Here's what online collusion looks like.
The real deal... a big-time set-up involving multiple players, monitors, computers, modems, accounts, etc... all right next to each other. You could easily use this set-up to occupy all but one seat at any table at any online poker site.
I mean, we all knew it existed, but it's still a little disconcerting to see.
Here's the link, I ripped it off from a 'NewGCA' post on RGP:
http://www.pokermafia.com/boiler_room.php
Regards,
all_aces
I mean, we all knew it existed, but it's still a little disconcerting to see.
Here's the link, I ripped it off from a 'NewGCA' post on RGP:
http://www.pokermafia.com/boiler_room.php
Regards,
all_aces
Comments
Making $$$$$$$
Anyone interested in seeing what a professional 'poker boiler room' looks like,
can go to www.pokermafia.com
These rooms are made to generate income of close to 6 figures a month or more.
Unethical yes, illegal, well you make the call.
I can and will teach anyone to make at least $300 a day. What you make is up to
you and your working abilities. I know how they master online collusion and
will pass it on to others. The SKY is the limit.
The price is not cheap, the equipment is not either. You don't need to start
with 'boiler rooms' that are as complex as those show. What you see in those
photo's are 21" plasma monitors, something that's needed, but not essential, at
least not when you start.
For $7,000 I will release the secret of setting up one of these rooms. For an
extra $5,000, I will throw in 10 hours of professional collusion tactics.
Without knowledge of how collusion works, many will fail even with one of these
'boiler rooms'.
I started small, but soon I had a big room as the money flowed in. Soon after
that, I was hiring and opened another room.
The equipment in these rooms costs close to $50,000 as when I purchased 21"
plasma monitors, they sold for about $1300. Now you can get them for around
$1000. I have 14. As for computers, I lied about 50. I only have 43. As for
accounts, I lied also, I don't have 50, I have almost 100.
Seven in each room allows for unlimited potential. It is not advisable to have
only one person playing in a room with this much equipment. For full potential,
three or four players would work best.
Smaller 'boiler rooms' would cost far less. I have all the knowledge on how all
of this works without having any problems.
I started small and within three months had a big room. Six months later I have
two. If you think all this money was spent for monitors and computers to just
show you people, enjoy the show:).
I will negotiate on pieces of this information. This information is available
now by emailing me at newgca@aol.com
Soon it will be available for purchase on my site. The poker boom is here and
anyone can reap the rewards. I doubt half a dozen players in the world will
make more from playing poker this year than I do. The game is taking down the
money, I do this.
Serious inquiries only please. Be prepared to spend. Your initial outlay will
easily be back in your pocket within a month.
But remember, I may have only bought this equipment for show:). I do things
because I can. I need money like I need a hole in my head. While 90%+ of you
players are honest, the rest aren't. They are enough to ruin the game as have
the players I have named in B&M's.
Can the online sites stop me? Yes, they can. Have them shut down. But you must
remember, I am the ONLY ONE doing this:). I am the Lone Colluder:). I have a
posse though.
prices subject to go up at anytime
Russ Georgiev
www.pokermafia.com
"But remember, I may have only bought this equipment for show. I do things
because I can. I need money like I need a hole in my head. While 90%+ of you
players are honest, the rest aren't. They are enough to ruin the game as have
the players I have named in B&M's."
A) if he doesnt need money why charge people to do this
this just doesnt make sense on any level
Looks like it just did. What a dink.
many times i have been at a tables or in tourney with friend and chatting on messenger...the only thing that keeps us from colluding is our morals...either that or both of us are too shy to suggest it
Cheers,
all_aces
How much is he charging for collusion lessons? Thousands of dollars? I can do it for a lot less. Just transfer me $0.50 at PokerStars and I'll let you in on it. And I'll cluck like a chicken and bark like a dog for you.
(Hint: If you can't afford the $0.50, this information is subtly hidden somewhere in this very post.)
Oh yeah. Thanks for the reminder of why I don't read RGP much any more. :cool:
ScottyZ
I don't know much/anything about this dude, but that picture kind of jumped out at me. No more NewGCA re-posts from me, here.
Cheers,
all_aces
ROFLMAO.
While it seems that Russ' posts are a little extreme, it does get you thinking about cheating and the fact that it does exist...
What I find most interesting is how anyone can say he is so completely wrong because he has no proof when nobody really has any proof to the contrary.
It's entirely possible that party et al rig up a few extra action flops per hour. It's entirely possible that floormen take bribes to let known cheaters play in games in a B&M. For anyone to ever say for sure that it doesn't/couldn't/will never happen is showing real ignorance.
This is simply personal preference whether you choose to a priori not believe someone until they provide proof that they are correct, or believe someone until they are proven wrong.
Character judgement is a key issue here. Based on his/her posts on RGP, I tend to put GCA/CGB/newgca/newgcb/Russ G into the former category.
Okay, but I sure didn't learn that these things are possible from GCA/etc. If anything, the collusion/cheating methods he/she suggestes are often so bizzare (say, implying the need for people to be in the same physical location to cheat at onlinepoker) that they distract people from cheating methods which are more commonly used (say, talking on the phone or using online messaging while playing).
And we're not really in the game of what it "possible" here. It's ceratainly possible that I am Michael Jackson. You'd show "real ignorance" to say for sure that I am not. Generally, there is more substance in discussing what is or is not probable. In this setting, I'd have to say it shows some degree of ignorance to suggest that it's *probable* that I am Michael Jackson. (But you never know... HOO hoo)
While I'd certainly accept that teaching people about cheating at poker (for the purposes of detecting it) may be a social good, I really can't agree with your implication that GCA/Russ G in particular is anything close to social good.
He/she could very well be the essence of why the internet term "troll" was coined.
And, having been a long time reader of RGP, I *certainly* think it's valid for me (and, if they are so inclined, anyone) to discount anything GCA/Russ G posts as complete horse excrement. I'm very far from needing "proof that he is so completely wrong".
ScottyZ
The fact of the matter is, at the end of the day, you are at mercy of the dealer and having a blind trust in that entity is a bad thing.
I just think Russ G/GCA overdoes it, and often talks about cheating at such an outrageous level that it creates something of a "boy who cried wolf" effect.
This in essence, does the opposite of what we might want in terms of online cheating awareness. I'm sure quite a few people are made more *complacent* than aware on reading his posts, simply by having a sort of "cheating can't possibly be as bad as Russ G says" reaction to many of his posts.
ScottyZ