Roy Cooke on Cheating and Cheaters

[Lawrence Ng]

Taken from RGP,

Roy Cooke's post.


I m mostly a lurker on rgp and I know some people resent that I don t post more.
As you probably know I have other forums I write for. And I have 3 jobs my
Internet job, my Real Estate business, and playing poker. Plus there s always a
book in the works. (My new Rule Book from ConJelCo should be out in June or
July, finally!). And I have a family with whom I love to spend time. Then there
s golf. Can t have life without golf. So I don t have time to post here often,
but I do stop into rgp from time-to-time to peruse the latest in flames :-)


Of all that I have read here over the years, perhaps the most interesting things
have been the GCA posts on cheating. I recently wrote two articles about
cheating in poker in a general way.
(http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_maga...name/Roy_Cooke). These
articles stirred a lot of conversation and mail. Fact is though, that there s
lots more I could have said, but for a variety of reasons, including space
limitations, I didn t.


The bottom line is that cheating exists, is probably less prevalent than most
players think, and the industry has a vested interest (these days things were
different in the old days) in keeping the games honest. Some of the things I
might have said have already been said by Russ.


I have been playing poker a long time, and I have known Russ Georgiev longer
than that. As a young teen I had visions of being a champion bowler. Russ was a
top bowler in the Pacific Northwest at that time, and I bowled against him in
pot games at Magic Lanes. (I lost.) Later when I started sneaking into poker
rooms at 15, Russ was there. And his reputation way back then was much what he
has told you all as a person who knew more than the average bear about
cheating, and reputedly wasn t bashful about using what he knew.


We were never friends but we knew each other in more than passing. I also ran
into him at the table from time-to-time over the last three decades in LA and
Vegas. Usually when he sat down I figured it was time to get up. Not that I knew
I d get cheated by him, but I suspected I might. I am sure of one thing though:
When Russ tells you he s an expert on cheating, he ain t lying.


Russ is by nature a fellow given to exaggeration and hyperbole. (I have a few
friends with the same tendencies.) He tends to overstate the case to make his
point. But that doesn t mean the case should be ignored.


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.





Mind you, this is not a blanket endorsement of everything Russ says there s
lots I just don t have knowledge about. Further, there are differences among
what you think is true, what you know is true and what you can prove is true.
It concerns me some that Russ doesn t always differentiate these. He treats all
three with equal dignity; he doesn t distinguish between a fact and a belief
----- a belief which may or may not in truth be a fact, but which in either case
cannot be dispositively established. But the man does know his stuff on this
subject.


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.


Here s the bottom line if you re playing $10-$20 or lower, to the extent there
are cheaters they tend to be incompetent and get little edge. As you play
higher, the likelihood of being effectively cheated grows with each level you
step up. If you play VERY high regularly (I m guessing most rgpers don t) it is
almost a certainty that you will eventually run into some form of cheating. In
tournaments, you want to know who is playing the same money and as with ring
play the higher the stakes, the more risk you have.


On the Internet, you really want to play sites with published procedures for
stopping cheats, especially if you play $15-$30 and higher. Don t just rely on
celebrity spokesmen affiliated with a site ask exactly how they protect you.
Also if you suspect collusion do yourself, the game and everybody else a favor
and report it right away with the players names and the hand number of the
suspicious hand.


Russ s pokermafia site is the only place in the world I know of that regularly
posts information about cheats and protecting against cheats. And though he
certainly has a history as a slimeball (which is a big part of why he is so
credible on this subject), and though he is prone to exaggeration the higher
you play the more you need to pay attention to much of what he has to say.


Russ, I ain t particularly interested in being friends but when you re right
you re right. And since I m sort of launching my own attack on cheaters I
figured you deserved the courtesy of me saying so. You said it publicly first
and loudest.


I won t be posting again on this thread, though I will stop in from time-to-time
to see what y all have to say. In between my three jobs and occasional
websurfing, including stops at pokermafia.com to help keep me on top of
protecting myself against being cheated. And of course, golf.


Life is Good :-)


Roy Cooke

I am sometimes still in awe shock at the how rampant cheating is at poker, but when respected figures like Cooke and Caro speak up against the grain, I can't help but nod my head.

Surprisingly enough, I often find that higher level forms ofcheating does not get discussed often enough here on 2+2.

Lawrence

[trying2learn]

i've wondered the same thing. i've also wondered why ethics aren't discussed more here as well. an occasional post for sure, but the grey areas that exist in and around this game are fascinating, and it's hard to have discussions about them without threads turning into flame wars.

[slickpoppa]

Are we sure that this is actually Roy Cooke?

[Lawrence Ng]

[ QUOTE ]
Are we sure that this is actually Roy Cooke?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are we sure you are slickpoppa?

Lawrence

[TStoneMBD]

For those that care, I'm pretty sure I am me right now.

[JohnG]

It's been confirmed on rgp that it is Roy Cooke.

[Smoothcall]

Yes this was a very interesting post by Roy C. He sounds as he's basically saying that Russ G.(the guy everybody called a liar on rgp) is telling the truth for the most part about his claims. That is some major credibility to Russ. As he has always been slammed but now a prominent perosn in the poker world has come out and said you should listen to him. I always wonderd if he was giving truthful claims of many of the big name poker players. I guess this means some of his claims may be true. Roy C. doesn't say which he knows to be true. That would be very interesting.

[Vincent Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
I always wonderd if he was giving truthful claims of many of the big name poker players

[/ QUOTE ]

There it is, the problem! Guys like smoothcall that want to believe these accusations against big name poker players will take Cooke's endorsement of Georgiev as confirmation that these players are indeed cheats. Hey, Roy, is that what you are saying? Are the top professional players that Russ has acused of cheating indeed cheats? You've convinced Smoothcall. Me, I want to hear it form your own lips! And I also want to know how you intend to prove it. Oh, I get it. We take your word and the not so credible (your intimation in your post) Russ Gerogiev. Wow, this is getting good!

Vince

[andyfox]

Guys involved with poker, it would seem to me, would be very hesitant to name names in public. Based on their writings, I give credence to what Roy Cooke and David Sklansky say about poker. The fact that Cooke has never played with Russ or in the $4K-$8K game doesn't mean he doesn't know something about them. And, IIRC, I believe an email from David to Russ posted by Russ in his RGP heyday said that David knew some of the things Russ said to be true. Mike Caro must also have at least suspected some of the things to be true; thus his initial cooperation with Russ.

What turned Mike off, and a lot of others (most especially you, as I recall), is that Russ practically accused everybody everywhere of cheating. And, so, of course this (along with his poor writing and combative style) put a negative light on everything he said. So whatever truth there may have been in some of the things was drowned in the flood of poorly written accusations.

I do especially agree with one thing, though: to just say, as Cooke says, that some of what Russ says should be listened to, can be a disservice without specifics. Russ accused a lot of big names of being a cheater. To just say that some of what Russ said is true lends credence to those accusations and that's a sin if the accusations are untrue. So which specific accusations Cooke believes to be true, and why he so believes, would be, for me, a welcome revelation.

But, as I say, I don't think you'll never see such a revelation.

[JohnG]

[ QUOTE ]
What turned Mike off, and a lot of others (most especially you, as I recall), is that Russ practically accused everybody everywhere of cheating.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can think of numerous people he didn't accuse, and numerous people he has mentioned as being honest.

[ QUOTE ]
I do especially agree with one thing, though: to just say, as Cooke says, that some of what Russ says should be listened to, can be a disservice without specifics. Russ accused a lot of big names of being a cheater. To just say that some of what Russ said is true lends credence to those accusations and that's a sin if the accusations are untrue. So which specific accusations Cooke believes to be true, and why he so believes, would be, for me, a welcome revelation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Roy Cooke is not stupid, and a lot of thought would have gone in to what he posted. He would have known exactly what people would read into it.