[cory1111]

Here are some examples of a so-called unbiased mediator:

8:31 AM
Reply ▼
Wilheim Add to contacts
To Cory Roth
From: Wilheim
Sent: Sat 4/02/11 8:31 Am
To: Cory
Regardless of your preconceived fears, there is no one who you will meet if you came to Costa Rica who would do you any bodily harm or even subject you to verbal abuse. Remember, we agreed to let you keep your arrival date, hotel and departure date secret. We also agreed to allow you to have as many representatives from SBR and personal body guards (I am sure SBR could supply you with several if needed) to accompany you at all times during your contact with the just ordinary people that work at Easystreet.. Your safety was never in danger from Easystreet (and certainly not myself, a 63 year old man) at anytime during your visit nor would your identity or location have ever been made public during your stay..

In any event that is in the past. You know the truth, soon everyone else interested in the case will also.


Regards, wilheim

[cory1111]

Players like you are the reason books require so much documentation from honest players these days. I find this entire effort by you shameful as we both know that hitting those three Royals in that brief of a time plus the other two at another book in even less time back in late November is a virtual impossibility, these are just the ones we know of. Extensive research went into that fact alone, all of it resulting in agreement with Easystreet that you broke clearly posted casino play rules to hit the Royals.

Regards, wilheim

Wilheim
Head Moderator
The Rx.com Posting Forum

[AimingHigh]

Players like you are the reason books require so much documentation from honest players these days. I find this entire effort by you shameful as we both know that hitting those three Royals in that brief of a time plus the other two at another book in even less time back in late November is a virtual impossibility, these are just the ones we know of. Extensive research went into that fact alone, all of it resulting in agreement with Easystreet that you broke clearly posted casino play rules to hit the Royals.

Regards, wilheim

Wilheim
Head Moderator
The Rx.com Posting Forum

I missed this part before. Seems you do actually have / believe you have an edge in casino play. Hence the massive deposit. Interesting.

[cory1111]

MR. WILHEIM'S BOSS:


Hello Cory,

My name is Marty Jensen, I am the managing director of The Rx. I have been following along your allegations against EasyStreet, and have noted that not only have you not answered Wil's questions below, you have omitted significant important information from the start. In particular, you neglected to mention to Wil that only a few weeks ago you won at NorthBet.com getting 2 Royal Flushes during your sessions there.

I am going to ask Wil to ban you permanently at The Rx, as I believe you have wasted enough of our time.

Marty

[cory1111]

IM GLAD MR. WILHEIM IS LOOKING INTO THIS MATTER WITH AN OPEN MIND:
Hello Cory, I will pass this information along to Alex for you and find out what he has heard and if possible what his plans are. There has to be more to this investigation than " the tests have completed and are fine". Please allow some time for the actual results to be made available officially by the software company that conducted the investigation. Remember, I have no actual power to force Easystreet to change their policies. Their rules on the use of robotic or "AI" (artificial intelligence) software by players in their casino are clearly posted..

You sent me screen shots of your balance but not of your royal flushes - would you care to comment why? Almost any experienced player who hits a huge winner like a Royal Flush on their computer at an online casino would spare a few minutes to take a quick screen shot of the winner for their own protection.

I find it difficult to believe you would hit 3 Royals in a 12 hour period and proceeded almost immediately (in less than 2 seconds) to the next hand each time. 999 out of 1000 players would stop and examine the screen results to at least make sure they received the proper amount of credit after hitting a Royal Flush, something that could not be done is less than 2 seconds. A player with your experience would certainly take a screenshot the same way you did with your balance screen that you emailed to me.

Additionally your own personal reputation as a fraudulent player (banned from multiple books) is also giving many who know how bad it is reason to doubt you did not use bots or "AI" to play in the Easystreet casino. The number of hands you played combined with the time involved make it a virtual certainty that some sort of unconventional and against clearly posted rueles play was involved in your session at the 5 card draw video poker game at the Easystreet casino when you hit 3 royals every 2900 hands of play..Not to mention the time involved to play the hands is not humanely possible to accomplish.

I personally worked with video poker machines in Las Vegas at the same place for over 10 years and never once did I see anyone play at the hand per minute speed Easystreet claims you did during the 12 hours it took you to hit your three royals. Added to your reputaion as a charge-back and fraudulent account artist at various well respected Offshore Sportsbooks and your story IMHO carries very little credibility.

You should know that I did investigate the allegations about your reputation made by Easystreet and found them to be accurate. You should man up and tell the truth about how many books you are banned from and why. I have not posted anything regarding your personal history in an effort to be fair but feel it definitely is a factor when one judges the veracity of your claims and should be included in any real honest appraisal of this dispute.

I will email you any information I am able to from Easysteet immediately should I receive any. Contrary to what you may believe I truly want to see the right thing done in this case. The real truth regardless of what it is remains all that I care to see come to light.

Regards, wilheim

Wilheim
Head Moderator
The Rx.com Posting Forum

[Santo]

I'm curious how they think he has an edge, didn't DGS deny that?

[pokerplayer22]

This whole damn thing is a fckn joke and someone should pay Powers a visit...and maybe wilheim too. EZ accepts deposit after deposit from this guy, probably laughing as he loses every one... and they only complain when he wins. Then they start with all sorts of accusations about bots, cheating, AI, not pausing, speed of play, etc. None of which have been proven. Even the damn DGS company has claimed that there is no evidence of cheating or bot usage and have recommended that EZ pay the player. You would think they of all people could tell if bot usage or cheating actually did occurr.

This is so aggravating to read because i know first hand what a fckn crook Alex Powers is and he will continue to do this again and again. SBR...please drop this scumbag book to an F and post warnings for players on your homepage before this happens to someone else, maybe even someone more credible than Cory

[katstale]

I'm curious how they think he has an edge, didn't DGS deny that?

If he does, they should offer him 20k to close the loophole.

[vitalyo]

I'm curious how they think he has an edge, didn't DGS deny that?

I was thinking same thing

I just spoke to Chris Davis( Head of Digital Gaming Solutions) ,maker of the casino software for the 3rd time today, his response to me was," I dont know why EZstreet hasnt paid me(cory1111) yet, he told them a month ago that there was no evidence of a bot or cheating while he ran all the casino play". He recommends that they pay me....I want to know why EZ has withheld this information since now?

LOL .

MR. WILHEIM'S BOSS:


Hello Cory,My name is Marty Jensen, I am the managing director of The Rx. I have been following along your allegations against EasyStreet, and have noted that not only have you not answered Wil's questions below, you have omitted significant important information from the start. In particular, you neglected to mention to Wil that only a few weeks ago you won at NorthBet.com getting 2 Royal Flushes during your sessions there.

I am going to ask Wil to ban you permanently at The Rx, as I believe you have wasted enough of our time.

This is a joke ? Right ?

[relaaxx]

have to admit taking shots at so many books is a problem for me if it is true. but the particular case at EZ, well is easy. prove that he broke some rule or just pay him. if EZ could definatly prove anything they would have already done so to anyone who asked. same old story --make as many deposits as you want - hit big and have a large balance - and most books will find a reason not to pay. they really only need 1 rule. we can do what we want in any circumstance that may arise, we are the last word on every situation, we do not have to explain anything to anyone.

[KGambler]

Some people might be confused by some of the things said by Shilheim in his emails. He has been repeating many of ezstreet's lies, partly out of bias and partly out of ignorance.

These are some of the lies that Shilheim has been telling. All of them have been 100% disproven by the data easystreet has released.

1. cory1111 played 18 hands a minute for many hours straight
2. cory1111 hit his royals at such a high rate that it is indicative of possible cheating
3. cory1111 hit 3 royals in 8,000 hands
4. cory1111 did not pause after hitting royals

He also keeps saying that cory1111 played perfect strategy in all of his hands, although even easystreet (the originators of this fabrication) now admit that they only looked at a handful of actual hand histories.

Don't be fooled into thinking that cory1111 might have an edge in the casino. He did NOT hit 3 royals in 8K hands. Even if he did, that is not nearly as uncommon as Shilheim seems to think. He is ignorant of the actual math. But again, he did NOT hit 3 royals in 8K hands at ezstreet. Shilheim and easystreet are not counting the sessions which did not contain a royal, so they are literally ignoring thousands and thousands of hands when they cite that figure. Cory1111 had his account balance up to about $60K and kept playing until he lost $12K back. He would have kept playing, but they froze his account. EZstreet/Shilheim are not counting any of the hands from losing sessions when they cite these bogus statistics. Releasing these false stasticis, and then constantly referring to them, is a very dishonest thing to do. It is clear that their agenda is to cloud the issue and to mislead people interested in the case.

[HedgeHog]

I don't know why Wil is dragging this out so long. He's obviously going to rule for EZ as evidenced by almost every post he makes at RX.

[BET THE HOOK]

They just need to play the player.

[yokspot]

These are some of the lies that Shilheim has been telling. All of them have been 100% disproven by the data easystreet has released.

1. cory1111 played 18 hands a minute for many hours straight
2. cory1111 hit his royals at such a high rate that it is indicative of possible cheating
3. cory1111 hit 3 royals in 8,000 hands
4. cory1111 did not pause after hitting royals

1. He's acknowledged this was wrong.

2. Granted. I think this is ignorance of gambling knowledge, not malice. Many people have also got hung up on this "impossible" angle, which is nonsense.

3. He didn't? He hit 2 in 5K hands. Irrelevant, though. 3 in 8K hands is not remotely impossible.

4. Technically, true.

[yokspot]

MR. WILHEIM'S BOSS:


Hello Cory,

My name is Marty Jensen, I am the managing director of The Rx. I have been following along your allegations against EasyStreet, and have noted that not only have you not answered Wil's questions below, you have omitted significant important information from the start. In particular, you neglected to mention to Wil that only a few weeks ago you won at NorthBet.com getting 2 Royal Flushes during your sessions there.

I am going to ask Wil to ban you permanently at The Rx, as I believe you have wasted enough of our time.

Marty

Why not accept the polygraph within a reasonable radius of your house? You've got nothing to lose, you can be no worse off. Then if you pass, you can take up the 2'16'' VP test in CR. Nothing to lose, no cost to you. Why not give it a go?

[CallMeChip]

Yknow I just started here and I took a look at that Rx forum too. Can anyone tell me what's up with all the yellow and orange? I'm a web designer by trade and honestly those colors look like shit. You need to spread out your homepage too, awful cluttered together.

[Justin7]

3. He didn't? He hit 2 in 5K hands. Irrelevant, though. 3 in 8K hands is not remotely impossible.

This is very misleading. If you want to be selective, the player hit 3 royals in just 3 hands. If you want to do a fair comparison, look at all the hands he has played anywhere.

Or, to be minimally fair, look at all the hands he played at EZStreet. This quote is ignoring all his sessions where he hit no royals (which is as ridiculous as ignoring all hands played without royals, making him 3/3). He deposited 10 times and blew out each time before going on this run.

You're free to comment, yokspot, but try to be fair and stick to facts.

[durito]

I went 50-0 today on my bets that won.

[relaaxx]

never take a polygraph -

[Scooter]

Why not accept the polygraph within a reasonable radius of your house? You've got nothing to lose, you can be no worse off. Then if you pass, you can take up the 2'16'' VP test in CR. Nothing to lose, no cost to you. Why not give it a go?

Because the lie detector is a joke, long discredited in the scientific community.
Entirely subjective as far as the results, depending on the operator.

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/polygr...ional_securit/


"" The secret of the polygraph-the polygraphers’ own shameless deception-is that their machine is no more capable of assessing truth telling than were the priests of ancient Rome standing knee-deep in chicken parts."

""The truth is this: The polygraph is a ruse, carefully constructed as a tool of intimidation, and used as an excuse to conduct an illegal inquisition under psychologically and physically unpleasant circumstances. Spies know how to beat it, and no court in the land permits submission of polygraphs, even to exonerate the accused."

[yokspot]

It's irrelevant.

3 Royals in 8K hands is not impossible. It follows that 3 royals in 8K+ hands is less "impossible" again.

What about the comment in the video about the OP having a chequered past? Is it substantiated? Wilheim also said he'd turned over a bunch of top-rated books, which seems to corroborate your statement.

[stevenash]

Yknow I just started here and I took a look at that Rx forum too. Can anyone tell me what's up with all the yellow and orange? I'm a web designer by trade and honestly those colors look like shit. You need to spread out your homepage too, awful cluttered together.

Why don't you take it up them?

[yokspot]

"The truth is this: The polygraph is a ruse, carefully constructed as a tool of intimidation, and used as an excuse to conduct an illegal inquisition under psychologically and physically unpleasant circumstances. Spies know how to beat it, and no court in the land permits submission of polygraphs, even to exonerate the accused."

Interesting article. However, the test in question would be little more than one question, by an unbiased tester (I'd say guaranteed if done in Florida), in neutral surroundings - so the hell, fire and brimstone of the article wouldn't apply. What does he have to lose? Zero minus zero is still zero. If he passes (every chance), then assuming he can get through two hours of swift VP, he's practically home and dry for his cash.

[Scooter]

Shillheim has already closed the case.

[yokspot]

He's said he's prepared to reopen it, or words to that effect.

[Justin7]

Interesting article. However, the test in question would be little more than one question, by an unbiased tester (I'd say guaranteed if done in Florida), in neutral surroundings - so the hell, fire and brimstone of the article wouldn't apply. What does he have to lose? Zero minus zero is still zero. If he passes (every chance), then assuming he can get through two hours of swift VP, he's practically home and dry for his cash.

There is no such thing as an unbiased tester. Any polygraph test has two goals: identify false statements, and avoid false positives. The more you chase one, the worse you do on the other. If you are testing potential secret service employees, you might tolerate a 90% false positive rate to eliminate 99.9% of deceivers. The two rates are correlated. The more likely a test is to identify someone actually lying, the more likely you are to incorrectly conclude that an honest person is lying.

What is a fair false-positive rate if you are 100% innocent, and a failure screws you out of 46k? Even the best tests have a 15-30% false positive rate. If you are owed 46k, you're retarded to give the other side a 15-30% chance of stiffing you.

[trumpdown]

There is no such thing as an unbiased tester. Any polygraph test has two goals: identify false statements, and avoid false positives. The more you chase one, the worse you do on the other. If you are testing potential secret service employees, you might tolerate a 90% false positive rate to eliminate 99.9% of deceivers. The two rates are correlated. The more likely a test is to identify someone actually lying, the more likely you are to incorrectly conclude that an honest person is lying.

What is a fair false-positive rate if you are 100% innocent, and a failure screws you out of 46k? Even the best tests have a 15-30% false positive rate. If you are owed 46k, you're retarded to give the other side a 15-30% chance of stiffing you.

[KGambler]

Interesting article. However, the test in question would be little more than one question, by an unbiased tester (I'd say guaranteed if done in Florida), in neutral surroundings - so the hell, fire and brimstone of the article wouldn't apply. What does he have to lose? Zero minus zero is still zero. If he passes (every chance), then assuming he can get through two hours of swift VP, he's practically home and dry for his cash.

The "unbiased tester" would be a Costan Rican guy hired by easystreet. It is a set up. Shilheim keeps saying that Cory has nothing to lose, but obviously he would report to the rubes over at his forum that Cory "failed" a "lie detector test" and that it's safe to deposit with his client ezstreet again.

Anyone who fell for such a blatant set up would have to be a real sucker.

[KGambler]

1. He's acknowledged this was wrong.

2. Granted. I think this is ignorance of gambling knowledge, not malice. Many people have also got hung up on this "impossible" angle, which is nonsense.

3. He didn't? He hit 2 in 5K hands. Irrelevant, though. 3 in 8K hands is not remotely impossible.

4. Technically, true.

1. OK, I just went and looked at his thread and he retracted that particular lie yesterday afternoon. I have been posting this list for days now, so I am sorry if I can't give him any credit for getting caught red handed in an obvious fabrication.

Notice that he keeps repeating that Cory "lied to him from the start", and he gives a silly example which has absolutely nothing to do with the case, but instead of acknowledging that EZstreet made a fool of him by telling him the player played 18 hands a minute for many hours straight, he attempts to blame it on his "own misinterpreted hand writing from notes I made during a telephone conversation with Ez St upper management." Even if that were the case (and you would have to be a real rube to believe that, considering ezstreet told the exact same lies to us over here on SBR), why would he report those statistics to his forum without seeing any evidence? This guy has acted totally unprofessionally - unless of course he is just a professional shill.

2. Yes, he does seem extremely ignorant when it comes to the mathematics of gambling and the mechanics of JoB VP. Although he keeps talking about his decade of work experience with JOB VP, he doesn't even know the correct payout for a straight.

3. No, he did not. He played many thousands of more hands at ezstreet. What is hard to understand about this?

4. "technically true"? You might have a job at therx, or as a poltician, or as a really, really scummy lawyer... It depends on what your definition of "is" is, right?

What a complete disgrace that this biased and wholly ignorant clown Shilheim has pronounced himself mediator of this dispute.

[KGambler]

Wow. Someone at therx asked Shilheim point blank how many hands of JOB VP Cory played at easystreet. The answer was 22K. That's slightly more than what he was citing when he kept repeating that Cory hit his 3 royals in "only" 9K hands.

[Scooter]

KGambler - "2. Yes, he does seem extremely ignorant when it comes to the mathematics of gambling and the mechanics of JoB VP. Although he keeps talking about his decade of work experience with JOB VP, he doesn't even know the correct payout for a straight."

The majority of the people working in casinos know as little - or less - about gambling math, odds, etc., as the chumps who gamble there without an edge.


Shillheim writes about going out to play vp after his casino shift was over, and tipping bartenders $10 for getting one beer. (And he's obviously still proud of this).
It's clear he hasn't a clue about gambling math, probability, vp odds, basic vp payouts, etc., even though he says he worked for years servicing customers at vp machines.
And he wrote something like "I may not have played perfectly but I basically know how to play".

Some people end up working in casinos because they bust out gambling and need a job.


A pretty likely portrait emerges as to his background.

[yokspot]

Wow. Someone at therx asked Shilheim point blank how many hands of JOB VP Cory played at easystreet. The answer was 22K. That's slightly more than what he was citing when he kept repeating that Cory hit his 3 royals in "only" 9K hands.

So why, from day 1, has everyone been talking about either 3 royals in 8K or 5 in 13K? At no point was there any reference to more than 13K hands. Now it's 22K, and Justin's banging on at me about "sticking to the facts"? Jeez, I've been using the exact same figures everyone else has been using.

This is all a red herring anyway. 3 royals in 8K hands is not statistically improbable, so 5 in 22K obviously is less so again.

What is a fair false-positive rate if you are 100% innocent, and a failure screws you out of 46k? Even the best tests have a 15-30% false positive rate. If you are owed 46k, you're retarded to give the other side a 15-30% chance of stiffing you.

You're retarded to take a shot at 70% non-stiff chance? that's 32K EV (assuming guaranteed success at the play test). Based on a 30% stiff rate, I'd say you'd be retarded NOT to accept this.

KG, he suggested a local test as an option (within 50 mile radius). That would eliminate any potential goons from Easystreet.

I think this "polygraph is Armageddon" angle is being played to excess here.

I grant that failure does have a downside, but not in money terms for the player. The book can claim that the player has been "legitimately exposed" as a fraud - which would not be strictly correct (but still MIGHT be - it is possible, but improbable, that he used a bot) - and that they are exhonerated as such. That is an "upside". But they know that this will do nothing to stem the flow of hatred or the reputation damage. In this respect, they don't have a whole lot to gain from this: OP passes = almost certain 46K to stump up. OP fails = broke book and paid forum shill conspire to fit up player and rob him. Either way, it ain't pretty.

On a more general note, a point I made at RX: this is all down to the book's rampant ineptitude in offering soft bonuses in the first place. Not for the first time, a player is being held responsible for the industry's failings. It's a very common theme.

[KGambler]

So why, from day 1, has everyone been talking about either 3 royals in 8K or 5 in 13K?

Because therx is like the blind leading the stupid. The 3 royals in 8K hands comes from easystreet's/Shilheim's lies. They intentionally left out the sessions where he didn't hit a royal, and tried to claim he might have cheated. The math never made any sense anyway, but that is the brush they tried to paint him with.

The 5 royals in 13K hands comes from the fact that this guy supposedly hit 2 royals in 5K hands at a different casino (Northbet) a few weeks or months ago. Yes, over at therx they really are stupid enough to add in these extra royals and try to attach some sort of statistical significance to it. Besides the fact that those hands were played weeks or months ago, the numbers cited come second hand from a notorious shill and liar (Shilheim).

On a more general note, a point I made at RX: this is all down to the book's rampant ineptitude in offering soft bonuses in the first place. Not for the first time, a player is being held responsible for the industry's failings. It's a very common theme.

If you are "Caruso" over there, then you made some very well reasoned points. That was a good post.

[increasedodds]

OVerall I think Cory should be paid.

That said, a question for Cory:

Have you ever done a ********** vs a casino? If so, which ones and why?

[stevenash]

Has a final/judgement even been made yet?