UB Scandal part 2 Phil Hellmuth

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29/...t-pot-gets-shipped-him-anyway-369065/

are you cereus?

holy fucking shit.....

This is obvious proof that Hellmuth can change the outcome of the hand and obv his holecards, he just fucked up and showed it to the world.

lol. That guy had his money refunded though but still pretty strange.

On December 21 2008 16:03 Hoolz_1907 wrote: lol. That guy had his money refunded though but still pretty strange.

strange? by strange you mean obvious Phil Hellmuth cheating again? if yes i agree.

UB is cereus site!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpMELRn8_l0 the part around 3.05 is hilarious

Wow this is so fucking sick

unreal. this is so fucking shitty. id love to hear what ivey and the owners of ftp and PS pros think of hellmuth and the cereus bullshit network hellmuth is associated with.

This happens to the guy that tilts from any normal cooler and has a share from CEREUS .Who strangely distracts his opponent after this hand ... you gotta be kidding me NO WAY this is a coincidence

r u cereus

Anyone still playing on UBet / AP deserve to get their money stolen.

On December 21 2008 17:10 Maynard! wrote: Anyone still playing on UBet / AP deserve to get their money stolen.

I think it's a higher chance that PH is just retarded then that he actually tried to cheat like this, but what do I know.

Submitted by : C0n5pir4cy

Stage #XXXXXXX: Holdem (1 on 1) Normal $200/$400 - 2008-12-20 04:15:23 (ET)
Table: FIR AVE (Real Money) Seat #4 is the dealer
Seat 4 - PHILHELLMUTH ($4495 in chips)
Seat 6 - DOUBLEBALLER ($7494 in chips)
PHILHELLMUTH - Posts small blind $100
DOUBLEBALLER - Posts big blind $200

Holecards(Odds)
PHILHELLMUTH - Raises $300 to $400
DOUBLEBALLER - Raises $400 to $600
PHILHELLMUTH - Raises $400 to $800
DOUBLEBALLER - Calls $200

Flop(Odds) (Pot : $1,600.00)

   
DOUBLEBALLER - Checks
PHILHELLMUTH - Bets $200
DOUBLEBALLER - Raises $400 to $400
PHILHELLMUTH - Calls $200

Turn(Odds) (Pot : $2,400.00)

   
DOUBLEBALLER - Bets $400
PHILHELLMUTH - Raises $800 to $800
DOUBLEBALLER - Raises $800 to $1200
PHILHELLMUTH - Calls $400

River (Pot : $4,800.00)

   
DOUBLEBALLER - Bets $400
PHILHELLMUTH - Calls $400

Showdown
DOUBLEBALLER - Shows (Three of a kind, kings)
PHILHELLMUTH - Mucks
PHILHELLMUTH Collects $5599 from main pot

Summary
Total Pot($5600) | Rake ($1)
Board
Seat 4: PHILHELLMUTH (dealer) (small blind) won Total ($5599) HI: ($5599) [Mucked]
Seat 6: DOUBLEBALLER (big blind) HI:lost with Three of a kind, kings - ]

On December 21 2008 17:48 DustySwedeDude wrote: I think it's a higher chance that PH is just retarded then that he actually tried to cheat like this, but what do I know.

no.. he had T2 LOL... he just fucked up while cheating

hahah his chat after the hand is also hillarious

On December 21 2008 18:51 Zorglub wrote: hahah his chat after the hand is also hillarious

hey wtf happened give my money back you didnt even WIN!

PH: standard.

These fuckers are going to get online poker banned everywhere, playing on their sites should be a criminal offense

cereusly T2s is the nuts!

LMFAO

I'm on the phone with the support. The fist lady I talked to was super nice, but had me so tilted. She was like "Oh, you had three of a kind, very nice!" I'm like wtf!?!?!

phil is always whining about how online sux and live rocks, maybe the aspect he misses is dealers fucking up

so i didn't want to read a 50 page 2+2 thread

in what way was it shown that phil is cheating?

T2s doesnt make any sense at all in this hand, are u sure its the real hand history ? And whoever play on UB deserves to get his money scammed imo

On December 21 2008 20:29 asdf2000 wrote: so i didn't want to read a 50 page 2+2 thread in what way was it shown that phil is cheating?

he had the losing hand and still won the pot
then the software tried to keep the guy off the table, and phil tried to downplay the hand like nothing happened

this would be a very stupid way to cheat.It just shows what a crappy software they have and how little they can be trusted

Kinda blosw how there is some bit of bad news in poker every other week.

http://img68.imageshack.us/img68/9158/ub2ai2.jpg

https://www.pokertableratings.com/rep...absolute&id=1162170993&hash=418635327

Anyway it seems impossible that it's a bug. Though the situation very much resembles a bug it would have to mean if the situation was recreated it could happen again. Considering this has never happened in billions of hands, and now it's happening when it is Phil Hellmuth playing his odd 200 online hands, AND that it is happening on UB the shadiest site on the web, pretty much means it has to be something else.

This is insane though. I've always held the believe that pokersites are too profitable so that they wouldn't risk cheating. If UB considers this worth it then it scares me to play on some of the smaller lesser known networks that aren't yet making profits.

On December 21 2008 20:39 lebowski wrote: this would be a very stupid way to cheat.It just shows what a crappy software they have and how little they can be trusted

argh dont you people get it? this is the first time that has happened and it turns out it was witht he owner of the site, and in his favour?


its obviously too blatant, however it shows that he probably has control of the hole cards, but something went wrong there and blowed his cover.

On December 21 2008 21:01 Baal wrote: Show nested quote + On December 21 2008 20:39 lebowski wrote: this would be a very stupid way to cheat.It just shows what a crappy software they have and how little they can be trusted argh dont you people get it? this is the first time that has happened and it turns out it was witht he owner of the site, and in his favour? its obviously too blatant, however it shows that he probably has control of the hole cards, but something went wrong there and blowed his cover.

It's still kind of weird though. Superusers could see opponents holecards. Why would he try to win the pot when his opponent was holding trips.

i think phil hellmuth is retarded but ud have to be amazingly retarded to try to steal this pot on purppsose.

i'd guess this is an elaborate level and there is nothing to see here

The most obvious reason would be some insiders trying to take the company down, but with the idiocy they have shown before on UB I guess it could be PH's superuser software glicthing

On December 21 2008 21:08 MezmerizePLZ wrote: i'd guess this is an elaborate level and there is nothing to see here

looks legit actually lol

On December 21 2008 21:08 MezmerizePLZ wrote: i'd guess this is an elaborate level and there is nothing to see here

possible, but the hand is recorded on table-ratings

https://www.pokertableratings.com/re...E0gxLgBy97c%3D

hand 23

in all honesty though, i doubt phil would purposely do this to win a measly few grand. i think it just brings to light the quality of the companies soft-ware.

think about how many million phil is worth, i doubt he'd attempt to cheat in an obv. horribly played hand, for a few thousand when he knows he has tons of railbirds watching his every move

On December 21 2008 21:03 Nazgul wrote: Show nested quote + On December 21 2008 21:01 Baal wrote:   On December 21 2008 20:39 lebowski wrote: this would be a very stupid way to cheat.It just shows what a crappy software they have and how little they can be trusted argh dont you people get it? this is the first time that has happened and it turns out it was witht he owner of the site, and in his favour? its obviously too blatant, however it shows that he probably has control of the hole cards, but something went wrong there and blowed his cover. It's still kind of weird though. Superusers could see opponents holecards. Why would he try to win the pot when his opponent was holding trips.

it was a programming failure WHILE cheating, like if he could alter the HH with his holecards but something went wrong and it showed his real holecards

i dont see why he would cheat like that on a site that has superusers, the evidence does point that way though

On December 21 2008 20:35 Bigbobm wrote: Show nested quote + On December 21 2008 20:29 asdf2000 wrote: so i didn't want to read a 50 page 2+2 thread in what way was it shown that phil is cheating? he had the losing hand and still won the pot then the software tried to keep the guy off the table, and phil tried to downplay the hand like nothing happened

ok, but how is it that this shows that PHIL is cheating. it just shows that the site is fucked up (which is scary in itself).

you would have to be literally mentally retarded to try to get away with cheating that way....

god ub/absolute are soo freaking shady, they are ruining it for every grinder/other site

whenever i play live with the fish at the casino, all they can say is 'i told you so', and that they'll never play online again

most of them actually think they personally were scammed

I thought UB is still rigged. And I thought it might have involved more than seeing cards. Guess I might have been right on both.. ;p

Programmers in 2+2 have already explained how this can happen, especially since the software is new and not bug free.

Not the first time something like this has happened either. It's apparently happened on several sites when implementing new games/software.

On December 21 2008 21:37 asdf2000 wrote: Show nested quote + On December 21 2008 20:35 Bigbobm wrote:   On December 21 2008 20:29 asdf2000 wrote: so i didn't want to read a 50 page 2+2 thread in what way was it shown that phil is cheating? he had the losing hand and still won the pot then the software tried to keep the guy off the table, and phil tried to downplay the hand like nothing happened ok, but how is it that this shows that PHIL is cheating. it just shows that the site is fucked up (which is scary in itself). you would have to be literally mentally retarded to try to get away with cheating that way....

it says so in the law of common sense

On December 21 2008 21:59 FrEaK[S.sIR] wrote: Programmers in 2+2 have already explained how this can happen, especially since the software is new and not bug free. Not the first time something like this has happened either. It's apparently happened on several sites when implementing new games/software.

The one in a million bug happens on PH's table with him as the winner, what are the odds?

aslo he has been bragging about winning 10 days straight with his shitty play, and when he was confronted with the error he wasn't shocked or anything, he just shrugged it off. Not to mention the way he played T2

On December 21 2008 22:03 Nazgul wrote: Show nested quote + On December 21 2008 21:37 asdf2000 wrote:   On December 21 2008 20:35 Bigbobm wrote:   On December 21 2008 20:29 asdf2000 wrote: so i didn't want to read a 50 page 2+2 thread in what way was it shown that phil is cheating? he had the losing hand and still won the pot then the software tried to keep the guy off the table, and phil tried to downplay the hand like nothing happened ok, but how is it that this shows that PHIL is cheating. it just shows that the site is fucked up (which is scary in itself). you would have to be literally mentally retarded to try to get away with cheating that way.... it says so in the law of common sense

ok ur right lol i can't actually think of a reason that would happen that doesn't involve phil cheating
but it still seems feasable to me. anyways im curious what exactly was going on now

and you would have to be literally mentally retarded to use a superuser account so obviously like nionio and the other crooks did...

Read the 2+2 thread if you really want to know. There are a couple posts on page 2(mine is filtered to 100 posts per page) with programmers explaining possible scenarios. It has to do with how the software assigns values to hand strength and sloppy programming having certain hands assigned a value of 0. Then lists a couple reasons why a hand might get assigned the value of 0. If hand strengths are assigned in descending order, that'd cause whatever hand got assigned 0 to win.


More detail in the 2+2 thread, I don't feel like digging for it.


And who said it's a one in a million bug? As far as I've heard it's fairly common when implementing hi lo games and sometimes on newer softwares due to sloppy programming and not enough testing. It just happens to be more public because 1) it happened on UB and 2) it happened to PH.

I'm not discounting that it's a scandal. I don't play on UB and I never intend to. I'm just saying that immediately assuming that PH is trying to cheat people out of $5600 pots while being worth at least 8 figures seems rather silly. It's even more blatant than the last cheating scandal. As if people aren't going to notice pots getting shipped the wrong way?

I have little faith in people's intelligence but I don't believe that this is cheating. You'd have to be really, really stupid to think you're going to get away with it. They already refunded the guy's money. Not like they're denying anything happened. I just tihnk it's more likely a bug in the new software than the most blatant act of cheating in poker.

I mean really, it doesn't get worse than showing down the worst hand and trying to reach over the table and scoop the pot yourself. Pretty sure you'd get a "what the fuck do you think you're doing?"

On December 21 2008 22:21 TenBagger wrote: and you would have to be literally mentally retarded to use a superuser account so obviously like nionio and the other crooks did...

You can't see how using a superuser in a blatant fashion and shipping the pot to the wrong player are on completely different levels? At least as far as how stupid you'd have to be to try to get away with it.

I mean, we needed a TON of evidence for the superuser thing to go anywhere. With this you'd just need to be like "uh...yeah, the pot went to the wrong person? WTF is wrong with you?"

Its still does not make sense it happens to PH, out of the 20.000+ users and millions of hands played on that site, no fucking way!

"This is the first incident of this kind we have encountered. We are currently examining the poker system and the application logs in order to pinpoint the cause of this malfunction." -Paul Leggett

On December 21 2008 22:34 Zorglub wrote: Its still does not make sense it happens to PH, out of the 20.000 users and millions of hands played on that site, no fucking way!

So many stars have to align for this to occur. People need to stop even trying to defend those crooks. They have a long history of cheating. Maybe if it happened on pokerstars we'd give the benefit of the doubt but not UB.

Maybe their super user account is sloppily programmed and bugs happen to it...

Seriously fuck this piece of shit site.

As if people aren't going to notice pots getting shipped the wrong way?

You can't see how using a superuser in a blatant fashion and shipping the pot to the wrong player are on completely different levels? At least as far as how stupid you'd have to be to try to get away with it. I mean, we needed a TON of evidence for the superuser thing to go anywhere. With this you'd just need to be like "uh...yeah, the pot went to the wrong person? WTF is wrong with you?"

The argument against that is obviously that the bug is not in hand strength, but the bug being in the superuser cheat. It seems silly to argue a software bug and not acknowledging the possibility of a bug existing in a cheat. They are equally likely.

Both bugs being possible, question remains do you give UB who magically ships a pot to their owner and has been known for superuser accounts the benefit of the doubt.

maybe it is their fault.. it probably is.
all we are saying I think is innocent until proven guilty

On December 21 2008 22:41 asdf2000 wrote: maybe it is their fault.. it probably is. all we are saying I think is innocent until proven guilty

They have been proven guilty before. Fuck them. Nothing even happened to them for the superuser incident.

The odds are stacked against them and I'm not going with the underdog on this one. Besides, if it's a genuine mistake they are obviously incompetent as hell and shouldn't be running a poker room no matter what. And "innocent till proven guilty" let's say a guy murdered his wife and was proven guilty but is released due to a mistake in the system. 6 months later he is found with a bloody knife and a dead child. Yeah, who knows maybe he is innocent.

On December 21 2008 22:40 Nazgul wrote: Show nested quote + As if people aren't going to notice pots getting shipped the wrong way?   You can't see how using a superuser in a blatant fashion and shipping the pot to the wrong player are on completely different levels? At least as far as how stupid you'd have to be to try to get away with it. I mean, we needed a TON of evidence for the superuser thing to go anywhere. With this you'd just need to be like "uh...yeah, the pot went to the wrong person? WTF is wrong with you?" The argument against that is obviously that the bug is not in hand strength, but the bug being in the superuser cheat. It seems silly to argue a software bug and not acknowledging the possibility of a bug existing in a cheat. They are equally likely. Both bugs being possible, question remains do you give UB who magically ships a pot to their owner and has been known for superuser accounts the benefit of the doubt.

The fact that people are doing this ANGERS me. Fucking morons, seriously.......

well mainly I was speaking of phil hellmuth. it was never shown that he cheated was it?

and im not disagreeing with u lol, fuck them

On December 21 2008 22:45 Maynard! wrote: The fact that people are doing this ANGERS me. Fucking morons, seriously.......

yo fatty take a chill pill

On December 21 2008 22:43 Nazgul wrote: Show nested quote + On December 21 2008 22:41 asdf2000 wrote: maybe it is their fault.. it probably is. all we are saying I think is innocent until proven guilty They have been proven guilty before. Fuck them. Nothing even happened to them for the superuser incident. The odds are stacked against them and I'm not going with the underdog on this one. Besides, if it's a genuine mistake they are obviously incompetent as hell and shouldn't be running a poker room no matter what. And "innocent till proven guilty" let's say a guy murdered his wife and was proven guilty but is released due to a mistake in the system. 6 months later he is found with a bloody knife and a dead child. Yeah, who knows maybe he is innocent.

what are u saying? ur actually against "innocent until proven guilty"? the situation you described has entirely different repercussions.. I don't think they should be compared. taking money is not like taking a life..

what are u saying? ur actually against "innocent until proven guilty"? the situation you described has entirely different repercussions.. I don't think they should be compared. taking money is not like taking a life..

Something like won't be ever be proven unless someone comes clean.

[B]On December 21 2008 22:46 Nazgul wrote: yo fatty take a chill pill

Fuck off loser.

seriously anybody who think this was a normal bug is absolutely retarded for the next reasons:

1.- Millions of hands are being played on the site, and it happens to the owner of the site, and in his favour.
2.- Phil doesnt react in a shocked surprised way, more in a dodging/avoiding manner, which is weird.
3.- UltimateBet Phill Hellmuth were involved in the biggest cheating scandal in online poker's history not long ago.



This was probably a bug (or human mistake) WHILE CHEATING, the way Phil played that T2s makes no sense at all, common sense says that he somehow can change his holecards but the client either bugger or phil fucked up.

Well actually after thinking a little it would make sense:

A - Nobody would ever play T2s this way in LHE, i mean wtf is this call on the river ? Did he seriously think T hi was winning here even if he gets 10:1 ? Did he called to get informations ? the hand itself doesnt make any sense at all.

B - What are the odds for the software having a glitch when its Hellmuth playing ? And more than that, favoring him ?

C - Why would Hellmuth keep representing UB after the superuser scandal ? It means this guy doesn't care mucho customers got screwed in the first place and a lot of 2+2er pointed that he might have profited from it (nionio superuser account).

D - He didn't seem shocked when the pot has been dragged to him and lacked reactions.

UB's range is so polarized here, it's either a complete random incident OR these guys are sick cheating bastards and their software is rigged as fuck imo

Edit: lol the time i write this Baal said the same things

On December 21 2008 22:48 asdf2000 wrote: Show nested quote + On December 21 2008 22:43 Nazgul wrote:   On December 21 2008 22:41 asdf2000 wrote: maybe it is their fault.. it probably is. all we are saying I think is innocent until proven guilty They have been proven guilty before. Fuck them. Nothing even happened to them for the superuser incident. The odds are stacked against them and I'm not going with the underdog on this one. Besides, if it's a genuine mistake they are obviously incompetent as hell and shouldn't be running a poker room no matter what. And "innocent till proven guilty" let's say a guy murdered his wife and was proven guilty but is released due to a mistake in the system. 6 months later he is found with a bloody knife and a dead child. Yeah, who knows maybe he is innocent. what are u saying? ur actually against "innocent until proven guilty"? the situation you described has entirely different repercussions.. I don't think they should be compared. taking money is not like taking a life..

The difference in repercussions is that they have been stealing money from people for the longest time and have received no punishment for it. Why WOULDN'T you be against innocent till proven guilty when it's about UB. We aren't judges that need to sentence people and thus need to be 100% sure of things. There's a 99% chance this proven cheater has once again been stealing money from people and you are trying to hold on to that 1% just because it says so in your law. The owners of UB should have been in jail a long time ago can not be trusted and the phrase innocent till proven guilty should not be applied to an already proven cheater that got away with it.

what are you talking about, I never said I trust UB or anything.
why do people do this every time i post in a thread like this. I am not saying they aren't cheating here. and I am not saying people should trust them. where did you get this from?

death sentence imo

Even in a real court there is circumstantial evidence, and in this case there is so much circumstantial evidence that they would be convicted unless the judge was retarded

On December 21 2008 23:10 asdf2000 wrote: what are you talking about, I never said I trust UB or anything. why do people do this every time i post in a thread like this. I am not saying they aren't cheating here. and I am not saying people should trust them. where did you get this from?

so dont trust ub even though they're innocent?

"Earlier today we learned about a poker hand where our system paid out the losing player instead of the correct winning hand. The hand number is #1162170993.

We are investigating this software malfunction as our absolute top priority.

This is the first incident of this kind we have encountered.

We are currently examining the poker system and the application logs in order to pinpoint the cause of this malfunction.

Paul Leggett"


First incident ? And it has to be Hellmuth playing the hand ? Gimme a fucking break, i'd rather think Santa is real than this being a coincidence, i'll NEVER put 1 cent on this site and FFS someone sue these bastards and make them close, they're like the cancer of online poker.

WTFFFFFFFF i'm so tilted now, it's like they deal hundreds of thousands of hands every day (it's limit HE hay not razz or stud) and this is the FIRST incident and Hellmuth is dealt in the hand ??? Woohoo way to go buddy, make it more obvious. w/o his statement there was like a remote chance it was a real incident but now it's SOOOOOOOOooo obvious wow.

On December 21 2008 23:18 Nazgul wrote: Show nested quote + On December 21 2008 23:10 asdf2000 wrote: what are you talking about, I never said I trust UB or anything. why do people do this every time i post in a thread like this. I am not saying they aren't cheating here. and I am not saying people should trust them. where did you get this from? so dont trust ub even though they're innocent?

I never said they were innocent. I said "innocent until proven guilty", which means to reserve judgement for once you know what actually happened.

lol that's just ..

im not sure what to believe. if we suppose it's a bug, why does he react in the way he does? his table talk seems really suspicious.

Yup the board was JKK29 my bad, makes sense for his river call :



Stage #XXXXXXX: Holdem (1 on 1) Normal $200/$400 - 2008-12-20 04:15:23 (ET)
Table: FIR AVE (Real Money) Seat #4 is the dealer
Seat 4 - PHILHELLMUTH ($4495 in chips)
Seat 6 - DOUBLEBALLER ($7494 in chips)
PHILHELLMUTH - Posts small blind $100
DOUBLEBALLER - Posts big blind $200
*** POCKET CARDS ***
PHILHELLMUTH - Raises $300 to $400
DOUBLEBALLER - Raises $400 to $600
PHILHELLMUTH - Raises $400 to $800
DOUBLEBALLER - Calls $200
*** FLOP *** [Js Kc Kh]
DOUBLEBALLER - Checks
PHILHELLMUTH - Bets $200
DOUBLEBALLER - Raises $400 to $400
PHILHELLMUTH - Calls $200
*** TURN *** [Js Kc Kh]
DOUBLEBALLER - Bets $400
PHILHELLMUTH - Raises $800 to $800
DOUBLEBALLER - Raises $800 to $1200
PHILHELLMUTH - Calls $400
*** RIVER *** [Js Kc Kh 2h]
DOUBLEBALLER - Bets $400
PHILHELLMUTH - Calls $400
*** SHOW DOWN ***
DOUBLEBALLER - Shows [Kd Qh] (Three of a kind, kings)
PHILHELLMUTH - Mucks
PHILHELLMUTH Collects $5599 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total Pot($5600) | Rake ($1)
Board [Js Kc Kh 2h 9c]
Seat 4: PHILHELLMUTH (dealer) (small blind) won Total ($5599) HI: ($5599) [Mucked] [2s 10s]
Seat 6: DOUBLEBALLER (big blind) HI:lost with Three of a kind, kings [Kd Qh - B:Kh,P:Kd,B:Kc,P:Qh,B:Js]

On December 21 2008 22:24 FrEaK[S.sIR] wrote: Show nested quote + On December 21 2008 22:21 TenBagger wrote: and you would have to be literally mentally retarded to use a superuser account so obviously like nionio and the other crooks did... You can't see how using a superuser in a blatant fashion and shipping the pot to the wrong player are on completely different levels? At least as far as how stupid you'd have to be to try to get away with it. I mean, we needed a TON of evidence for the superuser thing to go anywhere. With this you'd just need to be like "uh...yeah, the pot went to the wrong person? WTF is wrong with you?"

I am making no judgement as to what is going on here. However, the point that I'm trying to make is that the "it can't be hellmuth cheating because doing it so obviously is so stupid" defense is a type that has failed many times over in many different scenarios. As Naz said, the law of common sense would dictate that Hellmuth is smart enough so that if he really wanted to cheat, he would cheat better. Well, history has shown that even very smart people do very dumb things and there are countless examples of cheats and frauds doing incredibly dumb things.

I am not in the slightest way saying that hellmuth is guilty of anything. I am saying that eliminating the possibility of his guilt by that logic is invalid.

why would phil be involved in something like this with all the sponsors and money he has already???

yes that might be the case, but this just seems unbelievably dumb too do. on the scale 1-100 in stupidity this probably reaches 1000. it's just too obvious and will be detected pretty much every time.

why would a well respected multi millionaire engage in a ponzi scheme which by definition will be eventually detected pretty much every time?

seriously, I could pull up hundreds of examples of people doing very dumb things. People that are otherwise intelligent and with more wealth and prestige than hellmuth committing crimes with a very high likelihood of getting caught.

Again people this is obv not a cheat working properly, but either making a human error while cheating, or the client is bugged in the cheat, that is extremely evident.

On December 21 2008 22:40 Nazgul wrote: Show nested quote + As if people aren't going to notice pots getting shipped the wrong way?   You can't see how using a superuser in a blatant fashion and shipping the pot to the wrong player are on completely different levels? At least as far as how stupid you'd have to be to try to get away with it. I mean, we needed a TON of evidence for the superuser thing to go anywhere. With this you'd just need to be like "uh...yeah, the pot went to the wrong person? WTF is wrong with you?" The argument against that is obviously that the bug is not in hand strength, but the bug being in the superuser cheat. It seems silly to argue a software bug and not acknowledging the possibility of a bug existing in a cheat. They are equally likely. Both bugs being possible, question remains do you give UB who magically ships a pot to their owner and has been known for superuser accounts the benefit of the doubt.

I am acknowledging it. = I already said that I'm not denying that something shady is going on. I'm just not going to say it's for sure one way or another because I don't have enough evidence either way. Nor do I really care, I think UB is a piece of shit site anyway.

ASDFAFSDFSA

Can anybody point out where I said absolutely nothing shady was possibly happening?

I'm saying it's possible it's not and that a bug is possible. Only reason I posted was because people were completely discounting the possibility of a bug because they thought it wasn't possible or that this is the first time something like this has happened.

Bug is possible and this kind of thing has happened on several other sites. That's all I'm saying.

I just said possible like 8 times in an equal number of sentences. I need a thesaurus

On December 21 2008 23:48 Baal wrote: Again people this is obv not a cheat working properly, but either making a human error while cheating, or the client is bugged in the cheat, that is extremely evident.

I really do think it's a bug. Hellmuth is INSANELY rich and to ruin his poker career / reputation just for a pot at these stakes is ridiculous.

Why someone would be daft enough to put money onto UB / AP after the first incident is beyond me.

There are plenty of other better or equal sites with far cleaner reputations.

As for this though, who knows? It seems pretty retarded to cheat in such a blatant manner, but it's hell dodgy for the reasons Baal explains.

Just another reason to avoid these networks.

Why someone would be daft enough to put money onto UB / AP after the first incident is beyond me.

By now most forum regulars and people who know how to play poker have cashed out their money from this network. That leaves you with all the fish.

On December 22 2008 01:08 TheHuHu3 wrote: I really do think it's a bug. Hellmuth is INSANELY rich and to ruin his poker career / reputation just for a pot at these stakes is ridiculous.

Hellmuth has shown many times that he hates online poker players, so why not taking his revenge stealing money from them?.

how on earth can a computer proggy make a mistake like this without having the option to manipulate results in some way? this is definitely a cheat of some sort on the server's end unfortunately

I'm sure he can't sleep thinking about his next attack to the online players

Hellmuth is INSANELY retarded if u ask me and nothing that he d do would suprise me ....There are many things he's done that d ruin his reputation in some way.Most of them are tilting on TV tables like in the WSOP calling the guy IDIOT FROM NORTH EUROPE or something like that.He was obviously tilted by this guy ( in the LHE hu ) and his reactions after the hand make everything even more suspicious.Chances of all this being a coincidence would be 5% at max

Of course we cant know for sure he was cheating, but this is extremely shady at best and I hope that site just goes busto once and for all so it can be forgotten.

What a joke these people are... totally disregarding what the reasons for this latest fiasco are, the rest of the poker business should hire a squad of goons with bats to methodically beat up all of UB's management to death and trash their servers into bits and pieces

On December 21 2008 21:01 Nazgul wrote: This is insane though. I've always held the believe that pokersites are too profitable so that they wouldn't risk cheating. If UB considers this worth it then it scares me to play on some of the smaller lesser known networks that aren't yet making profits.

"Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed."

why is everyone assuming Hellmuth is crazy rich, for all we know hes a hardcore coke addict who has blown every cent hes ever made and is now desperate, unless you know him personally or have seen his latest bank statement who knows how much cash he has left

lol this is pretty funny, agree with freak that this could simply be just a bug but it does seem a little funny for it to happen to hellmuth

like baal said: Too many coincidences in this incident. Fuck them, never ever will I play on their fucking site.

On December 22 2008 06:44 TedHastings wrote: why is everyone assuming Hellmuth is crazy rich, for all we know hes a hardcore coke addict who has blown every cent hes ever made and is now desperate, unless you know him personally or have seen his latest bank statement who knows how much cash he has left

Because that's what everybody who has ever talked about Phil in interviews has said. It's not like the poker world is a particularly private one.

On December 21 2008 23:48 Baal wrote: Again people this is obv a cheat not working properly, either making a human error while cheating, or the client is bugged in the cheat, that is extremely evident.

there is some cereus shit goin on here

the traffic despite the merging was really poor and now this shit occured, i bet Cereus will go broke sooner or later and that happened when they were declaring about their top priority to security... This forces me to cashout my money, despite i really love their fast software.

UB already said it would reimburse him, so really doesn't look like that great a deal. Seeing as there are no complaints all over the web about losing money to this sort of mistake, it's clearly an isolated incident. I strongly doubt that this is the next great cheating scandal. Looks like a simple error that has already been taken care of to me.

Way to go Phil, what a fucking joke

LOL Freak, its possible....

Its possible im a fucking alien typing from a space ship, there is an actual chance, however its so ridiculously low we assume its stupid to believe so.

some1 posted an interesting theory on 2+2

Suppose it isn't a 'sitting out' routine at all, but a 'start next hand' routine. Suppose the software actually launches the next hand before this one even ends, but the showdown code runs so fast that it normally clears before the code running the next hand contacts the machines. So at the end of the code you have something like AT SHOWDOWN { SEND HANDS TO HAND ANALYSIS ROUTINE START NEXT HAND GENERATE HH SEND RESULTS TO PLAYERS CLOSE HAND } At the start of the code is some housework, that used to take longer than the last three processes above, so that by the time the machines are asked to start the next hand, they would already be clearing away the last one. But with the new larger network, the system can't cope. The hand analysis routine is struggling to keep up. So the code for the next hand contacts DB's machine to find out whether he wants to play hand #002, and DB's machine sends back that he can't - he still hasn't finished hand #001. The server interprets this as a failure to post blinds. It tries again, and the same thing happens. Then a third time. Now the server tells DB's machine that he's being sat out for failure to post blinds. From then on, it is as I say above. He gets sat out of hand #001 instead of hand #002, with the odd result that he loses a hand he should have won, because of the array thing. I think this theory might explain everything. Maybe.

On December 22 2008 10:53 all_in_4tw wrote: some1 posted an interesting theory on 2+2 Show nested quote + Suppose it isn't a 'sitting out' routine at all, but a 'start next hand' routine. Suppose the software actually launches the next hand before this one even ends, but the showdown code runs so fast that it normally clears before the code running the next hand contacts the machines. So at the end of the code you have something like AT SHOWDOWN { SEND HANDS TO HAND ANALYSIS ROUTINE START NEXT HAND GENERATE HH SEND RESULTS TO PLAYERS CLOSE HAND } At the start of the code is some housework, that used to take longer than the last three processes above, so that by the time the machines are asked to start the next hand, they would already be clearing away the last one. But with the new larger network, the system can't cope. The hand analysis routine is struggling to keep up. So the code for the next hand contacts DB's machine to find out whether he wants to play hand #002, and DB's machine sends back that he can't - he still hasn't finished hand #001. The server interprets this as a failure to post blinds. It tries again, and the same thing happens. Then a third time. Now the server tells DB's machine that he's being sat out for failure to post blinds. From then on, it is as I say above. He gets sat out of hand #001 instead of hand #002, with the odd result that he loses a hand he should have won, because of the array thing. I think this theory might explain everything. Maybe.

That is interesting.... if you are a fucking retard who fail to see this happened in favour of the owner of the site who has backgrounds on cheating and played T2 in an illogical fucking way lol.

Although that may explain how the software bugs up, the fact that it has not happened to anybody else but Phil Hellmuth in an isolated incident leads me to agree with Baal on pretty much everything he has already said.

yeah also the fact he had T2s which made no sense whatsoever and the fact he tried to dodge it like it didnt happen instead of being like "whoa wtf just happened".


Sure u can make dumb ratinoalizations of those both things like "well he sux at poker" and "well he didnt want to bring attention to his buggy site"...

However those rationalizations just pull you away even more from common sense that is screaming at your face "CHEAT!"

On December 22 2008 11:39 Baal wrote: yeah also the fact he had T2s which made no sense whatsoever and the fact he tried to dodge it like it didnt happen instead of being like "whoa wtf just happened".

the way he reacted to the situation tells me he fucked up 100%

"OMG WTF LOL HOW DO I PLAY THIS OFF?... YEAH I GOTTA ACT CALM"

...scum

seriously, what a shady fucking dude

cmon guys

there's really no point in wasting time rationalizing and legitimizing this scandal when the blatant truth is slapping you in the face.

mmm, face slapping.

Honey, he raised me!

Honey, this donk called my raise i had T2 suited and when i try to change my hole cards to AK so i can ship the pot the system fucks up MOTHERF#$#$@#$@#$#@$@#$ calling my raises with KQ MOTHERF#$#@#$#@$#@$@#$@#$ donks.

rofl n1

On December 22 2008 12:53 Sheitan wrote: Honey, this donk called my raise i had T2 suited and when i try to change my hole cards to AK so i can ship the pot the system fucks up MOTHERF#$#$@#$@#$#@$@#$ calling my raises with KQ MOTHERF#$#@#$#@$#@$@#$@#$ donks.

looooooooool

nevermind, i just read the whole thread

Meh, either way, Phil is scum, and nobody with a brain should put money on a site as sketchy as UB. What's gonna happen there next?

Now suddenly more bugs are showing up, one guy won a hand without any cards, he was sitting out. If none of these bugs happened before the PH hand it looks like they are deliberately making bugs now to grasp the only straw they have left "It all happened when we merged it is just a bug in the software".

But games are still running...

Fuck these guys they are hurting online poker more than anyone, even more than the UIEGA and we cant do anything to stop them.

Im seriously thinking about taking a shot and playing there,I mean honestly I think I could make a pretty good profit avoiding fishy situations as they come and playing with all the plethora of fish left. The only thing that stops me is I dont want to support that shitty site :/

On December 22 2008 16:27 EvilSky wrote: Im seriously thinking about taking a shot and playing there,I mean honestly I think I could make a pretty good profit avoiding fishy situations as they come and playing with all the plethora of fish left. The only thing that stops me is I dont want to support that shitty site :/

lol moron

On December 22 2008 16:07 Zorglub wrote: Now suddenly more bugs are showing up, one guy won a hand without any cards, he was sitting out. If none of these bugs happened before the PH hand it looks like they are deliberately making bugs now to grasp the only straw they have left "It all happened when we merged it is just a bug in the software". But games are still running... Fuck these guys they are hurting online poker more than anyone, even more than the UIEGA and we cant do anything to stop them.

well being called buggy its better than being called cheaters

I think not IMMEDIATELY taking the site down after multiple bug reports is just as bad as cheating

time to make an account and sit out at 16 different tables and let the money floooooooow in

lol wow fuck our lives and fuck UB

I dunno if anyone thought of this yet but, what if hellmuth's cheating software read his hand as the trips and doublerballer's as the T2. That would definitely make sense.

On December 22 2008 16:27 EvilSky wrote: Im seriously thinking about taking a shot and playing there,I mean honestly I think I could make a pretty good profit avoiding fishy situations as they come and playing with all the plethora of fish left. The only thing that stops me is I dont want to support that shitty site :/

there are still plently of regs, don't make assumptions w/o actually experiencing the game play

You'd have to be a pretty crappy programmer if you either
- start the next hand before this one is completely finished
- assign hand values to wrong players

And I don't believe the hand value algorithm would be the problem, these things have been around for years and it's not difficult to just copy it. Most likely error to me would be some kind of mistake in the network code and threading. But regardless of the error, it shows they never (stress)tested it well. Nice professional attitude if you're going to make money off your software.

The Pokerbrat is unstoppable! He even win hands without a showdown, gg

uhhh, i think most poker players would occasionally win a hand without a showdown, yes?

i think thats a fairly good assumption!

I thought ub was easy before

On December 23 2008 05:02 ther wrote: The Pokerbrat is unstoppable! He even win hands without a showdown, gg

more like call/muck on river and then have the pot shipped your way.

now that's some fucking 1337 skillz