Does this sound like a bot on Cake Poker?

MonkeyF0cker · 10-11-09, 09:17 PM

A bot? Do you know what a bot is?

Sorry, I'm not shoving with AK suited in a cash game. Poor play on the second. Guy got lucky.

themajormt · 10-11-09, 09:21 PM

Ok maybe I meant super account or whatever Monkey...

Lucky is a fukking MAJOR understatement bro... 2,3 suited CALLING after 2 all ins preflop??? You say thats just lucky?

mtneer1212 · 10-11-09, 10:00 PM

Why play at Cake? Play at Full Tilt or PokerStars -- they are the only two I truly trust -- maybe Bodog too..........

poker_dummy101 · 10-11-09, 10:32 PM

First raise is a 10x?

flyingillini · 10-11-09, 10:35 PM

I had a hard time getting my money out of cake a while back.

poker_dummy101 · 10-11-09, 10:36 PM

Also, do you want us to believe you won the middle hand played for $50 NET profit?

Edit: Assuming the first raiser is the one who went all in, getting AKs AIPF is pretty standard there.

MonkeyF0cker · 10-12-09, 12:04 AM

Originally posted by themajormt

Ok maybe I meant super account or whatever Monkey...

Lucky is a fukking MAJOR understatement bro... 2,3 suited CALLING after 2 all ins preflop??? You say thats just lucky?

I've seen far worse in live games. What was he up against? AK and what? He might have even had odds. Although, he probably didn't know it or he just wanted to dink around on a smaller table for a while. Anyone who would have access to the come on a poker site probably wouldn't make it that obvious. I highly doubt that was the case.

MonkeyF0cker · 10-12-09, 12:05 AM

Originally posted by poker_dummy101

First raise is a 10x?

I laughed at that too when I first read it...

JoshW · 10-12-09, 07:39 AM

Three betting with nothing is pretty common, especially if they know you like to two bet.

firedawg · 10-12-09, 07:45 AM

dont play online

20Four7 · 10-12-09, 08:18 AM

I"m sorry Major didn't realize it was you. I'll fold next time..... NOT

themajormt · 10-12-09, 08:33 AM

You guys are all missing the point... Please explain to me the justification for the calls... Youre pointing out totally irrelevant things...

TheBeautifulGame · 10-12-09, 08:42 AM

So you're saying this person called a heavy amount like he KNEW he was going to receive the correct cards for him to win his hand. Perhaps he was just a compulsive gambler and called HOPING the cards would go right for him.

Obviously, he was right for those two hands but playing like that all the time will result in failure.

EDIT: Perhaps he was trying to bluff that he had a decent hand (ie flush) and the cards just happened to go his way?

poker_dummy101 · 10-12-09, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by themajormt

You guys are all missing the point... Please explain to me the justification for the calls... Youre pointing out totally irrelevant things...

The only relevant thing here is for you to give me:

A. The guy's screen name who open raised $10

B. The guy's screen name who called with ridiculous cards

C. Pray that they didn't change their names on Cake yet

themajormt · 10-12-09, 08:58 AM

PokerD... I will get the hand history tonight and PM you with it... The first hand it was just me and the donkey in the hand, the other guy wasnt there... Like I said before, I know I could be over reacting, but I have NEVER seen a gut shot CALL, with all under cards, when he isnt even close to getting 1:1 on the money... Just blows my mind, and then the fact that he calls with 2,3 a hand later just really is messing with me... I know there are bad players out there but this is very extreme!

20Four7 · 10-12-09, 09:07 AM

Originally posted by themajormt

PokerD... I will get the hand history tonight and PM you with it... The first hand it was just me and the donkey in the hand, the other guy wasnt there... Like I said before, I know I could be over reacting, but I have NEVER seen a gut shot CALL, with all under cards, when he isnt even close to getting 1:1 on the money... Just blows my mind, and then the fact that he calls with 2,3 a hand later just really is messing with me... I know there are bad players out there but this is very extreme!

How about doing some math? A quick calculation shows there's 196 in the pot, 137 to him (1.43 to 1). How is he not getting even close to even money. Not that it justifies the call (as you need far more than that if the gut shot is your only outs) but math is important in playing poker and if you didn't think he was getting even money YOU need to work on some skillz.

konck · 10-12-09, 10:01 AM

Lets think ......poker is run by the underworld now......it's there big bizz/...... do you think there stealing DUH

Rio DiNero · 10-12-09, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by themajormt

You guys are all missing the point... Please explain to me the justification for the calls... Youre pointing out totally irrelevant things...

Low limit games at cake poker are full of donkeys. Those plays don't shock me one bit, I've seen way worse. Here is a TIP for you to utilize on the cake network: PLAY .25/.50 or .50/1 HEADS UP, and play ABC poker, and you can easily make a few hundred a day.

JoshW · 10-12-09, 10:52 AM

I am not saying that clearly some superusers existed or exist, but I am saying that this persons play while bad, doesn't lead one to think the most likely reason for the play is he knew the outcome. It takes many hands to even begin to consider suspecting that. Also no superuser claim has ever had them predicting cards I don't think.

But I understand when you get drawn out on, it pisses you off. Same for me.

keyboarding · 10-12-09, 11:34 AM

Things to consider. Not worth it to run a bot on such a low stake game. Secondly, the "super user" can only see your cards, and if he saw you with a set, he wouldn't push hoping to hit, he'd call and see he has the winning hand and then **** you.

You were playing a very lucky donkey. Move on.

themajormt · 10-12-09, 12:38 PM

Good points KB...

Dbldown11 · 10-12-09, 12:41 PM

I wouldnt play online at all at this point. All major sites have had issues with superaccounts and cheating. It's just not safe, or reliable

keyboarding · 10-12-09, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by Dbldown11

I wouldnt play online at all at this point. All major sites have had issues with superaccounts and cheating. It's just not safe, or reliable

It always makes me laugh when people say things like this, and you find out they are doing $20 buy-ins or $1/$2 cash games. Most people need to get over themselves, they aren't that important, and no one wants your money that bad.

My friend plays HU for the max limits at Pokerstars. Once you get to that level, and I'd imagine at all high stake levels, people know each other. They would sniff out a bot or superuser or whatever in a matter of days. Pokerstars gains nothing from allowing a superuser (as was the case in the AbsolutePoker example), and stand to lose everything.

Reality check; you're losing because you're either being outplayed or playing terrible players. I know, it sucks, but people claiming conspiracy every time they lose a hand they should have won is beyond ridiculous.

Dbldown11 · 10-12-09, 02:25 PM

Originally posted by keyboarding

It always makes me laugh when people say things like this, and you find out they are doing $20 buy-ins or $1/$2 cash games. Most people need to get over themselves, they aren't that important, and no one wants your money that bad.

My friend plays HU for the max limits at Pokerstars. Once you get to that level, and I'd imagine at all high stake levels, people know each other. They would sniff out a bot or superuser or whatever in a matter of days. Pokerstars gains nothing from allowing a superuser (as was the case in the AbsolutePoker example), and stand to lose everything.

Reality check; you're losing because you're either being outplayed or playing terrible players. I know, it sucks, but people claiming conspiracy every time they lose a hand they should have won is beyond ridiculous.

I never said that I was a victim.....but it's a fact. Poker stars, Ultimate Bet, some very high profile online poker sites have had problems with super users. I wasnt stating an opinion, I was stating a fact you ****ing moron. And by the way I would destroy in cards.

Dbldown11 · 10-12-09, 02:26 PM

and again you ****ing fool obviously pokerstars and the sites dont "allow" it to go on, but it goes on until they catch the people. Who said anything about them allowing it. Learn to talk about facts instead of just your thoughts on a subject. You'll become more reputable

keyboarding · 10-12-09, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by Dbldown11

I never said that I was a victim.....but it's a fact. Poker stars, Ultimate Bet, some very high profile online poker sites have had problems with super users. I wasnt stating an opinion, I was stating a fact you ****ing moron. And by the way I would destroy in cards.

Show me the facts about superusers on Pokerstars please. You would destroy me in cards is what I'm assuming you meant to say, to which I say... okay.

Originally posted by Dbldown11

and again you ****ing fool obviously pokerstars and the sites dont "allow" it to go on, but it goes on until they catch the people. Who said anything about them allowing it. Learn to talk about facts instead of just your thoughts on a subject. You'll become more reputable

You sound like a very upset young man. Sounds like poker has been very bad to you. I'm sorry for that.

Dbldown11 · 10-12-09, 02:45 PM

No, I just hate when ****ing idiots quote my posts.....then blatantly state that I'm saying things I never said. It just makes you an idiot, and it makes me mad to be misquoted

keyboarding · 10-12-09, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by Dbldown11

No, I just hate when ****ing idiots quote my posts.....then blatantly state that I'm saying things I never said. It just makes you an idiot, and it makes me mad to be misquoted

You said:

All major sites have had issues with superaccounts

I am awaiting the proof of documented superusers on Pokerstars and FullTilt. Until then you will be viewed, rightfully so I might add, as a ridiculous, alarmist idiot.

acarmelo1 · 10-12-09, 03:12 PM

maybe he knew you were a bad player

poker_dummy101 · 10-12-09, 03:12 PM

Superuser accounts might or might not exist on pokerstars and/or fulltilt. Right now there is no proof that doesnt mean there aren't.

Many years ago people would say ohhhh poker isnt rigged its just that you suck. Now it is.. ohhhh poker isnt rigged, just Absolute and UB has superusers, every other site is clean.

We dont know for sure because we dont have access to the billions of hands that go on there.

poker_dummy101 · 10-12-09, 03:17 PM

Wow there are so many things wrong in this thread

keyboarding · 10-12-09, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by poker_dummy101

Superuser accounts might or might not exist on pokerstars and/or fulltilt. Right now there is no proof that doesnt mean there aren't.

I don't disagree about the possibility, but he's stating it as fact.

Originally posted by Dbldown11

Learn to talk about facts instead of just your thoughts on a subject. You'll become more reputable

MrMike · 10-12-09, 04:18 PM

Originally posted by Dbldown11

I wouldnt play online at all at this point. All major sites have had issues with superaccounts and cheating. It's just not safe, or reliable

BINGO!!!

Online poker has become so shady over the past few years and if it is not one issue it will be another.

blackbart · 10-12-09, 07:22 PM

i am quite sure there are many bots at cake, and at the level you were playing.