Roy Cooke on Cheating and Cheaters

[JohnBond]

Sheesh, been on the site a couple of hours and already somebody's beating up on my bud.

Rocky is that you? I've got more reasons than one to think it is and if so we both know why you've a problem with Roy. Amazing how quiet this account has been for so long and suddenly it pops up from the dead to smack at RC. Classic anonymous smear at a person fighting hard to stop poker cheats.

This is old news from an incident in 2001, reported in 2002 practically the dawn of Internet poker when everybody including Roy was figuring out the right way to do things. Roy was a pioneer establishing standards, methodologies and principles to protect players on the Internet. Everybody who plays in an honest Internet game owes Roy Cooke for all the money they haven't been cheated out of!

All that crap’s been asked and answered long ago.

It's also essentially inaccurate, though it has a tiny bit of truth which is what makes for the best slanders. But RC hates it when I get into wars with people about him on the net so I won't go there. Also, old friend, you know and I know that RC doesn't need inappropriate edges to take the money at the table -- including from you which is of course part of the problem.

Here's the reality: Nobody has done more for integrity in poker, on and off the web than Roy. Nobody knows more about integrity issues confronting poker than Roy. Nobody more credible has spoken out for players’ interests on integrity and related issues more often (or more recently) than Roy.

Have to ask myself how you profit from trying to sandbag RC's efforts to make things cleaner across the industry. Wait, no I don't -- we both know the answer.

I've always liked you, bud. You're charming, friendly and funny, and in many (though sadly not all) ways a good guy. You and Jeannie share something important, and you’ve always been a good man to me about that. But you need to stop whipping this dead horse and get on with things already.

Thanks again for the great story about Hourly Rate in the Mirage game a few weeks ago. As we discussed it's worth using and we will. It makes the point beautifully.

If this ain't Rocky -- I really think it is -- oops, sorry bout that. Really. But I’ve gotten this old just saying what I think – not anonymously I might add, like some cowards we know – and I ain’t likely to change anytime soon.

Whoever this hmmmm person may be is an essentially anonymous jerk who has revitalized a long dead account name to take shots at Roy with long dead and mostly discredited and discounted stories in an effort to make Roy less credible in his battle to help shape the industry.

I think that as Roy continues to press for the poker industry to put up the money to keep the game clean in all regards, he will be subject to many more such attacks. Believe them if you wish, though that will likely make you among either the gullible or the criminal. I'd suggest rather that you take them for exactly what they're worth - nothing.

Not that I’d say what I think or anything.

John Bond
Aka The Loose Cannon
Aka Roy’s Rottweiler (Heel, Boy, Heel!) (That’s sort of an inside joke, but truer and funnier than ya know.)

[hmmmmm]

[ QUOTE ]

Whoever this hmmmm person may be is an essentially anonymous jerk who has revitalized a long dead account name to take shots at Roy with long dead and mostly discredited and discounted stories in an effort to make Roy less credible in his battle to help shape the industry.


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, this isn't true - I lurk here all the time - just saw this thread and was trying to remember what was said about it and did some googling. I couldn't find the original accusation or defense - seems to go to far back for my limited googling abilities.

[JohnBond]

Liar, liar, pants on fire,
Nose is Longer than a telphone wire.

ROFLMFAO

jb

[Mason Malmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
Nobody has done more for integrity in poker, on and off the web than Roy. Nobody knows more about integrity issues confronting poker than Roy. Nobody more credible has spoken out for players’ interests on integrity and related issues more often (or more recently) than Roy.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is Cooke's number 1 booster, and I would take it with a grain of salt.

MM

[Vincent Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
Nobody has done more for integrity in poker, on and off the web than Roy.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
This is Cooke's number 1 booster, and I would take it with a grain of salt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me, I would have thought it was sugar coated but what do I know.

Vince

[JohnBond]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody has done more for integrity in poker, on and off the web than Roy. Nobody knows more about integrity issues confronting poker than Roy. Nobody more credible has spoken out for players’ interests on integrity and related issues more often (or more recently) than Roy.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is Cooke's number 1 booster, and I would take it with a grain of salt.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Mason -- long time.

I notice you don't actually say my proposition is untrue, and that is good -- because we both know it is.

I signed my post as "Roy's Rottweiler", a not exactly tacit admission that I'm biased in his favor. But I'm not his #1 booster - he actually has people even more exuberant than I about him - I'm just his best friend. You of course have a few boosters of your own, like Poor Vincent -- although I don't go sotto voce like he does (probably you and David is a better analogy, though Roy and I haven't known each other quite as long our relationship is more intense and personal)--

As with pretty much everthing in my life I'm no bull and upfront about it. It is both the most irritating thing and the most refreshing thing about me. Part of my charm [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I've always liked you, you know that -- long after you and RC had your falling out, you and I sat and chatted on a very friendly basis -- to me you've always been the good guy from Coral Gables. Ask Chuck -- I said something along those lines to him not too long ago at a spring training game. You're just Mason, and people who understand you get that, and either accept it or don't. Though you sometimes make it hard, I'm happy to accept you for who you are, and not judge.

All things considered, if I am somewhat biased in RC's favor on a personal basis you are somewhat biased against him on a personal basis-- and probably each of our comments regarding him should be weighed accordingly.

And notwithstanding your falling out, RC has always treated you with professional respect and great credit for what you've done(as you have mostly treated him) -- he named you in his Hall of Fame as one of the ten most important people in the history of poker. He has always referred people to books published by you.

You have always referred to him as one of the best non-2+2 writers which is the highest praise you give -- though we both know most 2+2-ers don't come close. (RC has always said that David has written the best book in the history of poker, so good that a better may never be written. He has been foisting the Harringon book on people as well, recently.)

As to the issue at hand, I could make the argument at length, but will settle for two salient points and let it rest. (Honest, I've learned to let thing rest, although I haven't learned to just shut up. If I could learn that...)
1. Before 99%+ of the people playing on the Internet today logged on, RC was ferretting out and barring cheaters, working with programmers on algorithms and screens to identify them, sniffers and other client-based preventative measures, which were shared with others in the industry and have become standard.
2. RC is the only mainstream commentator in the industry standing on a soapbox screaming that there are problems with cheating in poker and if somebody doesn't do something about it we're going to be [censored]. He's been doing this at seminars, in coversations with management of both B&M and Internet operations extensively for the past year --- and most recently in 2 articles in CardPlayer. http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_maga...name/Roy_Cooke -- Nobody else has done more than he, more publicly more energetically, or more recently.

Like my mama always said, it just ain't braggin' when it's true!

You are a good guy, but odd, Of course that is the pot calling the kettle black. You are particularly odd on a personal level about RC, have been for about eight years. I too tend to be a bit odd about him in the opposite direction.

Oddness notwithstanding though, what I said about him being in the forefront of protecting players particularly on the Internet just happens to be true.

It is good to hear from you, and I hope we get a chance to chat again sometime soon. You are at heart a good man, our disagreements notwithstanding, and the fact is that good men in this industry can be few and far between.

Genuine Best Regards,

jb

[Mason Malmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
Nobody has done more for integrity in poker, on and off the web than Roy. Nobody knows more about integrity issues confronting poker than Roy. Nobody more credible has spoken out for players’ interests on integrity and related issues more often (or more recently) than Roy.


[/ QUOTE ]

I dispute all of the above. I can't be more clear than that. Mike Caro has harped on this topic for 25 years.

[ QUOTE ]
I've always liked you, you know that

[/ QUOTE ]

Does this include the insults you posted about me on RGP a couple of years back? Remember the "Brick Mason."

As I stated to you in a private message I think I'm entitled to a public apology, especially since you now realize the value of participating in our forums.

MM

[JohnBond]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody has done more for integrity in poker, on and off the web than Roy. Nobody knows more about integrity issues confronting poker than Roy. Nobody more credible has spoken out for players’ interests on integrity and related issues more often (or more recently) than Roy.


[/ QUOTE ]

I dispute all of the above. I can't be more clear than that. Mike Caro has harped on this topic for 25 years.

[ QUOTE ]
I've always liked you, you know that

[/ QUOTE ]

Does this include the insults you posted about me on RGP a couple of years back? Remember the "Brick Mason."

As I stated to you in a private message I think I'm entitled to a public apology, especially since you now realize the value of participating in our forums.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

Mase -- when you're right you're right.

Caro has been saying it longer than Roy -- and was also part of the early efforts designing methodologies to stop cheats on the Internet. Roy has been louder recently ---- but permit me to modify my statement -- Nobody with the possible exception of Mike Caro ..... the relative weight of their influence is arguable and close ----- Roy is currently more on the front line on this than Mike, but Mike is indeed the other person who deserves great credit. With that edit would you say I'm basically correct? Would you agree that Roy is doing a good thing and deserves credit for it?

And given your history, it is big of you to say that about Caro. That's why I continue to like you even when you're sometimes a jerk! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] (we're all sometimes jerks, dont take it too personally!) You are intellectually honest and overcome your personal prejudices far more often than not. Anybody who doesn't respect that is a fool.

I also like you because Donna likes you, and I have this strange thing where my friend's friend is my friend. And Todd likes you. And Chuck likes you, and he will likely become a friend, as we are embarking on what I hope will be a long-term relationship. I respect the opinions of people I respect. (Hell, for that matter I respect most of your opinions!)

There is the problem of how you feel about RC, but it's not like you two are enemines -- then I'd have to choose. Each of you is wrong about the other, albeit in my VERY biased opinion you are more wrong than he -- and my opinion is meaningless. You two are among the most pigheaded, stubborn creatures in God's creation and trying to talk sense to you about each other is a waste of time. You should have kissed and made up and become allies long ago. I still have some small hope that will someday happen. And small hope is better than no hope at all.

As to the rgp matter -- I never read a single PM at rgp, didn't know you'd sent me one --- and I'd forgotten the incident, don't even remember the details. To be honest I don't even remember what I said. I would venture a guess that you were taking shots at RC and I was defending him --- I have been known to go overboard in such situations.

That's part of your oddness - you never forget a slight and you always take it in the worst possible way ---- and as I said above those of us who know you accept that or don't -- I do. Part of my oddness is that nothing from last week bothers me next week -- we are different. Not better or worse, just different.

Brick Mason is certainly I joke I would have made, although I don't remember it (I just think I'm too damned clever) - so I'm 100% certain your reportage here is correct, even though I'm too lazy to go back and check.

To the extent that I was inappropriately personal in any exchange we may have had in the past, please accept my genuine and public apology. Reprint or re-post it anyplace you deem appropriate. I am often guilty of an excess of zeal in defense of those I care about, and I'm sure I was out of line.

As noted in my previous post you are one of the good guys in a world and industry that needs them -- even if you are odd [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I'm sure we'll disagree again. And I'm sure then as now and in the past, we'll be honest with each other. Neither of us is known for pulling punches in our discourse. And that's all good.

Best,

jb

PS If you ever have the need or inclination to take this or any other discussion private, please use my email: Sundance1@aol.com --- I really never got the pm at rgp!)

[Vincent Lepore]

Am I wrong, or haven't you continuously dodged the subject of this thread? What is Roy Cooke talking aobout? Where are the facts backing up RC (Roy Cooke's) endorsement of the claims made by Russ Georgiev. That's what this thread is about or hadn't you noticed? Maybe RC sent you up here to change the subject so he wouldn't have to answer. Who knows? I don't think that is true. Roy seems like a straight shooter too me. I would just like to hear the straight scoop from him concerning Georgiev's accusations.

Vince

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Vincent:

I agree with you and feel that this is the real problem here. When Cooke writes

[ QUOTE ]
I do not know that every detail of cheating described by Russ is true. When he describes specific incidents, I wasn t there and I don t know though I have
heard some of the same stories Russ has told from other (more?) credible sources. I would guess there is at least a kernel of truth in a lot of Russ's accusations. The fact that when he names names he doesn t get sued is telling
to me, although I have been told by some the reason they don t sue is that they could never collect.


[/ QUOTE ]

and

[ QUOTE ]
Also, to any person Russ has pointed a finger at I know that some of his accusations are true, I believe some of his other accusations are true, and many of his accusations I have no personal knowledge of. It s likely that in some cases he s incorrect. I m not necessarily talking about YOU.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have real problems with this since Georgiev has accused almost everyone with name recognition of being a cheat. At the very least, I believe that Cooke needs to rethink what he wrote and quickly make the appropriate correction. In addition, we need to hear this statement directly from Cooke, not from someone else.

Best wishes,
Mason