GGPoker – “MoneyTaker69” superuser & new statistical anomalies
I’m the person who first exposed the superuser account “MoneyTaker69” on GG Poker, a case that has since been publicly discussed and acknowledged by GG.
My original exposé post:
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showp...
Since then I’ve run large-sample statistical analyses on a massive GG database of hands from winning regs (winners post-rake). Looking at overall run patterns – running under/above all-in EV, BBJ runouts, pure cooler spots – I’m seeing statistically significant deviations that effectively compress the edge between good and bad regulars by up to 3 bb/100 over big samples.
Combined with the already known PVI system (which clearly works to reduce the gap between winners and losers), this doesn’t look like normal variance but like a systematic reduction of regs’ edge.
At an appropriate time I’ll leak the full analyses (graphs, distributions, methodology, raw numbers) so anyone with a solid stats background can verify or try to break the conclusions.
good work, online sites needs to be better
Would be sweet if it ever happens.
Something smells off with GG...
i'm the person who first exposed the enron and theranos scandals. at the appropriate time i will release my findings on apple and nvidia. stay tuned
Doubt this is true and identifying a whale winning at 100bb/100 as being suspicious isn't much of a qualification that you are right on this.
identifying a whale winning at 100bb/100 as being suspicious isn't much of a qualification that you are right on this.
It wasnt even identified by OP, but by mining sites. OP just noticed it (as did many many others)
And the exact quote accompanying the screenshot of moneytaker was "Statistically, it's impossible to win 70 buy-ins in 8400 hands, let alone if you're a 53/17/4 fish. Can someone explain this graph to me?". Rarely has there been an expose with a question to explain, ususally its the explanation of it.
Shows that even though there are reasons to hate mining sites they do make it way more possible to spot cheaters like this.
But this time OP did his own analysis and research but hasnt shown any, I for one am not getting my hopes up for a solid piece 🙂
It wasnt even identified by OP, but by mining sites. OP just noticed it (as did many many others)And the exact quote accompanying the screenshot of moneytaker was "Statistically, it's impossible to win 70 buy-ins in 8400 hands, let alone if you're a 53/17/4 fish. Can someone explain this graph to me?". Rarely has there been an expose with a question to explain, ususally its the
Tell us you're affiliated with GG without telling us....😵
Have you ran anything on MTT DB's ? Great work sir, look forward to the release.
Hey, its the guy who doesnt know what an RNG is and thought poker was rigged because an AI chat couldnt tell him that it isnt. And when AI could help him any further gave up on the thread he started.
And now you are complementing someone's "great work" but somehow also "looking forward to the release" hahahah
Tell me you are a braindead moron without telling us... : smirk:
Oh thats too easy, and if you were able to any research you would have find it yourself😉
1. I actually said above that I find the PVI very shady. Whats shady about it is that they advertise 50% rakeback but when i was crushing the games too hard i calculated that my pvi was 0.25 and I only got 12,5% rb. Leaderboard volume crushers who were losing pre-rb got a better PVI but still not the rb advertised. This is shady business to me.
multiple times I was advocating against GG in many ways (i kinda broke my shill duties a bunch of times) like high rake, unknowable pvi system, bad software and i think showing people their graph with the rake paid shown as profit is very sketchy.
I dislike GG for many evidence-based reasons, I dont think their RNG is rigged. If that makes me a shill thats fine
Dont like their PVI slashing my rakeback while paying way too much rake to begin with because of preflop rake.
lol, if you make a claim like that you should read my post history a bit better and you'll see i have a lot of objections with GGThey have preflop rake without a flop, they advertise a rakeback which is severely lower due to PVI which you cannot see for yourself, their promos are nowhere near as good as they advertise, i dont like their software, their graphs dont include rake
Ive said numerous times what I think is wrong with GG and its a lot.I think with superuser you are indeed referring to the moneytaker69 situation where a hack allowed him to see the equity percentage. But they did not "allow" him to superuse, of course not. Obviously very very bad stuff but this does not mean poker and the rng are rigged, completely seperate things.I do believe
Quite a few posts from me about why I dont like GG. I am clearly doing a terrible job as an affiliate, hope they dont fire me :p
I am sticking to the facts and actually capable of research and objective thought, you believe in fairy tales because you need an excuse as why you are a losing poker player. Good luck with that 😉
Actually Slugant's post was fact based unlike the OP which is full of highlighted buzzwords saying "look how smart I am" with only a future promise of any substance.
If some shady site was going to rig it, the key thing you'd see is the fish running over EV against regs. Not making weak regs who are already winning win more off of the better regs. That doesn't even make sense for helping the site rake more.
If some shady site was going to rig it, the key thing you'd see is the fish running over EV against regs.
Even this is no proof. From my experience fish tends to run more above EV than REGs. This thread supports my impression:
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/174/p...
Most graphs I have seen there were above EV.
Running above/under ev is a complete outside factor compared to skill.
A fish and a top reg have the exact same chances of running above/below ev over the same sample.
I do think people are more inclined to look at (and remember) the graph of the sunrunning fish than a bad running fish.
Furthermore fishes give you more ridicule beats (not like aa losing to qq pre, but weird bad played hands) and these beats stay way more in memory than getting it in good vs fish and your hand holding up. So I think your experience might be influenced by confirmation bias.
Yes i got him. Exposed him actually
At an appropriate time I’ll leak the full analyses (graphs, distributions, methodology, raw numbers) so anyone with a solid stats background can verify or try to break the conclusions.
How do you intend to leak your own analysis? Are you planning to do it without your own consent or knowledge?
Lol so much **** thrown at OP for....what exactly? Slugant why is it that whenever I read ur posts ur always shitting on someone, and in this case for no reason at all. Are u the biggest loser on this forum? If so, that is quite the feat... my salty little turd
Lol so much **** thrown at OP for....what exactly? Slugant why is it that whenever I read ur posts ur always shitting on someone, and in this case for no reason at all. Are u the biggest loser on this forum? If so, that is quite the feat... my salty little turd
Maybe because OP is just talking **** and actually has 0 evidence for anything.
Lol so much **** thrown at OP for....what exactly? Slugant why is it that whenever I read ur posts ur always shitting on someone, and in this case for no reason at all.
Define "shitting on someone" for me.. you can do it on your other account as well 😉
And please quote me where i "shat on someone" thats for no reason totally unlike:
😃
Running above/under ev is a complete outside factor compared to skill.
A fish and a top reg have the exact same chances of running above/below ev over the same sample.
This is wrong.
For 6 handed games "Regulars" tend to play a tighter and more condensed/overlapping range with each other than with a looser fish's which has a noticeable impact on the true expected equity of hands while database software can only provide equity analysis utilizing information from cards which were exposed at showdown. Databases will provide EV as if the hand was played HU and that none of the other four players were dealt cards. Here is an example of what I am talking about:
You raise A♥ K♣ UTG, CO reg flats, BTN fish flats
Flop comes A♣ T♥ 3♠
You cbet, reg calls, fish raises, you jam, reg folds, fish calls with T♣ 3♣
The CO who called and then folded had a range of hands which interacted with the board in some way, they did not have random cards, but their folded cards will be treated as such and have no impact on the face up equity you will be provided by the client or your database software. The CO would have been more weighted towards hand combos like AJ, A9s, KQ or KJ with BDFD, etc. All of these more heavily weighted combos negatively impact your equity vs the T3 and they cut down on your true frequency of hitting trips, your K for top 2p, running QQ or JJ to make a better 2p, or running QJ to made broadway. In this scenario you will underrealize your displayed EV as it wont account for some of the incomplete information you should have some insight into. The folded cards preflop impact your EV slightly as well, just nowhere nearly as much as the overlapping ranges.
This is wrong.For 6 handed games "Regulars" tend to play a tighter and more condensed/overlapping range with each other than with a looser fish's which has a noticeable impact on the true expected equity of hands while database software can only provide equity analysis utilizing information from cards which were exposed at showdown. Databases will provide EV as if the hand was
this.
