay people off. Everyone I talk to that fears online gaming has this reason in mind, cheating come down the list a bit, usually after if its legal.


  • What These Surveys Show
    Posted by: David Sklansky (Dsklansky@aol.com)
    Posted on: Monday, 24 July 2000, at 6:06 a.m.

    There are a few points to be made about the results of the three surveys I instigated.

    1. About 90% of those who answered dismissed computer type cheating (as opposed to collusion) as very unlikely, in spite of knowledge of Ed Hill's results. Therefore, those who say that my similar public skepticism proves alterior motives have been effectively rebutted. Many of those who answered this survey are brilliant guys who should not be dismissed lightly. Even professional paranoid Abdul Jalib was in this camp. (Yes, I understand that this doesn't prove I don't have alterior motives. It only shows that my own public statements are not good evidence for it.)

    2.Many of those same posters who highly doubted funny business, still expressed concerns and misgivings, that Paradise and other poker sites should read carefully and address appropriately. Ray Zee was particularly harsh, which should lay to rest any supiscions that we would let advertising revenue influence our public opinions.

    3. Those few of you who think there is a very large chance of cheating, especially with the express consent of management, need to look long and hard at themselves. You need to fix something that is almost certainly causing you harm in other aspects of your life, whether it be your poker results or something else. The fact that so many smart successful people, including even Abdul, voted as they did, should give you pause. It means you probably have one of two possible problems: A psychological predisposition to irrational distrust, or a flaw in your method of evaluating all of the available evidence (eg. probability, Baye's Theorum, economic incentive, human nature etc.). These subjects could of course be discussed in great detail but I will leave that to others. In any case, you would surely admit that if you do in fact have these flaws it will lead to incorrect decisions in poker and elsewhere. (In the case of internet poker, a viscious cycle could ensue whereby weak play [for instance you put too many people on bluffs] causes poor results, causing further distrust etc.)

    Unfortunately those who have these problems, are I fear, very unlikely to admit them. Possibly seeing all these very opposite opinions by these highly qualified people will do the trick. It is important to understand that what I am saying would remain true even if it was to come out that Paradise or others were indeed cheating. If that were to happen it would not invalidate my words. Rather it would be a case of a one or two percent shot coming in. Please understand this. One key aspect of success is the ability to assign accurate probabilities to various eventualities. Those of you who assigned a high probability to Paradise shenanigans, are almost certainly assigning probabilities wrongly, regardless of the eventual outcome, and you need to find out why you are doing such things.


  • pc suggestions for net poker
    Posted by: Hrothgar
    Posted on: Monday, 24 July 2000, at 8:40 a.m.

    Before I proceed with my plans of world domination through cheating, hacking, and colluding in online poker, I was wondering if anyone out there can give me some hardware recommendations for someone playing two hands at a time (screen res, etc.).


  • new survey: federal investigations
    Posted by: Matt
    Posted on: Monday, 24 July 2000, at 10:43 a.m.

    What are the chances that twoplustwo, and the online industry are under surveillance by the FBI?


  • A new survey:how many 2/3 needed?
    Posted by: Matt
    Posted on: Monday, 24 July 2000, at 11:59 a.m.

    How many congressional bills need a 2/3 majority to pass the US Congress. This assumes that it is a straight bill, not a veto overide. I believe that the answer will be near zero. Shouldn't the Republican majority committee members have to explain why a gaming law was exempted from regular US law?


  • how many here cheat on taxes?
    Posted by: Gary
    Posted on: Monday, 24 July 2000, at 12:21 p.m.

    Everyone will say they don't cheat on their taxes. Is that credible? No.


  • Why Online Low Limtis are Beatable
    Posted by: Bartholemew (bart@yahoo.com)
    Posted on: Monday, 24 July 2000, at 2:51 p.m.

    I was playing 5-10 on Planet sitting one right of cutoff with T9o. 4 callers to me and the cutoff just posted as a new player. I called, 7 saw the flop of T94 with 2 diamonds. All check to me I bet and get 3 callers. Turn is the Ace of diamonds. Two checks to me and I bet. Button calls, UTG calls. River is a Ten. Check to me I bet and UTG calls. I show he folds. I get a hand history to find out what he called with without ever betting and find out he was holding QJo. He called the river with a busted straight draw without even a pair or a King in his hand. And he's playing 5-10. Why does anyone want to move up??


  • cheating may not be traditional
    Posted by: backdoor (frankersteinross@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Monday, 24 July 2000, at 11:23 p.m.

    Consider the following: with the combination of casual collusion and less sinister cheating online poker could prove difficult to beat. By less sinister cheating I mean perhaps merely the hand histories of players could be intercepted and or sold/given to certain players. For example a house player may have access to players histories, perhaps via this so-called "renegade employee" referred to in other posts. This would be a significant advantage, one could conclude exact pre flop starting requirements, bluffing frequencies, and a wide range of extremely useful tactical information. This type of cheating is not traditional in the poker room sense and is not detectable by an outside observer such as Roy Cooke. Could anyone with expertise in computer hacking comment on how difficult it might be to intercept or otherwise gather this type of data? This combined with both casual and sophisticated collusion would leave a regular player at the very least at a disadvantage. This is not to suggest I have an iota of evidence of this; it is merely a suggestion that perhaps jumping to a conclusion that there has to be non ramdom cards or serious hacking is not necessary to swing a small poker edge into negative expectation. Just for your consideration and elaboration. PS. In brief communications with Mr. Hill he related that he had dropped out of the 2+2 debate and who can blame him.


  • Online Holdem versus the ''Pit"
    Posted by: Wiseguy
    Posted on: Tuesday, 25 July 2000, at 3:37 a.m.

    I hate No. Cal Casinos. The 'Pit' is Colma. This may be an over-reacion on my part but after playing a bit on Paradise (played 15-30 and 3-6 to warm up) I have not played for at least a year. I found the 15-30 games softish. 3-6 was very good. The game is too early to be passed any judgement on. I am not sure about this noise about scams.....

    Take this, I suspect scams in LIVE casinos at times ! I have quit playing cause every time I went into Colma - my stomack turned (and it was not only the food). Ok - call me a stuck up snob, maybe you are right but I am no fool. I would not play anywhere if I suspected a scam. So what was Ed Hills problem - he lost on one session ? Please, I am very curious. Wiseguy


  • Look at this Paradise Hand...Any Thoughts?
    Posted by: Joe (JoeBlow1980@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Tuesday, 25 July 2000, at 10:30 a.m.

    I watched this hand unfold this morning while getting ready for work this morning. Would anyone consider this suspicious, or a hand shuffling glitch. Its was the 2nd 4 of a kind I observed with in about 30 minutes. I've pasted the entire Paradise print out so as not to get flamed or accused of tampering. Here ya go.... Game #15299725 - $2/$4 Hold'em - 2000/07/25-06:54:50 (CST) Table "Tahiti" (real money) -- Seat 2 is the button Seat 1: A Man ($182.50 in chips) Seat 2: speedyd21 ($131 in chips) Seat 3: glowworm ($60 in chips) Seat 4: trip7 ($111 in chips) Seat 5: moffen ($92 in chips) Seat 6: SCOTT327 ($14 in chips) Seat 7: FLOPASET ($156 in chips) Seat 8: kingsnake ($56 in chips) Seat 9: elleon ($66 in chips) glowworm: Post Small Blind ($1) trip7 : Post Big Blind ($2) Dealing... Dealt to A Man [ Ad ] Dealt to A Man [ 2d ] moffen : Fold SCOTT327: Fold FLOPASET: Raise ($4) kingsnake: Call ($4) elleon : Fold A Man : Raise ($6) speedyd21: Fold glowworm: Fold trip7 : Call ($4) FLOPASET: Call ($2) kingsnake: Call ($2) *** FLOP *** : [ Ah Td Ac ] trip7 : Check FLOPASET: Check kingsnake: Bet ($2) A Man : Call ($2) trip7 : Raise ($4) FLOPASET: Fold kingsnake: Call ($2) A Man : Raise ($4) trip7 : Raise ($4) kingsnake: Fold A Man : Call ($2) *** TURN *** : [ Ah Td Ac ] [ Th ] trip7 : Bet ($4) A Man : Raise ($8) trip7 : Raise ($8) A Man : Raise ($8) trip7 : Call ($4) *** RIVER *** : [ Ah Td Ac Th ] [ As ] trip7 : Check A Man said, "now what?????" A Man : Bet ($4) trip7 : Call ($4) *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $82 | Rake: $3 Board: [ Ah Td Ac Th As ] A Man bet $34, collected $82, net +$48 (showed hand) [ Ad 2d ] (four of a kind, aces) speedyd21 didn't bet (folded) glowworm lost $1 (folded) trip7 lost $34 (showed hand) [ Tc Ts ] (four of a kind, tens) moffen didn't bet (folded) SCOTT327 didn't bet (folded) FLOPASET lost $6 (folded) kingsnake lost $10 (folded) elleon didn't bet (folded)


  • Ed Hill's response to David
    Posted by: Ed Hill (winner777@aol.com)
    Posted on: Tuesday, 25 July 2000, at 7:18 p.m.

    <<<3. Those few of you who think there is a very large chance of cheating, especially with the express consent of management, need to look long and hard at themselves. You need to fix something that is almost certainly causing you harm in other aspects of your life, whether it be your poker results or something else. The fact that so many smart successful people, including even Abdul, voted as they did, should give you pause. It means you probably have one of two possible problems: A psychological predisposition to irrational distrust, or a flaw in your method of evaluating all of the available evidence (eg. probability, Baye's Theorum, economic incentive, human nature etc.). These subjects could of course be discussed in great detail but I will leave that to others. In any case, you would surely admit that if you do in fact have these flaws it will lead to incorrect decisions in poker and elsewhere. (In the case of internet poker, a viscious cycle could ensue whereby weak play [for instance you put too many people on bluffs] causes poor results, causing further distrust etc.)

    Unfortunately those who have these problems, are I fear, very unlikely to admit them. Possibly seeing all these very opposite opinions by these highly qualified people will do the trick. It is important to understand that what I am saying would remain true even if it was to come out that Paradise or others were indeed cheating. If that were to happen it would not invalidate my words. Rather it would be a case of a one or two percent shot coming in. Please understand this. One key aspect of success is the ability to assign accurate probabilities to various eventualities. Those of you who assigned a high probability to Paradise shenanigans, are almost certainly assigning probabilities wrongly, regardless of the eventual outcome, and you need to find out why you are doing such things. >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have refrained from saying this in the past, but here goes: 1. Early 80's, Stardust cheating scandal. 2. Mid 80's, Maxim cheating scandal. Never made public knowledge. 3. Mid to late 80's, Dunes cheating scandal. Never made public knowledge.

    In all three of these incidents, the casino itself was not to blame; it was the people that the casino employed. Either way, I don't think that matters to the people that got their money stolen from them. These people trusted the casino to hire people that were honest, and that didn't happen.

    American Coin in the early 80's had the concession to put all the slots in the Vegas bars. What a business. You would have to be crazy to cheat well I guess they were. Gaming caught them with chips in their video poker machines.

    The video poker machines at Sycuan were always so high that I was too suspicious to play them. It didn't seem right that the jackpots were always big overlays. Nothing became of it; they got caught cheating in the blackjack before any suspicion was drawn to the machines. Were the owners to blame, probably not. The floor-people were bringing in marked cards so that certain players could cheat the player bankers. Again, I don't think it matters to the people that were cheated who exactly was to blame.

    While still poker room manager of the Mirage, Eric Drache is supposedly caught cheating Ralph Morton. Mirage replaces him, but am I to assume that nothing ever happened in the Mirage in the big games when the poker room manager is involved in a scandal?

    None of this has kept me from playing; I have always done real well playing poker. It didn't stop me from giving Paradise a shot. I encountered very sub-par results, had five friends that played real good, all sharing the same results. Had an e-mail conversation with Nolan Dalla, who also had a few friends that play well, all having the same very poor results. I talked to Roy Cooke who told me, "that a few good players he knew all had poor results in Paradise, and were all winning at Planet." This caused me to seriously question Paradise.

    I thought that an open forum was to share opinions for the good of the group? Apparently I am mistaken. You personally asked me to put my Paradise post on your forum. What was your purpose? Evidently, to refute what I said.

    You conducted a poll, got opinions that matched yours, and from what I gather in the above exert of your post, are of the opinion that anybody who thinks that there is a high probability that Paradise is on the not on the square, is some kind of lunatic.

    In my original post, I stated, "this was either the worst run of cards that entire group of good players have ever seen, or something was wrong in Paradise." Judging from those poor results, considering that this is an unregulated gaming outfit based in Costa Rica, it seemed to me that it is not too illogical to question the integrity of the outfit. I guess in your opinion and your panel of intelligent people it is.

    Everybody you find seems to be doing real good in Paradise, I find this odd. Do you think that there is a possibility that you are not being told the truth? You are viewed by many to be a God and a lot of these people consider them your disciples. Do I really think that they are not telling you the truth? No, most of them wouldn't lie to you, but I could see where some would, if for no other reason ego. Now for the real question, are these people really winning? Technically, yes. What are their hourly rates? You could ask somebody that has played 40 hours a week, in two games, for 9 months how are they doing? They would say, "Killing it, I am up $10,000." Would they offer the fact that they have played an equivalent to 2880 hours and are therefore making $3.47 per hour, I doubt it.

    I knew going in that I would catch a lot of heat for making my original statement, but I figured it better to take the heat than keep my mouth shut and allow my fellow poker players to "maybe" get cheated.

    In my opinion it is our duty to poker to insure that our fellow poker players are not cheated. Cheating does happen. Is Paradise cheating, I don't know? Do I question their integrity, yes.


  • Why dosen't Ed Hill release his hand histories?
    Posted by: Joe (JoeBlow1980@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Wednesday, 26 July 2000, at 10:28 a.m.

    I keep reading about this terrible run of luck/cheating/collusion where the Ed Hill's better hands were beat. It would help me to see 20 or 30 of Ed's hands where he got these bad beats. I used to watch the big boys play from time to time. Ed Hill was often one of the 10/20 players. As I recall most of the time Ed was taking pots without a showdown. I am sure this is partly because he is a well known winning player. Maybe he ran into someone who didn't know he was so good. He is also the only player I've ever seen have pocket AA and flop AAx.

    Posting Ed Hill's hands or hand numbers here would go a long way in answering a few of the Paradise questions.


  • Hand histories and mucked river calls on Paradise
    Posted by: wahnfried
    Posted on: Wednesday, 26 July 2000, at 12:20 p.m.

    I am new to Holdem and learning while playing at the low limit tables on ParadisePoker.

    I have never been to a real live card room, but there is one thing on PP, which I just can't imagine to be a real live rule:

    If you call your opponent on river and you lose and muck your cards, your hand is still shown on hand history, not only for you but for everyone.

    Isn't this in contrast to usual habits?


  • Rebuttal for Mr. Sklansky
    Posted by: Avocado Fats
    Posted on: Wednesday, 26 July 2000, at 4:58 p.m.

    I have been reading some of your posts regarding the outcomes of the different surveys you submitted for our consideration. I would first like to point out that Ed Hill is, as always, a true gentleman of the highest class, despite being a world class poker master. His own postings on these matters are extremely well put - EVERYONE HERE should give them due consideration.

    For one thing, I find it disturbing that you would suggest that those of us who have any doubt regarding the honesty of an unregulated casino have one or more personal and/or emotional problems. I believe, like most thinking, intelligent people, that critical thinking is NOT a quality that is indicative of mental illness. All brilliant people engage in the activity. To insinuate that we have some kind of emotional problems because we engage in the pursuit is suspect. There are SO many examples of such activity in REGULATED CASINOS, why SHOULDN'T we have doubts about an UNREGULATED casino? Why should we be denigrated and insulted for having perfectly reasonable doubts?

    You implore us to listen to people like Abdul (whom I respect) when they suggest that the odds that there is some kind of cheating are 1 in 10000. This is complete nonsense. More than 1 in 10000 REGULATED casinos cheat, so why aren't the odds at least as good for a thoroughly UNREGULATED one? Would you be willing to accept a wager where I offered you 5000:1 odds that there is cheating by the management? If you believe that there is only a 1 in 10000 chance of it you should gladly accept.

    You suggest that we need some kind of help with our personal problems - what about yourself? I remember when you offered to bet me 50 thousand dollars that you were more intelligent than I. I accepted. I haven't heard from you since. Perhaps YOU have some kind of mental illness that you should seek help for?

    Incidentally, I belive the correct spelling is ULTERIOR, not alterior.

    I really do not understand what is wrong with you. You are just a nobody who plays a funny card game all the time. Do NOT preach to me. I do not respect your judgement in matters regarding my emotional health.

    AF


  • Still Can't Understand
    Posted by: Avocado Fats
    Posted on: Wednesday, 26 July 2000, at 5:11 p.m.

    The poor logic being used in these arguments still bewilders me. I love Ed Hill's posts - thank you for them. Maybe you will open some eyes around here.

    People claim that PP won't cheat because they have a good thing going, why ruin it? Yet we have seen so many examples of people messing up a 'good thing' by trying to make it 'better.' See Ed's posts for more.

    Why would an accountant embezzle from a client? Accountants are well paid. Why ruin a good thing? Yet they do. And here's the clincher - THEY CAN GET CAUGHT. *PP CANNOT* Remember this - they can NEVER - EVER - get caught.

    AF


  • answer to Sklansky on what surveys show
    Posted by: Ray Springfield
    Posted on: Wednesday, 26 July 2000, at 5:56 p.m.

    You have some valid points. My temper at times causes me to tilt occasionally at poker. It turns me into only a modest winner rather than a significant one. Nevertheless, I don't believe things are kosher at Paradise.

    Recently I have been observing Planet Poker, and their algorithms seem to have eradicated the four card flush board problems they used to have. Perhaps Mr.Caro has had a positive influence on the practices of that operation. Planet used to be the industry leader until they were hacked. If positive steps continue, then I predict that will return to prominence.

    Still, I find several of your assumptions biased. Collusion can exist at all levels of play. A poker acquaintance in Denver recently made $900.00 at 2-4 on Paradise in 2 four hour sessions. I don't think he was colluding, but the dollar figure shows what can come off even a low limit table in a brief period. House cheating even at this level would prove lucrative. As a matter of fact, if I were cheating with confederates, card showing programs, or colluding then I would do it at a level that would avoid suspicion from experts such as yourself (3-6,5-10, perhaps 10-20).

    Secondly, your surveys are not scientifically based. The same people screamed last year that I was a lunatic for suggesting that Planet Poker was hacked. They did call me a paranoid lunatic, and worse. I turned out to be correct. Now I believe that Planet is probably more straight than Paradise. I'm not playing at either, however. The fact that the majority of posters on twoplustwo see things in one light does not make their vision correct.

    Respectfully,

    Ray Springfield


  • Ed Hill's hand histories
    Posted by: Joe (JoeBlow1980@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 11:13 a.m.

    I beleive Paradise can pull hand histories for any player, table or time period. Recently at my request they gave me a history of my account from the beginning. At the time i'd played over 26,000 hands. I didn't ask for old hand histories, but we all know they keep them on file. Certianly they can run a search for Ed Hill's hands.

    Maybe Paradise is cheating. I just don't see it. I've had long runs with crappy cards, just like live poker. I've also had long runs with incredible cards. Once making over $1000 at 3/6 in about 8 hours(playing 2 tables at once), just like I've done (5/10 table)in live play.

    I would beleive they were skimmimg a little off every player rather than picking one or more players and busting they down to zero. There are too many untraceable ways for paradise to cheat if they wanted. Why not pick out rich players with a gambling habit who can't play worth a damm. We see them in casinos all the time. They keep rebuying and keep losing. The list could go on forever.

    When I play well I win, when I play poorly I lose. There are more reasons I play internet poker badly than in a live game. Trying to get in a few hands before dinner. Getting to comfortable. Running to get something between hands. Surfing the net. Just not taking / having the time to calculate the correct odds. Its too easy to hit that call button on the run back to the computer as it beeps.

    I am sure Ed's vist to Paradise and following report with be informative. Ed Hill has a great reputation where ever he speaks and plays. For everyone's sake, I hope he just had a run of really bad luck. If Paradise proves it self honest Ed should be back playing and winning in no time. Even my back luck has an begining and thank goodnes an END!


  • Watergate in Paradise
    Posted by: JayNT (jaynt@optonline.net)
    Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 11:16 a.m.

    DS has come to the conclusion that paradise is probably not cheating, or aware of or condoning in house cheating because

    1) They are making so much money legitimately it would be stupid of them to risk it all by cheating. After all, all it takes is one person to find out and blow the whistle to ruin everything.

    2) Most of the best and brightest minds contributing to this Forum agree that the chances that they are cheating are slim. Anyone who goes against the consensus is guilty of fuzzy thinking and poor situation analysis and should look to themselves for the reasons for their insecurities.

    In 1971, the chances that George McGovern, Ed Muskie or Eugene McCarthy were going to be able to wrest the presidency from the Republicans were quite slim. Still, someone who had reached a prominent position in the Committee to Re-elect the President thought it a good idea to try and short circuit the Democratic momentum (which barely existed) by engaging in flagrantly illegal acts.

    When this was bungled some of the brightest minds in the country, people with dubious scruples and tainted motives, decided to commit more illegal acts to cover up the first stupid and ill-advised act. People like, HR Haldeman, John Ehrlicjman, John Dean, Attorney General John Mitchell, Chuck Colson, Jeb Macgruder, Harvey kalmbach, G. Gordon Liddy, E. Howard Hunt, Richard Milhouse Nixon, Spiro agnew all thought it worth everything to act criminally.They had nothing to gain and everything to lose.

    Now, if you asked many of the best and brightest minds on the political scene at the time what they thought the chances of the White House being directly involved in the break-in or the cover up were they would probably come up with the same percentages that your survey came up with. And the others would have been labeled paranoid.

    The committeee to re elect was conmducting an extensive campaign against the potential candidates in the Democratic party, many people were involved and all it would have taken was one whistle blower to ruin everything. That didn't stop them.

    Why did George Mallory attempt to climb Everest? Because it was there. Why would someone, of high intelligence, risk his future and reputation to try and hack into paradise poker? To see if it's possible. You ask why would Paradise want to cheat the customers, their bread and butter? The answer might be as easy as the answer to why a dog licks himself.


  • My take on Avacoda vs Sklansky
    Posted by: asd
    Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 7:13 p.m.

    I was reading this current thread with great interest. I for one think I will have to side with Avacodo on this issue. I find it amusing that Mr. skalnsky, s self-professed "genius" would find it necessary to resort to name calling in order to get his point across.

    Is there cheating on Pardise? I doubt it. But I also doubt that Skalsky is in fact a genius. I'll admit he looks like your typical math nerd but ill be willing to wager a fiar amount he that he is no genius. Sure he may be smarter than his peers but you have to take a look at his peers. Oh, they are mostly poker players. I'm still waiting for a poker player to come up with a cure for cancer. Lets face it, the average poker player is just not smart. Dont you think if Skalnsky were truly a genius he would be in a field where at least some degree of intellect is necessary? something like engineering or computers or even the medical field.

    I'll admit his knowledge of statistic is quite good but then again statistics is not all that difficult. Even I, who is definately not a genius, was able to breeze through my stat courses in college. You didnt see to many people copareing the difficluty of a stats class to a physics class.

    I also find it amusing that skalnsky constanty find the need to debase tournamnet and big bet poker players. Big bet poker is definately harder than limit poker. If in fact big bet poker were so easy dont you think Sklansky would be up there beating the game? Or if tournment were really that easy wouldnt you see his name a lot in card player? The fact is skalnsky can beat the middle limit games and thats it.

    Is Sklansy smart? Yes. Is he a genius? Probably not. Maybe about 500 to 1 against.


  • To Ed Hill.
    Posted by: David Sklansky (Dsklansky@aol.com)
    Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 8:52 p.m.

    As you can see below Ed, a number of people have lumped you in with them (One thing they seem to have in common is that they never, to my recollection, post on any of our strategy forums where logical flaws can be exposed in a more slam dunk fashion.) I have a sneaking suspicion, knowing you as I do, that you are not particularly happy having these fellows invoking you in their cause. Perhaps you might like to clarify things.


  • Sheer Lunacy
    Posted by: PR (pokerpete@earthlink.net)
    Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 11:02 p.m.

    I have been reading the posts here for a couple of months and can't help but finally post a message of my own calling you all lunatics for endlessly debating the whole question of cheating. It seems to me that some new poster can endlessly keep postulating some new idea for how Paradise is ripping everyone off. Even a first-hand inspection by some knowledgable inspector could probably be fooled if the conspirators/renegade were cagey enough. It seems to me that the bottom line is that everyone who is serious about winning should keep their own records. If they are losing after about 500 hours, they have a choice between the two obvious conclusions. Either they have been cheated enough to make their play unprofitable or it never was profitable to begin with. But until such time as someone comes forth with hard proof against paradise, this debate will rage endlessly (and pointlessly, though that is just my opinion). Anyone who is winning (including myself) is naturally going to be of the mindset that paradise is straight, the losers (i would guess) would be more inclined to argue otherwise. But the point is not who is on which side of the debate. Simply, that neither side is ever going to sway the other. If someone really wants to do something constructive on this forum, why not organize some sort of non-profit org. which can watchdog all of these poker sites, something similar to what the Internet Gambling Commission does for online gambling sites. Or maybe they themselves would be willing to do it. And for those of you who are still inclined to debate topics for which neither side can ever furnish evidence and the arguement can go on endlessly, I will so be launching a forum of my own dedicated to debating the question of which came first, the chicken or the egg, so we can leave this for the discussion of productive topics which will ultimately contribute something to the online poker experience.


  • Is David Sklansky Vulcan ??
    Posted by: Deep-throat
    Posted on: Friday, 28 July 2000, at 6:29 a.m.

    I have read many of David post as "this is illogical" or "your statement has logic flaws" etc. What is this ?? Sometime a persons logic is just different from yours or perhaps his written reasoning has some need of chiseling. But accept them. Paradise is a client of 2+2 - they are biast !!! David is biast. This site has a competition and if you (Gary) are not treated well here, you can always go there. I am not going to take sides in the cheating issue but I KNOW that anything can happen and Paradise may not even be aware. One can just have logging turned on in their server and play on the net while watching the unix box. (provided there are using some unix boxes but experiencing the speed my bet, it's not NT). I work at a institutional broker/trader - their client server application is far more sophisticated but you can see at all times what the client machines are doing. What I am saying the we have millions changing hands and I can watch it !! Why do you think Paradise would be different ? A rogue employee can even log in from afar (his house) and play at the same time ??? There is no amount of VV or any of this non-sense would fix that. All client servers have levels of logging real time and this can be viewed easily.

    I am not saying that this is happening but *could be* and you would never know. I am working on a distributed system that has clients on the floor (NYSE) and in London, TelAviv.... anywhere. I can watch it from my cube if I know what to look for. David this is real !! Wakey, Wakey, and drop the Tupac talk please !!!!


  • Major reason for skewed distribution complaints
    Posted by: M (mmmmmm@excelonline.com)
    Posted on: Friday, 28 July 2000, at 4:40 p.m.

    One major reason we are seeing quite a few complaints about "skewed distribution" is possibly that the internet forums naturally offer what may be akin to a survey of sorts. In live poker, we may run into the occasional player who is simply running incredibly badly or has just seen a series of incredible hands. But we are not going around asking people throughout the cardrooms about this.

    Since the internet forums are a "gathering place" where such tropics are discussed, we hear from more people running badly than we would otherwise hear from. Since one major topic is the fairness or randomness of the distributions, we hear about this quite a bit more than we hear about people running equivalently badly or "strangely" in live poker. Since Paradise has by far the largest player base, the sample size of players there is larger. It is inevitable that amongst a large player base and 15 million hands that a relatively small number of players will see things they have never seen before. Perhaps we have just facilitated hearing about it more.

    There are certainly other factors at work as well; I am just suggesting that this is perhaps one primary reason we have heard so much about it on these forums. If we could conduct an equivalent widespead long-term "survey" about odd results and running badly in live poker, I wonder if the responses might not be distributed similarly. I for one have had "incredible" bad runs, and strange runs, at live poker over the years and I have heard about others experiencing this as well. But ordinary conversation does not provide nearly the opportunity for so many to weigh in on one topic. Add to this the fact that internet poker is a "hot topic" and one which lends itself easily to theories about any number of dubious practices. There are many other factors at work here, but I suspect that the "survey" nature of these forums in themselves, and the large sample size drawn from, may have much to do with the reports we are hearing. It is inevitable that quite a few individuals will experience the most extraordinary results, and since this is internet poker, many of them probably read these forums. Anyone experiencing wild results online and reading these forums would in turn be fairly likely to post as well.


  • New forum: Paradise/Hill/Sklansky/Dead Horse n/t
    Posted by: Joe (JoeBlow1980@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Friday, 28 July 2000, at 4:49 p.m.

    nt


  • The Online Poker Dilemma (Long)
    Posted by: thecat (thecat_08021@yahoo.com)
    Posted on: Friday, 28 July 2000, at 8:17 p.m.

    There have been a lot of allegations and name calling concerning Paradise Poker. Both sides in this discussion have made logical and reasonable arguments. The only consensus seems to be that there is potential for abuse and cheating. I am proposing that both sides in this discussion combine their efforts and specifically identify the potential problems and possible solutions. I look forward to hearing from both sides in this discussion.

    Dealing, Shuffling, & Random Number Generation (RNG) - 1)Numerous players have complained about too many quads and too many bad beats at Paradise Poker while claiming these problems donít exist at Planet Poker. 2)Paradise created their own random number generator. Random number generation seems fairly straight forward, but is actually an advanced topic in computer science. The only way to validate the effectiveness and distribution characteristics of a random number generator is through extensive testing and analysis. The problem is that Paradiseís random number generator is based in part on mouse and keyboard movements from players. How do you perform extensive testing and analysis when the results are based on player interaction? You could attempt to simulate player activity, but this adds a level of uncertainty to the results. See http://www.paradisepoker.com/rng.html for more information. 3)Planet Poker does not use external factors like mouse and keyboard movements in their random number generators. 4)Dealing & Shuffling is relatively straightforward and not likely to be a problem, but needs to be checked. 5)Problems with the random number generator or dealing & shuffling algorithms could explain some of the alleged problems with hand distributions.

    Direct Server Hacking - 1)Should be a very minimal threat at any online poker site. 2)The game server should be completely separate from the development and support systems. The game server and its terminals should be in a separate controlled work area. This may seem extreme, but is essential to prevent back door access to the game server by rogue employees. 3)The game server firewall should restrict all non-client traffic. 4)There should be no connections behind the game serverís firewall. 5)There should be no backdoors for remote programmer access.

    Collusion Detection - 1)In-house employees can handle the routine monitoring and detection of collusion. 2)There must be an independent review conducted by a qualified expert. 3)The independent expert will be looking for ALL suspicious activity. The expert will be looking for any activity that would indicate that the system has been compromised. The expert will be able to identify collusion, hacking from internal or external sources, or intentional management abuse. 4)The expert must operate independently and secretly from the internal staff. 5)The expert must have unrestricted access to the system. 6)The expert needs to be more than just an expert poker player. 7)This person is essential for creating a system of checks and balances. 8)It is clearly in managementís best interest to implement such a system.

    Source Code Control - 1)There must be an audit trail of all software changes. 2)There must be an archive of ALL previous versions of ALL source code, objects, and executables. 3)Checksums should be recorded and verified for ALL source code, objects, and executables. 4)Document and verify what software changes where made by which programmers.

    Source Code - 1)How does Paradise Poker or Planet Poker test their software modifications? Custom tools and special coding in the system created for testing purposes could leave vulnerable back doors. 2)Examination of the client software by an experienced hacker should yield no useful information to the hacker. 3)The source code should be reviewed by a qualified independent software developer.

    Viruses - 1)Viruses could infect server or client applications. 2)Viruses could steal player hole cards or account information and passwords. 3)This is a minimal threat and is only included for completeness.

    SSL Encryption - 1)Paradise Poker uses OpenSSL encryption. See http://www.openssl.org/ for more details. 2)SSL provides commercial-grade encryption for software applications. Decryption of an intercepted packet by brute force decryption is far beyond the capabilities of most individuals and most governments. 3)SSL is extremely reliable and is widely used in e-commerce applications on the web. 4)Online poker is different from most e-commerce applications. SSL by itself does not address all the issues. a)Traffic Analysis Ė The fact that a client sent a packet to the server can be significant and useful information even when the packet is encrypted and unreadable. For example, do you use the betting action buttons? I use the check/fold button constantly. Someone monitoring my packet traffic could be 90% sure that I will fold if there is a bet. b)The information exchanged between the server and its clients is highly repetitive. The transmission of small highly repetitive packets that can be correlated against actual play is a potential problem.

    Financials - 1)What protection is there on the money in player accounts? a)Is the money insured against theft by an employee or principal of the company? b)Is the money insured against a bank failure? 2)Is the site financially sound or in danger of bankruptcy? 3)How is the money managed? Does the money get invested in the stock market? 4)This will become a bigger issue as the stakes continue to increase and the dollar values in players account increase.

    Certification of Online Poker sites - 1)Certification of online poker sites by an aggressive independent watchdog group is clearly in the best interest of ALL legitimate sites. If any poker site is caught doing the things Paradise has been accused of it will clearly hurt the entire industry. 2)The watchdog group must be independently managed and operated. A group formed by the industry to monitor itself would only be a rubber stamp approval of existing operations. 3)The watchdog group should implement a system allowing customers to directly complain about problems.

    Conclusion - Theoretically online poker can be safer and cleaner than live games. 1)No angle plays 2)No dealer mistakes 3)No marked cards 4)No stacked decks 5)No muggings 6)Collusion is a problem.


  • Costa Rican notes...
    Posted by: wildbill (wba712@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Saturday, 29 July 2000, at 2:17 a.m.

    Today in my dealings with my so called mob connections in Costa Rica I found out some stuff on Paradise that I thought I would share. Hell half of you all won't believe anything I say but I dont give a... I was talking with the "line manager" as his title says at a fairly big sports operation there. He was nice enough to hire a past girlfriend as his director of information systems, so if you want to think I get my connections from the mob, I am sorry disappoint you with this news. It was quiet today so he agreed to talk to me for awhile about what goes on and I told him I would tell people what he said on this board. He said everyone knows everyone else in the industry in San Jose, they even have a basketball league that all the books put teams in. Everyone is competitive, but yet everyone knows who is involved in what, but they keep it to themselves. He said think of it like the TV networks. They all are competing against one another, but in the end they all have somewhat similar goals and interests. They all know where the money is and they all know who is involved, but they all do things a little differently in search of becoming the most successful company in a competitive field.

    All the sports guys though think the poker guys are crazy since the poker customer is far more demanding than anyone in the online gaming business. Most online standard casinos are out catering to very small players who come online very rarely. The sports guys have players who come and go, most needing very little service since after all its just a line and the sports betting game is pretty well defined. The poker player however is a pain in the ass requiring constant attention and ugrades to his game. The poker players don't have many legitimate choices since they need a critical mass of having players around just to have a game so the whole name of the game is getting customers. When I asked him about cheating he said that if someone was cheating down there he is pretty sure word would have gotten out. News spreads very fast as there are only two zones where almost all the systems of the offshore books are handled and people who work at one operation that isn't doing so well get hired by another before they are out of work a day. I asked him about an employee doing the cheating and he said it could happen, but the security is fairly tight and in his operation as in most bigger shops, the people in marketing and accounting don't have access to the betting systems and vice versa. I told him that I think they should spread them out to different countries and he said he thought Paradise was doing that, but not certain about it. The only people that could probably do the cheating would be very high level people, but all these operations are run by a mix of owners so its very hard to do. Paradise would quite literally have to be a den of thieves, so if you all want to think that, I guess I can't change your minds.

    When I pressed the ownership issue that so many are concerned about, he said that ownership is one thing that no one really gives out for a couple of reasons. First of all, there are liability concerns as courts there don't always accept the principle of limited liability. If the owners never mention in documents their actual names, then they can generally avoid this hassle. Second is that some do fear becoming another Jay Cohen, arrested for a crime that never really happened. None of them have ever personally taken a bet on American soil for their current operations yet the Justice Department and our congress seems to think just being an American taking a bet even on foreign soil should be a crime. Lastly he just said it really seems to serve no purpose. The owners are just financial guys. Even guys that are suposedly starting up a book do it mostly with other people's backing. The wisest minds are just bit owners in the operations and brought in for thier expertise. He pointed out that Gary Bowman is well known for his sports operation yet he has sold off just about all of it to investors. He said if Nolan Dalla asks who the owners when he goes down there, they might even tell him but the names are just that, names that won't mean anything to anyone. If you are involved in the community down there you would know them, but to Americans they have no real significants. He ran off the name of one guy he knows down there that he is pretty sure is a good sized owner of Paradise, and to me it just sounded like a typical Jewish-American name. After all what do you guys want these names so you can harass them and claim they must be members of the mob???

    Overall I pretty much heard mostly what I knew or had figured was going on down there. These operations have no reason to cheat. Yeah you can say its there and its tempation, but don't you all know how many bookies I have met in my lifetime that said I got rich off 11/10? How about the online casino? For the price of about 5 slot machines, they can buy a complete casino package. Then they need about 1/10 the employees of a real casino and of course no expensive overhead and no food or beverage department either. The costs of four security guards covers their technology costs every month. They pay amongst the highest wages of any business in San Jose and yet that is still about half what a Vegas casino has to pay a cashier. Their staff totals are about the same size as the staff of cocktail servers in a regular casino. To top it off they pay the taxes of any regular operating office business in San Jose, which compares incredibly favorably to the 7% of gross profit tax Nevada gets from casinos and the even higher amounts other states extract from their casinos. Regular casinos are already cash cows, but these things are incredible. They totally lay sports and poker sites to waste in terms of margin, but fortunately for us, most people don't have any desire to play slots or roulette online. Otherwise we would face the same fate regarding poker and sports betting as we are seeing in Nevada these days. If you still want to think there is cheating, go ahead, but I know I will never see a reason to agree with you.


  • Finally, a real post not about Paradise
    Posted by: Bryan
    Posted on: Saturday, 29 July 2000, at 3:00 p.m.

    I've been playing poker for about 9 months. I learned to play and began on-line. As a mater of fact, I'd never played live until recently. Many people talk about the transition from live to online play and how online seems tougher, adjustments need to be made etc. I am one of the rare people who is now starting to play live every now and then. Since my transistion is different than most, how do you think I would fair offline? I am a constant winner online, have received several checks from Paradise over the last 6 months. It took me about 4 months to become profitable. Anyway, your comment on how the "new breed" of poker player wandering into live games having been "trained" online will fair??

    Bryan


  • My experiences at Paradise-sound familiar?
    Posted by: steve (steveylee@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Saturday, 29 July 2000, at 5:47 p.m.

    I've been playing on and off at Paradise Poker since they first opened. Playing 3-6 and 2-4, I have on 3 occasions been down 1k but have managed to get even every time. Everytime I got down 1k, I would quit for a month or two out of frustration but would eventually go back. I would then catch great cards and get back even. I dont feel that my style of play has really changed but what I do notice is that when I'm on a losing streak, my pocket pairs (AA,KK,QQ)dont hold up and when I'm on my comeback streak they hold up. I've read on this forum and rgp that at Paradise the long shot draws get there too often. I dont know if there are any facts to support this but my experiences tend to give credence to this idea. If Im a bad player than in the long run I should lose and If Im a good player than the converse that I would win should be true. But at Paradise, it seems that I'm a bad player for the first 1k but a good player after.


  • I was cheated on Paradise!
    Posted by: wildbill (wba712@hotmail.com)
    Posted on: Sunday, 30 July 2000, at 3:54 a.m.

    ...out of a pot that is when I clicked on the wrong spot and folded accidently.

    I just signed up for Paradise since I feel so secure now thanks to the recent surveys (yeah right!). I chatted with quite a few people about cheating and other stuff at our big limit 2-4 game and all of them said, "oh well". A couple pointed out they play at home games since there are no legal games around and those surely are more susceptible to cheating than Paradise and I had to agree. Everyone seemed to be having fun and I would think the most fun is had by those unlucky enough to be far from legal rooms.

    Playing there it just dawned on me. Maybe all the critics on here are just mad we get to go out and have fun playing poker! They because of their fears have to sit at home and write up scary tales of what lurks at Paradise. Seems like that element on this board are dour types that find things to fear in everything. They turn their skeptical eye on the game and forget that its just a game and to have fun with it. I can't think too many people on here are like Ed Hill trying to make a living off the game, so next time you do something during your recreational time, be sure to smile and enjoy it because it sure beats working.

    All the critics do is remind me of our wonderful congress people that feel they have an obligation to make sure we don't get the opportunity to lose our money. They probably don't want us having fun either. I just can't understand why you can't leave the people who choose to play online alone. If we are suckers and are getting cheated, well thats our problem and certainly not yours (our money too!). We are well aware of your beliefs and purported stories, but despite it all, we still play online and take our chances. Don't we deserve respect for that?


  • Question For The Big 3 (Malmuth, Sklansky, Zee)
    Posted by: Justin Honold (jhonold@bigfoot.com)
    Posted on: Sunday, 30 July 2000, at 3:19 p.m.

    by the way, the names were in alphabetic order ;]

    have any of you played poker for real money online? on paradise? do you do it on at least a semi-regular basis?


  • Paradise - Very Serious Message.
    Posted by: Aslan (bagir467@yahoo.com)
    Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 1:05 p.m.

    My account on Paradise was blocked on Saturday. I sent them an e-amil asking for the reason and here is what I got:

    "We have determined that several players (namely VIOLA,boyuk, and lkaer) were transferring funds into your account. These players machines have been unequivocally connected to your machine. Your account is being permanently closed.We have attached the various hands for your consideration, which clearly show these accounts dumping moeny into your account fraudulently. This matter is closed. No funds in your account will be sent to you. Paradise Poker is terminating this relationship and in addition all correspondence."

    I am totally confused by this. First, the hand histories that they attached have only "lkaer" - no "viola" or "boyuk". They show that I lost about half of the time, that everytime lkaer lost to me I either had the best hand or he had one pair or worse and folded on the river, that I lost to lkaer several times, that he lost to other players as well. But this is not my biggest concern. I realize that mistakes happen. I am surprized by Paradise refusal to even discuss the issue or ask me what I know about it. And, of course, refusal of returning money from my account is just plain stealing. There is about $2500 on the account. I am outraged by this theft. What do you think I should do? If they were in the USA I would have sued but how to get my money back from Costa Rica??? I e-mailed to them but got no reply.

    Sklansky, Malmuth, Zee, can you help? You place advertizements of a site that refuses to return money placed in good faith and refuses even to prove their case. This could happen to any player at any time.

    If anyone is interested, I can forward to you the hand histories. My nick is "Aslan"


  • Message to Aslan
    Posted by: Avocado Fats
    Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 5:15 p.m.

    I don't think anyone should be surprised by this. It has been a long time in coming. I would like to make a couple of comments.

    First of all, assuming that this story is true, I have no doubt that Aslan was up to some funny business and got caught. In that respect I can't say that I'm sorry for Aslan.

    On the other hand, Paradise was totally out of order for stealing Aslan's money. There is no excuse for what has been done. Paradise has stolen your money, and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

    I think we can safely upgrade the % chance that Paradise is dishonest to 100%.

    Also note that this can happen to any one of you at any time. You have been warned.

    AF


  • Would Aslan Give Permission
    Posted by: David Sklansky (Dsklansky@aol.com)
    Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 6:41 p.m.

    For Paradise to reply on this forum? It is possible that they are reluctant to do so otherwise. (Again however, it is idiotic to think that they are doing this because they are merely greedy. Same argument as before.)


  • In defense of PP
    Posted by: Deep-throat
    Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 7:34 p.m.

    If one gets caught colluding in the Bellagio it's very often just a suspicion. When you catch a guy acting with others the prof is the pudding so to speak. The network footprint and records of credit card deposits allegedly from other players cards. This is much different from barring you from a casino where you never have any evidence like this against you. Also in cultural imperialism (my favorite PC word) we should not assume our right to impose our F-d up judicial system. Nobody is going to Hague to the world court over this. I admit it's a bit strong move but this is by no means theft. If this guy was colluding that I think we are pointing the finger to the wrong direction. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, He is the guilty party. I would however be intersted to know if they are building a fund for pro players who have extened loses at PP ? (Funds, much akin to California jackpots. <:{}


  • Poll: Who thinks Aslan is guilty?
    Posted by: Gus
    Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 11:15 p.m.

    Results so far: 1 vote for guilty.


  • Re: No ones ever happy...
    Posted by: Jodder
    Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 11:29 p.m.

    My thoughts exactly!


  • Paradise mail continued(2)
    Posted by: David Sklansky
    Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 11:40 p.m.

    It should also be noted that we are not taking any money from anyone and in fact are sure to lose additional money in this fraud as some of the funds lost by the fraudulent players went to other players as the fraudulent accounts pathetically attempted to disguise their actions. The $2,500 in question will be returned to the credit cards that made the original purchases.

    In conjunction to the technical proof, the Hand Histories below are clearly show the obvious intentional losing of the fraudulent accounts to their related party Aslan. We have included samples from each of the three players.

    1. Please note the BLATANT folding of better hands even when the hand is checked to ensure Aslan wins the pot. 2. Please note the BLATANT raise, raise, call of hands that are visibly and guaranteed beaten (exposed cards in stud). 3. Please note how in each case with each player no matter the time they played, or the tables they played at, Aslan was sitting there at the exact same table even moving with them to different tables during the same session.

    David, we appreciate your concerns since this fraudulent act has been made a public ordeal. When blatant cheating is committed we must act and in this case we have. Having responded to your request we wonder if you may do us the courtesy of posting something based on the evidence we have provided, if you wish to post our email in its entirety you have our permission.

    If you have any further questions please let me know.

    Sincerely,

    Winston Paradise Poker Security

    lkaer - Aslan hands (this is an administrator hand history which shows the players hole cards in the summary - these are being published based on the fact the hands were engaged in fraud):


  • Paradise mail continued(3)
    Posted by: David Sklansky
    Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 11:45 p.m.

    Game #15576707 - $4/$8 7-card stud - 2000/07/27-19:42:15 (CST) Table "St. Lucia" [1016] (real money) Seat # 3: [$001075df] Aslan ($28.50 in chips) -- playing Seat # 7: [$001079de] lkaer ($568.00 in chips) -- playing Aslan : Ante ($0.50) lkaer : Ante ($0.50) Dealt to Aslan [ Qh ] Dealt to lkaer [ 3c ] Dealt to Aslan [ As ] Dealt to lkaer [ 3h ] Dealt to Aslan [ 6c ] Dealt to lkaer [ 8h ] Aslan : Bring-in ($2) lkaer : Raise ($4) Aslan : Call ($2) Dealt to Aslan [ 5s ] Dealt to lkaer [ Qd ] lkaer : Bet ($4) Aslan : Call ($4) Dealt to Aslan [ 9h ] Dealt to lkaer [ 5h ] lkaer : Bet ($8) Aslan : Call ($8) Dealt to Aslan [ Ac ] Dealt to lkaer [ Ah ] lkaer : Bet ($8) Aslan : Call ($8) Dealt to Aslan [ 3s ] Dealt to lkaer [ Jh ] lkaer : Fold Aslan : Winner -- doesn't show cards *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $48 | Rake: $1 Aslan bet $24.50, collected $48, net +$23.50 [ Qh As 6c 5s 9h Ac 3s ] (a pair of aces) lkaer lost $24.50 (folded) [ 3c 3h 8h Qd 5h Ah Jh ] (a flush, ace high) ----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- Game #15578283 - $8/$16 7-card stud - 2000/07/27-19:56:56 (CST) Table "Virgin Isles" [1018] (real money) Seat # 1: [$001079de] lkaer ($426.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 2: [$001026fd] sweet lou ($262.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 3: [$0010000a] QuadAces ($556.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 4: [$00105e4a] Phil King ($362.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 5: [$00100fa1] JoeFi ($398.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 6: [$00104358] ezed. ($487.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 7: [$001075df] Aslan ($122.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 8: [$00102497] 10JQKA ($173.00 in chips) -- sitting out lkaer : Ante ($1) sweet lou: Ante ($1) QuadAces: Ante ($1) Phil King: Ante ($1) JoeFi : Ante ($1) ezed. : Ante ($1) Aslan : Ante ($1) Dealt to lkaer [ 9d ] Dealt to sweet lou [ 9c ] Dealt to QuadAces [ 2c ] Dealt to Phil King [ 3d ] Dealt to JoeFi [ 6s ] Dealt to ezed. [ Tc ] Dealt to Aslan [ 4d ] Dealt to lkaer [ 5c ] Dealt to sweet lou [ Kc ] Dealt to QuadAces [ 7d ] Dealt to Phil King [ 8h ] Dealt to JoeFi [ 9s ] Dealt to ezed. [ Js ] Dealt to Aslan [ 8c ] Dealt to lkaer [ Qh ] Dealt to sweet lou [ 5s ] Dealt to QuadAces [ Qd ] Dealt to Phil King [ 6d ] Dealt to JoeFi [ 8d ] Dealt to ezed. [ 2s ] Dealt to Aslan [ 7h ] ezed. : Timed out ezed. : Bring-in ($4) Aslan : Raise ($8) lkaer : Raise ($16) sweet lou: Fold QuadAces: Fold Phil King: Fold JoeFi : Call ($16) ezed. : Timed out ezed. : Force All-in Aslan : Call ($8) Dealt to lkaer [ Ks ] Dealt to JoeFi [ 5d ] Dealt to ezed. [ Jd ] Dealt to Aslan [ 3h ] lkaer : Bet ($8) JoeFi : Call ($8) Aslan : Raise ($16) lkaer : Raise ($16) JoeFi : Call ($16) Aslan : Call ($8) Dealt to lkaer [ 6c ] Dealt to JoeFi [ 3c ] Dealt to ezed. [ 7c ] Dealt to Aslan [ Kd ] lkaer : Bet ($16) JoeFi : Call ($16) Aslan : Call ($16) Dealt to lkaer [ 6h ] Dealt to JoeFi [ Qs ] Dealt to ezed. [ 8s ] Dealt to Aslan [ Kh ] Aslan : Bet ($16) lkaer : Call ($16) JoeFi : Call ($16) Dealt to lkaer [ 4s ] Dealt to JoeFi [ 4h ] Dealt to ezed. [ Jh ] Dealt to Aslan [ Ac ] Aslan : Bet ($16) lkaer : Raise ($32) JoeFi : Fold Aslan : Raise ($32) lkaer : Call ($16) *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $23 | Side pot 1: $297 | Rake: $3 lkaer lost $121 [ 9d 5c Qh Ks 6c 6h 4s ] (a pair of sixes) sweet lou lost $1 (folded) [ 9c Kc 5s ] QuadAces lost $1 (folded) [ 2c 7d Qd ] Phil King lost $1 (folded) [ 3d 8h 6d ] JoeFi lost $73 (folded) [ 6s 9s 8d 5d 3c Qs 4h ] (high card queen) ezed. bet $5, collected $23, net +$18 (showed hand) [ Tc Js 2s Jd 7c 8s Jh ] (three of a kind, jacks) Aslan bet $121, collected $297, net +$176 (showed hand) [ 4d 8c 7h 3h Kd Kh Ac ] (a pair of kings) 10JQKA didn't bet ----------------------------------------------------- Game #15579074 - $8/$16 7-card stud - 2000/07/27-20:05:25 (CST) Table "Virgin Isles" [1018] (real money) Seat # 1: [$001079de] lkaer ($439.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 2: [$001026fd] sweet lou ($235.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 3: [$0010000a] QuadAces ($593.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 4: [$00105e4a] Phil King ($358.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 5: [$00100fa1] JoeFi ($310.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 6: [$00104358] ezed. ($502.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 7: [$001075df] Aslan ($167.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 8: [$00102497] 10JQKA ($170.00 in chips) -- playing lkaer : Ante ($1) sweet lou: Ante ($1) QuadAces: Ante ($1) Phil King: Ante ($1) JoeFi : Ante ($1) ezed. : Ante ($1) Aslan : Ante ($1) 10JQKA : Ante ($1) Dealt to lkaer [ 3d ] Dealt to sweet lou [ 3s ] Dealt to QuadAces [ 6h ] Dealt to Phil King [ Kh ] Dealt to JoeFi [ 2s ] Dealt to ezed. [ 5c ] Dealt to Aslan [ 4d ] Dealt to 10JQKA [ Ah ] Dealt to lkaer [ 7h ] Dealt to sweet lou [ Ad ] Dealt to QuadAces [ 9c ] Dealt to Phil King [ 4s ] Dealt to JoeFi [ 9h ] Dealt to ezed. [ 8h ] Dealt to Aslan [ Td ] Dealt to 10JQKA [ 4h ] Dealt to lkaer [ Qd ] Dealt to sweet lou [ 9s ] Dealt to QuadAces [ 3h ] Dealt to Phil King [ Qs ] Dealt to JoeFi [ Th ] Dealt to ezed. [ 3c ] Dealt to Aslan [ Jh ] Dealt to 10JQKA [ 7c ] ezed. : Bring-in ($4) Aslan : Raise ($8) 10JQKA : Fold lkaer : Raise ($16) sweet lou: Fold QuadAces: Fold Phil King: Fold JoeFi : Fold ezed. : Fold Aslan : Raise ($16) lkaer : Call ($8) Dealt to lkaer [ 5h ] Dealt to Aslan [ 8d ] lkaer : Bet ($8) Aslan : Raise ($16) lkaer : Call ($8) Dealt to lkaer [ 5s ] Dealt to Aslan [ 6c ] lkaer : Bet ($16) Aslan : Call ($16) Dealt to lkaer [ Ts ] Dealt to Aslan [ 5d ] lkaer : Bet ($16) Aslan : Raise ($32) lkaer : Raise ($32) Aslan : Call ($16) Dealt to lkaer [ Jc ] Dealt to Aslan [ Ac ] lkaer : Check Aslan : Bet ($16) lkaer : Fold Aslan : Winner -- doesn't show cards *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $217 | Rake: $3 lkaer lost $105 (folded) [ 3d 7h Qd 5h 5s Ts Jc ] (a pair of fives) sweet lou lost $1 (folded) [ 3s Ad 9s ] QuadAces lost $1 (folded) [ 6h 9c 3h ] Phil King lost $1 (folded) [ Kh 4s Qs ] JoeFi lost $1 (folded) [ 2s 9h Th ] ezed. lost $5 (folded) [ 5c 8h 3c ] Aslan bet $121, collected $233, net +$112 [ 4d Td Jh 8d 6c 5d Ac ] (high card ace) 10JQKA lost $1 (folded) [ Ah 4h 7c ] ----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- Game #15693589 - $8/$16 7-card stud - 2000/07/28-21:49:10 (CST) Table "Bikar" [1028] (real money) Seat # 1: [$001079de] lkaer ($356.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 2: [$00101f47] all gone ($727.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 3: [$00103f10] MAKEaRUN ($302.00 in chips) -- sitting out Seat # 4: [$00102457] antics ($2,187.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 5: [$00105c21] BarryB ($431.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 6: [$001075df] Aslan ($234.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 7: [$00102d6b] last try ($387.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 8: [$001076e6] slex2 ($844.00 in chips) -- playing lkaer : Ante ($1) all gone: Ante ($1) antics : Ante ($1) BarryB : Ante ($1) Aslan : Ante ($1) last try: Ante ($1) slex2 : Ante ($1) Dealt to lkaer [ Ad ] Dealt to all gone [ Tc ] Dealt to antics [ Kh ] Dealt to BarryB [ Qd ] Dealt to Aslan [ 9h ] Dealt to last try [ 5s ] Dealt to slex2 [ 6c ] Dealt to lkaer [ 9d ] Dealt to all gone [ Jh ] Dealt to antics [ 7c ] Dealt to BarryB [ Jd ] Dealt to Aslan [ Ks ] Dealt to last try [ 5d ] Dealt to slex2 [ 4c ] Dealt to lkaer [ 8h ] Dealt to all gone [ Qh ] Dealt to antics [ Kd ] Dealt to BarryB [ 4d ] Dealt to Aslan [ 6d ] Dealt to last try [ 8d ] Dealt to slex2 [ 2c ] slex2 : Bring-in ($4) lkaer : Raise ($8) all gone: Call ($8) antics : Raise ($16) BarryB : Fold Aslan : Call ($16) last try: Fold slex2 : Call ($12) lkaer : Call ($8) all gone: Call ($8) Dealt to lkaer [ 3d ] Dealt to all gone [ 2h ] Dealt to antics [ 6s ] Dealt to Aslan [ 2s ] Dealt to slex2 [ Th ] antics : Bet ($8) Aslan : Call ($8) slex2 : Call ($8) lkaer : Call ($8) all gone: Call ($8) Dealt to lkaer [ Ah ] Dealt to all gone [ Td ] Dealt to antics [ 9c ] Dealt to Aslan [ Qs ] Dealt to slex2 [ 8c ] lkaer : Bet ($16) all gone: Call ($16) antics : Call ($16) Aslan : Raise ($32) slex2 : Call ($32) lkaer : Raise ($32) all gone: Call ($32) antics : Call ($32) Aslan : Call ($16) slex2 : Call ($16) Dealt to lkaer [ 8s ] Dealt to all gone [ 2d ] Dealt to antics [ 6h ] Dealt to Aslan [ 9s ] Dealt to slex2 [ As ] lkaer : Bet ($16) all gone: Call ($16) antics : Call ($16) Aslan : Raise ($32) slex2 : Fold lkaer : Call ($16) all gone: Call ($16) antics : Call ($16) Dealt to lkaer [ 4s ] Dealt to all gone [ 7d ] Dealt to antics [ 4h ] Dealt to Aslan [ Qc ] lkaer : Check all gone: Check antics : Check Aslan : Bet ($16) lkaer : Raise ($32) all gone: Fold antics : Fold Aslan : Raise ($32) lkaer : Fold Aslan : Winner -- doesn't show cards *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $556 | Rake: $3 lkaer lost $137 (folded) [ Ad 9d 8h 3d Ah 8s 4s ] (two pair, aces and eights) all gone lost $105 (folded) [ Tc Jh Qh 2h Td 2d 7d ] (two pair, tens and twos) MAKEaRUN didn't bet antics lost $105 (folded) [ Kh 7c Kd 6s 9c 6h 4h ] (two pair, kings and sixes) BarryB lost $1 (folded) [ Qd Jd 4d ] Aslan bet $153, collected $572, net +$419 [ 9h Ks 6d 2s Qs 9s Qc ] (two pair, queens and nines) last try lost $1 (folded) [ 5s 5d 8d ] slex2 lost $73 (folded) [ 6c 4c 2c Th 8c As ] (high card ace) ----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- Game #15694631 - $8/$16 7-card stud - 2000/07/28-21:59:23 (CST) Table "Bikar" [1028] (real money) Seat # 1: [$001079de] lkaer ($293.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 2: [$00100cd0] celtics ($200.00 in chips) -- sitting out Seat # 3: [$00103f10] MAKEaRUN ($302.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 4: [$00102457] antics ($2,002.00 in chips) -- sitting out Seat # 5: [$00105c21] BarryB ($453.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 6: [$001075df] Aslan ($532.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 7: [$00102d6b] last try ($504.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 8: [$001076e6] slex2 ($750.00 in chips) -- playing lkaer : Ante ($1) MAKEaRUN: Ante ($1) BarryB : Ante ($1) Aslan : Ante ($1) last try: Ante ($1) slex2 : Ante ($1) Dealt to lkaer [ 2c ] Dealt to MAKEaRUN [ 6s ] Dealt to BarryB [ 4s ] Dealt to Aslan [ As ] Dealt to last try [ Th ] Dealt to slex2 [ 8d ] Dealt to lkaer [ 5h ] Dealt to MAKEaRUN [ 4d ] Dealt to BarryB [ 6h ] Dealt to Aslan [ Js ] Dealt to last try [ Qc ] Dealt to slex2 [ Jd ] Dealt to lkaer [ Kd ] Dealt to MAKEaRUN [ Kh ] Dealt to BarryB [ 2d ] Dealt to Aslan [ 2h ] Dealt to last try [ 7c ] Dealt to slex2 [ 8h ] BarryB : Bring-in ($4) Aslan : Call ($4) last try: Fold slex2 : Call ($4) lkaer : Raise ($8) MAKEaRUN: Fold BarryB : Call ($4) Aslan : Call ($4) slex2 : Call ($4) Dealt to lkaer [ 8s ] Dealt to BarryB [ 6d ] Dealt to Aslan [ Ac ] Dealt to slex2 [ 6c ] Aslan : Check slex2 : Check lkaer : Bet ($8) BarryB : Call ($8) Aslan : Call ($8) slex2 : Call ($8) Dealt to lkaer [ 3h ] Dealt to BarryB [ 9h ] Dealt to Aslan [ 4h ] Dealt to slex2 [ Ad ] slex2 : Check lkaer : Bet ($16) BarryB : Call ($16) Aslan : Raise ($32) slex2 : Fold lkaer : Raise ($32) BarryB : Fold Aslan : Raise ($32) lkaer : Call ($16) Dealt to lkaer [ Ts ] Dealt to Aslan [ 8c ] Aslan : Bet ($16) lkaer : Call ($16) Dealt to lkaer [ Jh ] Dealt to Aslan [ 7s ] Aslan : Bet ($16) lkaer : Fold Aslan : Winner -- doesn't show cards *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $243 | Rake: $3 lkaer lost $97 (folded) [ 2c 5h Kd 8s 3h Ts Jh ] (high card king) celtics didn't bet MAKEaRUN lost $1 (folded) [ 6s 4d Kh ] antics didn't bet BarryB lost $33 (folded) [ 4s 6h 2d 6d 9h ] (a pair of sixes) Aslan bet $113, collected $259, net +$146 [ As Js 2h Ac 4h 8c 7s ] (a pair of aces) last try lost $1 (folded) [ Th Qc 7c ] slex2 lost $17 (folded) [ 8d Jd 8h 6c Ad ] (a pair of eights) ----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- Game #15695212 - $8/$16 7-card stud - 2000/07/28-22:04:47 (CST) Table "Bikar" [1028] (real money) Seat # 1: [$001079de] lkaer ($165.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 2: [$00100cd0] celtics ($197.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 3: [$00103f10] MAKEaRUN ($294.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 4: [$00102457] antics ($1,999.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 5: [$00105c21] BarryB ($590.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 6: [$001075df] Aslan ($635.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 7: [$00102d6b] last try ($420.00 in chips) -- playing Seat # 8: [$001076e6] slex2 ($726.00 in chips) -- playing lkaer : Ante ($1) celtics : Ante ($1) MAKEaRUN: Ante ($1) antics : Ante ($1) BarryB : Ante ($1) Aslan : Ante ($1)


  • Re: Poll: Who thinks Aslan is guilty?
    Posted by: Dan Mullen (dwmullen@yahoo.com)
    Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 11:59 p.m.

    Is there any doubt?......

    Guilty as sin.

    If we try him as an adult (which this fool hardly is), we might be able to get the death penalty.


    Internet Gambling
    July 2000 Digest is provided by Two Plus Two Publishing and ConJelCo