HAHA. Who wants to do a Fanduel league again?

[threebag]

Originally Posted by BDj23

I've gotten two neg reps in the past two years, both from Baconeater, both because i called hootie a homo.

What's with the man crush, dude?

[Bugeater]

Originally Posted by BDj23

I've gotten two neg reps in the past two years, both from Baconeater, both because i called hootie a homo.

What's with the man crush, dude?

It has nothing to do with a man crush and everything to do with you being a nobody who contributes nothing to the board but for some reason thinks people need to hear your opinion of those who do.

Same shit happens whenever Clay's name comes up, we have nobodies like Chief Northman and TigerBob spouting off and acting like their opinion matters to someone. Guess what idiots? It doesn't. Not one ****ing bit.

[George Liquor]

Originally Posted by Baconeater

It has nothing to do with a man crush and everything to do with you being a nobody who contributes nothing to the board but for some reason thinks people need to hear your opinion of those who do.

Same shit happens whenever Clay's name comes up, we have nobodies like Chief Northman and TigerBob spouting off and acting like their opinion matters to someone. Guess what idiots? It doesn't. Not one ****ing bit.

Oh noez, I'm a CP nobody?

Bfd

I mainly stick to the Cards thread and fishing thread, and the fact that you care so much makes you as big a homo as hootie.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

That first week was one of the biggest shit shows ever

[Swanman]

Originally Posted by Pasta Giant Meatball

That first week was one of the biggest shit shows ever

Hootie was absolutely in love with the Patriots stacks that first week and they all did almost nothing, and were also really highly owned so it was a double whammy. To be fair, his lineups another week made a bit of money.

Hootie was booted because he wanted to violate a rule that he himself campaigned vigorously for. And it might have still be ok if he wasn't such a prick when he first brought up playing his free rolls. There were compromises to be made but he had already nuked every bridge from orbit by that point. Hootie being hootie.

[TimBone]

Originally Posted by Swanman

Hootie was absolutely in love with the Patriots stacks that first week and they all did almost nothing, and were also really highly owned so it was a double whammy. To be fair, his lineups another week made a bit of money.

Hootie was booted because he wanted to violate a rule that he himself campaigned vigorously for. And it might have still be ok if he wasn't such a prick when he first brought up playing his free rolls. There were compromises to be made but he had already nuked every bridge from orbit by that point. Hootie being hootie.

This is the best explanation of the events.

And Hootie was banned for a beef with CC that I still don't believe was hootie's fault.

[stumppy]

I'll kick in $5 if you let Hootie back in and let me have access to all the threads.
Thats $5 worth of entertainment right there.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

He my throw 90, run a 4.4 40 but he sure doesn't know football

[In58men]

To be honest, I wouldn't mind teaming up with Hootie in Draft Kings. The guy is very knowledgeable, he knows quite a bit. Playing DK or FD you're not going to win every time, that's how it goes. I've won plenty and lost plenty. 40% skill 60% luck.

[Chiefspants]

Hootie's acumen for both baseball and football is missed around here. I guess I'm waiting for the post where he says "okay, so I was wrong about this issue here.." It's clear he was treated unfairly in some regards, but his posts read like he was a white knight through this entire situation and that's obviously not 100% true.

I do enjoy his baseball takes. He nailed 2015 (specifically Moose's and Cain's development) when many pundits predicted the Royals to collapse. He deserves due credit for that.

[In58men]

Originally Posted by Chiefspants

Hootie's acumen for both baseball and football is missed around here. I guess I'm waiting for the post where he says "okay, so I was wrong about this issue here.." It's clear he was treated unfairly in some regards, but his posts read like he was a white knight through this entire situation and that's obviously not 100% true.

I do enjoy his baseball takes. He nailed 2015 (specifically Moose's and Cain's development) when many pundits predicted the Royals to collapse. He deserves due credit for that.

From what I'm reading, this seems accurate.

[lewdog]

**** all of you.

I am PM'ing Hootie and just he and I are gonna roll together. When we start living like kings, I'll let you know.

[Why Not?]

Originally Posted by lewdog

**** all of you.

I am PM'ing Hootie and just he and I are gonna roll together. When we start living like draftkings, I'll let you know.

Fixed

[lewdog]

Originally Posted by Why Not?

Fixed

Arizona bro.

[Lex Luthor]

I thought it was an interesting experiment last year. I'd do it again, except I lost a little faith in the fairness of all of these Daily Fantasy Sports sites.

I remember the week when a brand new player finished in something like 3 out of the top 5 spots in the contest. The player had just created his account a couple of days before the weekend, and he picked 3 winners. Not only that, but if I recall correctly, the only reason his teams won were because Ben Roethlisberger returned early from an injury (he wasn't expected to play at all that day).

This guy's teams won several hundred thousand dollars, and it all just seemed a little fishy to me. I couldn't help but think someone on the inside did some manipulation during or immediately after the Steelers game. It reminded me of the incident a few years ago where a guy who was a system administrator on one of the legal poker sites installed a hack that let him play the games and see what everybody's down cards were. He made a killing before he was caught.

I'm sure there are all kinds of safeguards in place at Fanduel and Draft Kings to prevent things like that. Yeah, whatever.

I did a Google search, and I found a story about the incident:

The Absolute Poker Cheating Scandal Blown Wide Open

October 17, 2007 @ 9:36am
by Steven D. Levitt

A few weeks back I blogged about allegations of cheating at an online poker site called Absolute Poker. While things looked awfully suspicious, there wasn’t quite a smoking gun, and it was unclear exactly how the cheater might have cheated.

A combination of some incredible detective work by some poker players and an accidental (?) data leak by Absolute Poker have blown the scandal wide open.

You can read the first-hand account in the following thread at 2+2 Poker Forum, but here’s the short version:

Some opponents became suspicious of how a certain player was playing. He seemed to know what the opponents’ hole cards were. The suspicious players provided examples of these hands, which were so outrageous that virtually all serious poker players were convinced that cheating had occurred. One of the players who’d been cheated requested that Absolute Poker provide hand histories from the tournament (which is standard practice for online sites). In this case, Absolute Poker “accidentally” did not send the usual hand histories, but instead sent a file that contained all sorts of private information that the poker site would never release. The file contained every player’s hole cards, observations of the tables, and even the IP addresses of every person playing. (I put “accidentally” in quotes because the mistake seems like too great a coincidence when you learn what followed.) I suspect that someone at Absolute knew about the cheating and how it happened, and was acting as a whistleblower by sending these data. If that is the case, I hope whomever “accidentally” sent the file gets their proper hero’s welcome in the end.

Then the poker players went to work analyzing the data — not the hand histories themselves, but other, more subtle information contained in the file. What these players-turned-detectives noticed was that, starting with the third hand of the tournament, there was an observer who watched every subsequent hand played by the cheater. (For those of you who don’t know much about online poker, anyone who wants can observe a particular table, although, of course, the observers can’t see any of the players’ hole cards.) Interestingly, the cheater folded the first two hands before this observer showed up, then did not fold a single hand before the flop for the next 20 minutes, and then folded his hand pre-flop when another player had a pair of kings as hole cards! This sort of cheating went on throughout the tournament.

So the poker detectives turned their attention to this observer. They traced the observer’s IP address and account name to the same set of servers that host Absolute Poker, and also, apparently, to a particular individual named Scott Tom, who seems to be a part-owner of Absolute Poker! If all of this is correct, it shows exactly how the cheating would have transpired: an insider at the Web site had real-time access to all of the hole cards (it is not hard to believe that this capability would exist) and was relaying this information to an outside accomplice.

If this is all true, I presume that the two cheaters are looking at potential prison time. I would also guess that if Absolute Poker continues to argue that nothing out of the ordinary happened, they will take an enormous hit to their profits. Online poker is a game of trust — players send their money to a site believing that they will be playing a fair game, and trusting that the site will send them their winnings. If there is even a little bit of uncertainty about either one of those factors, there is no good reason for a player to choose that site over the many close substitutes that exist. If I ran Absolute Poker, I would take a lesson from past corporate attempts at cover ups, sacrifice the cheaters, and institute safeguards to prevent this ever happening again.

The real lesson of this all, however, is probably the following: guys who aren’t that smart will figure out ways to cheat. And, with a little luck and the right data, folks who are a lot smarter will catch them doing it.
(Hat tip: Dan Hirschberg and Dean Strachan, who have kept me up to date on this story.)

Addendum: After the publication of this blog post, Absolute Poker conducted an investigation which did not find any evidence suggesting that Scott Tom was himself directly involved in the cheating.

http://freakonomics.com/2007/10/17/t...own-wide-open/

So, Absolute Poker investigated the incident and determined that one of their owners was not directly involved in the cheating. That doesn't sound very convincing to me, and that is why I'm not terribly interested in giving my money to Fanduel or Draft Kings.