|
I've read every post on here, and most for the other sites... The only thing I see are bad beat stories, and we all have plenty of those. Where some of you see possible evidence of cheating, I merely see bad poker plays and bad beats. I'll believe that some players cheat via collusion, and that sucks, but it's hard to stop. I want you to provide me with clues that PP is cheating, and from my perspective a hand history is not a clue. If it was a clue, all the above posts would provide clues to different types of cheating, not just one. We could assume that an opponent could see your hole cards, we could assume that PP intentionally gave the underdog the winning hand, we could assume that action flops are dealt to induce betting, we could assume there are planted shills to increase the rake, we could assume that someone just made a withdrawal and PP is punishing them, we could assume someone just made a deposit and PP is rewarding them. Lots of assumptions about different possibilities... but even the clues don't add up to circumstantial evidence of a single method of fraud, there is much reasonable doubt. I know for a fact that some people are learning to play poker with real money, instead of play money, this could easily explain some of the bad poker plays on the low limits. It's a nightmare for a decent poker player to sit with a beginner, they will do anything just to see what happens. I've watched the upper limits on PP and UB and rarely does anyone suck out on the river, no one calls that far into the hand, these people understand the game... low limit is a different story, some people could care less about their 25 or 50 dollars. Others take their money much more seriously, and can't understand why some people make such bad plays. I think it's a situation of the relative importance of money for different people. A decent player seems to assume that because they would 'never make that call', that when someone does it must be evidence of cheating. It's beginners and people who could care less about the money, that's my explanation.
|