Comments on: '60 Minutes' report: How online gamblers unmasked cheaters

A joint investigation by 60 Minutes and The Washington Post questions the honesty and security gambling sites.

[mikeburek]

I like the way CNet writes to an informed audience. The reason I don't watch 60 Minutes and other TV news programs is because they talk to a mindless audience.

I wish that both the American public could learn to think and that TV could expect their audience to be educated. This is a chicken and egg problem. There is not a practical reason to spend time debating how it started. But if one starts, the other will follow, and things will improve.

[nfrengle]

@Mikeburek--Psych! This story is directly from 60-minutes, not C|Net. Mindless indeed!

[thelemurking]

LMAO! Nicely done sir, nicely done!

[mikeburek]

Yes. And I was at first disappointed in the sudden "dumbdown-ness" of the article, but then realized it was the text from 60-minutes, not a CNet report on the same thing.

[rapier1]

Nioce save MikeBurek! Oh wait, no its actually a pretty terrible save. Sorry.

[cgallaway]

I don't really feel sorry for those that get cheated playing internet poker. I am always suspicious of putting my money down on a "game of chance" when somebody has to program that game. I guess it just doesn't make logical sense, which these players purport to have to use in face to face games. The other thing is the probability of cheating. Let's face it, it's easy to cheat. Granted, there may be more security on pay sites than, say, Yahoo Games (no gambling), but all it takes is to have a partner or multiple screen names (or accounts) that would allow you to log in and watch. And then the kibitzer could instant message the player other's hands. It's been done on Yahoo many times. And the theory is, if people are willing to cheat to win a game with no bets (nothing to win/lose besides the game itself), why wouldn't they cheat when there is a motive (actual, real Money)?

And then, since it is illegal in the US (Which I don't believe it should be), I feel these people who got cheated got what they deserved. They decided to break the law, and therefore they have no safety net for their grievances (like someone who has had a bag of marijuana stolen from them). They obviously didn't do their homework on legit sites that have measures in place to avoid such issues (as the flow of money always causes cheating concerns)

Point being, the online casinos don't pass the sniff test when it comes to the probability of a fair shake (company made computer programs, hidden identities, ease of cheating) that these online "Card Sharks" got taken like the proverbial "out of towner" in a hussle. They didn't do their homework first, and therefore have only themselves to blame.

[crunchy_pickle]

lmao. You can't watch other players hands whether you're a player or a spectator. Why would you even assume that in real money games? I hate to laugh at the expense of someone else, but that was really dumb.

[tunavin]

It's amazing how clever everyone is and how they know things are rigged but nobody could figure out their biggest assets their retirement accounts and house were invested in a giant PONZI scams the stock market and housing market. All these people who are so smart lost 45% of their assets and more but a guy who plays online is the idiot for losing a couple of thousand .

[jerljr]

Keep in mind. Internet poker is not illegal. But it is illegal for a bank to except a deposit or withdrawal directly from a gambling site. So people that play online are not breaking the law. Plus the websites, in their advertising and statements made as your sign in, say that they protect the players from cheating and make it as fair as can be. They have responsibilties to protect the players that our on the website. and the players have no choice but to trust them.

Plus, its harder to cheat then someone else signing in to watch and be able to see the other players cards because when you do that you still cant see the players hold cards.

I cant stand cheating whether its for money or not.

But, I wish someone would investigate the sites themselves. Because if you play real poker then go to these sites and play. You realize that very strang situation come up. Pecular situations occur more frequently then in real poker. You expect strange " bad beats" every once in a while but not at the same frequency as happens on these sites.

Only a card player would understand what I was talking about but set over sets two ore three times a night, people hitting one outer, two outers, three outers almost at a 50% rate.

Just seems like the randomness isn't as random as its suppose to have.

You could say. well what would be the advantage to the websites to tweak with this. Well it keeps bad players form losing all there money and not putting more in. plus it would up the amount of tables played by good players as they get "knocked out" when they were ahead to get there money back that they lost even though they made a "good move" but it didn't work out so well.

This is a concern of mine.

[cgallaway]

Of course it isn't as random......in real life, someone shuffles the cards, and when they do, the deck is is not split exactly in half and shuffled in a 1 card from column A and 1 card from column B order. Even though real life casinos typically use a different deck each game (possibly each hand---forgive me, I don't gamble often, so I don't know the technicalities), the decks are not always shuffled in the same way, and therefore seat 1 does not always get the same cards every hand or at the same hand every game.

Online, however, is a PROGRAM! There is no randomness to a program despite what any computer programmer will tell you (there are randomization programs, but they are created to mimic true randomness, but are not truly random) And remember, the program may not be just for one table. It could be a program written for the entire site, so that a royal flush, for example, is set to happen (for the sake of arguement...not real figures) 1 hand out of every million dealt, well, now that you have say 100,000 people on the site at one time (as opposed to 5 people at a table), the odds of getting a royal flush are dramitically decreased. Remember, online is not a real deck of cards, it is a program. It is the same as a slot machine. The programmer can dictate the deal, or the even the "randomization" of the deal. The programmer can write it so that certain results happen than would happen in real life. The programmer can write the program so that the house (or any beneficiary) could get the second round of dealt cards based on the first round as there is no physical deck that has a finite order. And no registration in the world (particularly politically appointed/elected officials) are going to interpret 5 million lines of source code and understand it all just to make sure that the computer program is "Fair"

This is what I mean when I say in my previous post that these online gamers aren't doing their homework to know how it works. They rely on what they have learned in real life. In real life, observation is key. You can see someone dealing from the bottom of the deck. You can see if someone reaches into their shirt to get a card. You can see, if you pay really close attention that there are 52 cards in a deck. When something is programmed, and debugged, it is precise. It will only be checked enough to ensure that the same card is not give to two people at the same table at the same time. Or that when one "Card" is dealt, it will not be dealt again that hand. But it will not be checked to ensure that the same card will not be dealt to someone else in 20 consecutive hands.

[philipq]

http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/room/features/security/
QUOTE
SHUFFLE

"Anyone who considers arithmetic methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin." - John von Neumann, 1951

We understand that a use of a fair and unpredictable shuffle algorithm is critical to our software. To ensure this and avoid major problems described in [2], we are using two independent sources of truly random data:

* user input, including summary of mouse movements and events timing, collected from client software
* true hardware random number generator developed by Intel [3], which uses thermal noise as an entropy source

Each of these sources itself generates enough entropy to ensure a fair and unpredictable shuffle.
/QUOTE

lulzyoufail.jpg

[auto98uk]

cgallaway - i think you will find it actually creates a "virtual deck" rather than creating each card at the time of dealing.

You talk about the odds as though there is something wrong there - clearly in RL poker the more tables there are being played (and therefore the more hands being dealt) the higher the likelihood that someone will get a particular hand - it doesn't increase any individuals odds of getting a particular hand though, because more hands are being dealt. Also, of course the program would not be checked to see if someone has got the same card 20 hands in a row (that WOULD be cheating) in RL it is perfectly possible, just unlikely, as it is online. You have kind of misunderstood what is meant by "randomness" i think

Frankly i find it hard to beleive that the software (at least on the big sites) cheats, not because of the threat of regulation, but because there are PC geniuses playing online who would eventually rumble them and the bad PR would basically stop players coming to their sites (those in the article got away with it because the players realised it wasn't "the site" but individual staff)

[patrickarose]

If there is any future investigation in this horrific incident please include me in your information and you can rely on me for my support. Thanks to 60 minutes for your investigation in this serious matter where many of us honest players may have lost our money to cheaters, who should be jailed.

Patrick

[mikeburek]

Was there any investigation by 60 Min or Wash Post? It seems like all they did was discover a story and publish it. Yes, that's good, and valuable to society. But they say it was a joint "investigation," which makes it sound like this was something so huge it took 2 news agencies to break into this ring of crime.

[jpmays]

I'll second that motion Patrick!

I, too, am an online player of poker. I first started playing on a site called EmpirePoker.com back in 2003, and this was my preferred site as I had a fairly decent win/loss ratio during 2004. My first year I lost almost $1000, however, in my second year (2004) I made a profit of $7,500 over a four-month period. Then the bottom sort of dropped out when President Bush signed the the Internet gambling law. EmpirePoker.com stopped accepting real money deposits from US players, and as a result, I was forced to find another poker site. AbsolutePoker.com was that site, and I never experienced the win/loss ratio that I had while playing at EmpirePoker.com. I no longer play on AbsolutePoker.com because of the bad beat after bad beat. In fact, I no longer play for real money, because since having to find other poker sites that would except US deposits, I have lost almost $10,000 over a four year period.

John Paul (a.k.a. JPRiver)

[potracker]

Ha Ha, This story is a joke. I can take you anytime you want to bet. :)

[carterqi]

er.. you can choose play with no money just for fun...

still think online stuff is not secure.. even Internet bank...

too conservative? ?

[xman0000]

DOES any know the word IRS, its still income and he better be paying taxes on it. Drop a dime to our favorite terrorist group , and let them have some fun, If he not been reporting this, good chance, he mail hafe filed false returns, fraud and lets see there a bucjmore things they can tack on and by the time they done with these guys, thye wish never palyed a hand of OLD MAID in there life. Seems like some of these guys have done the IRS work for them so it be a easy office audit, fair is fair they cheated you then it time to pay.....

[fogarbre]

After reading the above posts by people there are a few items that come to mind. First, there is a very large grey area around the legality of internet poker inside the US. I believe this will change because there is tax revenue that is not being tapped. Second, I also agree that a computer programmed RNG is not a random event at all. This is something that has been well documented by statisticians for many years year now. If you ?randomize? values then it is no longer a random event. Third, there are 160 million poker players worldwide. There are only 9 million poker players playing online right now. So that means that there are approximately 150 million or 94% of the poker players worldwide do not play online! WHY? Well, I think part of the issue is that people do not trust the web sites because of issues like this and maybe like the idea that has been put forth by Gene Gioia. Continue reading his thoughts on what might be happening.
The Online Bad Beat Phenomena
An editorial from Gene Gioia, Founder of Gioia Systems, and architect of the Cut N? Shuffle? and Game Check? systems
Many online poker players have observed noticeably more bad beats online then in live poker room games. The common explanation for this is that online players see more hands online then in live games.
Many online poker players believe that the starting hands online are noticeably better then their experiences in live games.
When taking these two factors into account, along with the fact that all online poker rooms generate their revenue from the size of the pots at games (the larger the pot, the more the rake), I can come up with an alternate theory for the seemingly larger number of ?bad beats? and ?draws? experienced by online poker players.
I am told that the Nevada Gaming approved that standard Random Number Generators (RNGs) have 12 lines of code. Online poker operators claim to be spending millions on the development of random number generators. Why?
Considering the recent news that Absolute Poker and Ultimate Bet had software installed that gave certain players the ability to see other players? hole cards, why should I think that programming random number generators to appear random while creating significantly more ?draw? hands is out of the realm of possibility?
A random number generator is, after all, a computer program, that will do whatever it is programmed to do. Poker is such a unique game because it creates a virtually unlimited number of possible outcomes. This opens the door for any number of possibilities for anyone wanting to exploit this fact to their advantage.
What is preventing online operators from developing or using RNGs that are programmed to create, whenever desired, a series of hands that encourage a greater number of players participating in any given game, to stay in because of the possibility of achieving a really ?monster? hand? If you have played online for any length of time, you probably can relate to what I am saying and why I am saying this.
By using computer programming to create desirable starting hands, it stands to reason that you would also be creating a significantly higher number of finishing hands. In the process, the pots for those games would be significantly higher; therefore the amount of rack per game increases.
Three years ago, Sports Illustrated published, in their May issue, an article about online poker. That article pointed to an April study by an online tracking company. This study concluded that there was approximately $200 million dollars per day being bet in online poker pots. It also estimated that online sites were generating about $5 million per day in rake revenue. At these levels of pots, an imperceptible change could result in a huge increase in annual revenue. If the average rake is 2.5% of the pot size (as the April study suggested), the effect of one quarter of 1% (very possible and easily done with programming) results in an increase of $500,000 per day or $182.5 million dollars annually in rake revenue. And who pays for this, the players of course. The rake is a necessary part of the game, but should not result from manipulation of any kind.
This is one of the reasons, the Cut N? Shuffle? and Game Check? systems were created. Our sole mission is to provide online poker players with a game that leaves no doubt about its fairness and integrity. We look forward to opening the RealDealPoker.com flagship site for poker players and fulfilling our goal to bring provable honesty and integrity to the online poker player. Our system also spells the end to robotic programs. Wait until you see what we have done to them.
Gioia Systems is all about Real Cards, Real Poker, and Real Fun for Real Players. Come join us when we open. You?ll see what we mean.
Please send your comments, [e-mail].

[fdunn3]

I find it ironic that these servers are in areas that the U.S. has no jurisdiction over yet the players are giving their credit information to these same sites.

Since the U.S. has no jurisdiction a site could open for a year and be a perfect poker site but then close down and sell all credit info on the black market.

These "Gamblers" are not only gambling at the table, they are also gambling that their credit info won't wind up being used against them at a later date.

As far as I am concerned the U.S. should ban all of these sites from ever reaching the U.S. Internet. I know they have tried and the World Court found it a violation. Well all I have to say is that we shouldn't abide by their position for the good of the U.S. population unless they can be held accountable by U.S. laws and enforcement.

[rapier1]

First you'll need to wrap the entire US in a giant firewall. That's the easy part.

[expobuyer]

Hi,

I beleive cheating is going on with the gameing sites in the Uk. How can approach this matter and who do I contact to investigate the matter. Thanks

[sunilverma011]

Ever since ultimate bet and absolute poker's cheating scandal was revealed, online poker's market has suffered a bit. But mind you still there are lots of other poker rooms which provide better security when compare to these downgraded poker companies who cheated millions of real money from innocent poker players. You guys can visit http://aboutpokerplayers.blogspot.com/ to get latest information on online gambling market.

[justinmacgonal]

I have been following this news for a while now and this is the best dissertation of the incident so far. I have been playing online slots and poker for a long time now and I have seen many people get away with cheating. When I started there was nothing much one could do about it and only a seasoned player would generally catch the cheater. I decided to move on to more secure sites like Slotland. They've been around for 10 years and most players are familiar and trustworthy. It's is usually a player who spots the cheat. I am glad that these were bought to justice. Well written and cheers!!..

[maxhodges01]

anyone who gambles online is just plain ignorant. Those companies can do absolutely anything they want with their programs. I'm sure now that a couple got busted, they will change their strategy and spread the winnings among hundreds of fake player accounts so that no single account jumps out as a statistical anomaly--just hundreds of thousands of accounts that win more often than they lose. Want to protect yourself from getting cheated out of your money? Simple: don't play online poker! If I were running such a company Hell Yeah I would rig the game! You stand to gain millions and you risk losing....well, you risk nothing at all.