Anonymous tables of Ladbrokes raise questions

Yesterday PokerCollectif informed you of the new anonymous tables launched by Ladbroke Poker October 21. In this article, we had raised some questions of security and integrity on these tables. For example, if you're a regular on the NL200, with time, you will know other regulars. If you're still on the same table that Charles (Montreal) and Joe (Montreal) and you notice that these two players will never compete, bluff never, never involved in the coolers (KK vs AA all in preflop for example), you can suspect collusion. You have taken many notes on these players and you can ask the support of the site for which you play to investigate these players.

On the other hand, if these two players are anonymous, you do not know their name, they did not name, that you do not know where they come from, you can never make the connection. Here, it is just an example of the possible shortcomings of this kind of tables.

Another fear of players criticizing the anonymous tables, is a form of collusion yet more intense. You join a 6-max table where 5 players are already seated. That is what you said that these 5 players are not friends who are waiting for the fish (in this case, you) for plucking by collusion?

Are you paranoid or are you indeed a victim of cheating? And even if you were sure to have been victim of collusion, how will you identify your torturers because they have no name?

What is anonymous tables are really likely to jeopardize the safety of the players? Is that these tables will become the preferred location for several rogue players?

These tables have advantages and disadvantages. Datamining (due to collect information about the habits of a player or multi-player game) is impossible. Whenever you sit down on a new table, you have no information on players, even if you have already played hundreds of times with them. The reverse is also true. You can be the greatest of the bluffeurs and whenever you join a table, you will have a blank folder.

Another fear of poker players; the SuperUserAccount (SUA). A SUA is an account on which you can see maps of all our opponents, which is obviously the worst possible crime for a player in online poker. Accounts SUA had already been closed in the past on sites AbsolutePoker and UltimateBet, which had obviously smeared the reputation of these rooms and the whole online poker by ricochet. A SUA can be discovered when an identifiable player has outstanding results. Following its gains on sites like PTR, it is possible to find these cheats. But with anonymous accounts, how to suspect a player to have a SUA if it is impossible to follow the progression of his earnings? Anonymous tables going to encourage the dishonest minds to get a SUA?

In response to these fears of its players, Microgaming reassures and inform them that a special "patrol" team will be set up on the anonymous tables and that security will be greater than on the regular tables. The question that remains is if this security will be sufficient to overcome all the cheats. Is that all necessary means be deployed?

The future will tell maybe.

Discuss this article on the forums of PokerCollectif: anonymous tables of Ladbrokes raise questions.


Poker Strategy

New book: Jonathan Little on the cash games lives

in Review of book
A new book just published by D & B: Jonathan Little We Live No-Limit Cash Games 2 - The practice As you will have divine, the 400-page book deals for cash games lives, but in a very practical way. What we mean by "practice" is that it is the presentation of…