Some pretty damning (circumstantial) evidence from what I have read thus far.
I have only read the Poker News article on 1 page of the 2+2 thread.
The alleged cheat is from Moldova and finished T5th in the H-U WSoP event, and acted very strangely by doing so. He has been banned for cheating in some European casinos.
A couple of the guys that he beat in the H-U event posted in the 2+2 thread explaining how he acted. Stalling, looking at his hold card in different angles. He was wearing sunglasses and I guess it is possible that he was marking the cards that could be seen with the sunglasses.
It seems a little speculative at this point. What evidence do you think is damning?
If they detect any markings or see something in the review of the tapes, that’s different. But for now there’s nothing - it’s just some guys who think he was weird. Maybe all he wanted to do was get in their heads, which he evidently did pretty well.
I’m curious as to HOW he cheats. Plastic casino poker cards are not easily marked. If you are going to mark them, doing it in a 9- or 10-handed game is one thing - doing it when it’s just you, the dealer, and another guy is something else.
While the guy is a known cheat, I admit to being a little puzzled as to why, if his cheating was so obvious, the second of third opponent didn’t, you know, say something to the dealer, or ask for a new deck, or just inspect the cards. The accusations are all
He was acting weird, and
He beat me.
Note there is no mention of anything wrong with an actual playing card, which would certainly be what I’d be looking for.
Yeah, this article was very thin on actual information. It sounds like he was banned from Czech casinos for marking cards by subtly bending the corners. So in this case, I’m curious what the status is. Do they not have the cards for the investigation? Is there evidence of them being marked? Is it actually conceivable that he could mark them subtly enough that WSOP investigators can’t detect the markings even when they’re looking for them?
The WSOP organizers said that “preliminary testing” of the cards revealed no markings, invisible ink, or anything suspicious. They are also evidently reviewing video of the games. In that thread linked in the OP, some people where saying that after the first couple guys complained, the WSOP put more cameras on him and switched out the decks more frequently. I have no idea if that’s true.
For their part, the WSOP said they won’t comment further until their investigation is complete.
It seems to me that if WSOP examined the cards and didn’t find them to be marked, it’s pretty unlikely that they were marked. I find it extremely hard to believe that Coca could mark the cards in a way that WSOP wouldn’t notice when they’re explicitly looking for evidence of marking - would you agree?
I’m not sure what the camera evidence would show (unless he was cheating through some completely separate mechanism) - the Czech case had cards that were pretty explicitly marked, but even with the camera evidence, they couldn’t prove that it was Coca who had actually marked the cards.
As much fun as it would be to have a cheating scandal, I’m doubtful. Like you said, I’m not sure how you mark the cards such that a close inspection wouldn’t reveal anything. The people speculating that he had special ink visible only with his special sunglasses have seen too many James Bond films.
I suffered through a few pages of that thread linked in the OP, and some people are saying the “pros” who lost to this guy were primarily online players who play with software giving them an instant read on the odds with every card. So maybe they aren’t as good as they think in live play, and maybe it’s easier to get in their heads in front of live players and a crowd watching.
One of the most-cited pieces of evidence is how Coca seemed to know when they had good cards or bad, and specifically when he snap-called on K-5 but played slow with A-10. A few thoughts:
I would assume a decent player isn’t going to play exactly the same way every time
Maybe these pros have more tells than they think
I bet there’s a strong case of confirmation bias happening. Once their suspicions are aroused, of course they’ll notice every time Coca makes a good call while forgetting the times he doesn’t.
At a guess, he was using some modernized form of daubing. Traditional daub is a red or blue oily/waxy compound that can leave a faint smear on a card. Just marking the aces or court cards can be enough as they come your way, or a slightly more sophisticated approach can mark the major cards for value. Daub is very hard to see even if you’re looking for it.
It’s possible he was using some kind of daub that was invisible without his x-ray specs, although that kind of approach is pretty old-hat, too.
Im a little surprised they don’t burn a deck with each hand then.
When it comes to cheating in poker, where theres smoke usually there is fire, especially if the player in question is a documented gambling cheat. Poker players rarely whine about other players cheating, and I thought it might have been a case of butt-hurt losers whining as well, but if Keith Lehr truly said Coca’s play was odd to him, thats really damning, considering he won the tournament. The WSOP rather belligerent language on the matter tells me they think something is up too. Coca’s silence is deafening.
It usually takes more than one hand to mark a deck in play to a useful degree. But throwing out the deck every few hands is certainly a good idea. Or, really, like a new ball ever couple of pitches in MLB, a new deck for every hand is a very, very small cost for absolute protection against marking or other cheating.
