Official Absolute scandal thread

[mendozaline]

In other words - we now have a verifiable, reliable and representative sampling that will assure us a win every time we play out our 8,5o's. Awesome, to say the least. Can't wait to play....

Actually no. It gaurantees less than nothing. The example was used in a way that will serve as a representation of something that I will publish at a later date. In fact it was a "representative sample" of something much more subtle. I don't suspect playing 85o on a regular basis will get me very far, however I do suspect that at times that's exactly what should be done.

Interesting that you would comment on this and not the other two posts.

 

[shinedown.45]

What a waste of my time reading this thread.
IMO, if you don't trust the sites, then don't play.

 

[mendozaline]

IMO, if you don't trust the sites, then don't play.

Yes, I guess that's a valid viewpoint. But suppose I was writing about how the New York Times was a Communist Rag, and someone else's argument was "if you don't trust the newspaper, don't read it." Well yeah, that's true, but that doesn't mean there isn't a valid reason for me pointing out that it's a communist rag, does it?

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

While I'm thinking along these lines of how the software was built in the first place, here's another little tidbit.

Imagine in the early days of development, if they wanted to see how a tournament played out, to test all the table switching and the like. Don't you think they would build in "fake players" (i.e., "software simulations" of people or........how do you sayyyyy?........"Bot") so that they could watch the tournaments unfold before they had enough real people to play them?

Hmmmm. Now I wonder what they did with that part of the software? Hmmm. I wonder what rules they would have implemented for the Bots to make decisions on? Hmmm. Maybe they were pretty simple, because they really only wanted to test table switching. Hmmm, but suppose maybe someone wanted at least one developer to explore makiing the Bots good enough to beat the your average Joe. Maybe they needed to be able to fill tables (tournaments) that didn't have enough real people. Hmmm, now what else may they have done?

I got a kick out of the Full Tilt Bot scandal when everyone was speculating about how the Bots "infiltrated" Full Tilt. Ah, you gotta love it.

Umm, no, they got people to alpha/beta test the software, so congratulations, your whole point is null, void, and absurd.

I got so sick of folding 85 only to see 885 flop that last night I decided, hey let me try playing an 85 or two.

Here's my first try last night.

Well I dunno about you guys but after this one hand I'm utterly convinced! Of course, you'll say it's part of some 'grand experiment', and even perhaps post an update after 100 trials where you're getting better results than expected, but as soon as your sample size gets reasonable and results start to converge with expectancy we won't be hearing from your little experiment again, of course.

I'll probably lock this soon seeing as it has nothing to do with AP anymore and instead is becoming a tool for silly people to ramble about silly things.

 

[NineLions]

I'll probably lock this soon seeing as it has nothing to do with Absolute Poker anymore and instead is becoming a tool for silly people to ramble about silly things.

Well, if it keeps people from posting the silly things elsewhere, keep it open.

 

[mendozaline]

Bring out the attack dogs, deny deny and obfuscate

Dorkus, what are your credentials? How much do you know about building software?

And why are you so sure I'm wrong? Now, it wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that you are somehow associated with these online poker companies, would it?

I suppose in your fantasy world the Absolute Poker scandal didn't even happen. How about the Full Tilt Bot scandal? Maybe that didn't happen either.

I've seen how you ban the posters who see this for what it is. What do you think, we're all idiots out here?

This is child's play compared to the Yahoo Finance boards.

You guys keep on getting caught cheating, and then you all use the same tactics. I call it the Bill Clinton Defense......"I did not have sex with that women Miss Lewinsky...."

And the rest is as they say.....history. What a joke. Just like the Natalie Holloway investigation. Samo samo.

 

[mendozaline]

Umm, no, they got people to alpha/beta test the software, so congratulations, your whole point is null, void, and absurd. Dorkus

Alpha and beta tests are fairly far down the development cycle. Way before they get to that, the developer is sitting in his cube testing it himself. With me. I was "pre-alpha". That's when the Bots would be created.

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

too lazy to quote so responding to your 'points' in order.

- more than you if you think it's common practice for poker sites to use bots to playtest software, obv

- lol, oh look it's the typical "OMG HE DISAGREED WITH MY POINTS THAT I HAVE 0 EVIDENCE FOR HE MUST BE A SHILL" argument. i thought it would only be a matter of time before that came out, heh,

- umm, who made this thread?

- i ban people for trolling. there's a difference between saying "i think online poker is rigged because..." and saying something like "YOU ARE A ****ING IDIOT OF YOU PLAY ONLINE POKER IT SUCKS AND IS RIGGED".

anyway, thanks for crapping up my thread, locked now.

 

[mendozaline]

I repeat:

"I don't suspect playing 85o on a regular basis will get me very far, however I do suspect that at times that's exactly what should be done." mendozaline

If someone is going to trash what I'm saying, at least use my last sentence on the subject in your analysis.