Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Collusion on Internet

  • 22-05-2005 3:06pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭


    Has anyone here ever been the victim of collusion on the internet? If so what joy did you get out of the casino?

    I was the victim of 2 guys playing together on a shorthanded table (3-6 Limit). They were pretty obvious about it but after the first mail from the casino they claim there was nothing wrong. I've sent them a more detailed complaint with all the hand numbers etc now so we'll see what they come back with.

    Am I likely to get any of the money I lost back as a result of this? One hand, I lost 126$ when the guy, with what I assume was the crap hand (of the 2), 4 bet with J8s preflop and proceeded to hit a straight. What was funny was that, as I kept watching the table another player accused them of collusion in the chat window. He claimed to be a pro who played at higher levels and when he was challenged on this by one of the colluders he brought 7k to the table :eek: . So it's quite possible that he's not an idiot.


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,375 ✭✭✭padser


    im fascinated by the question, i wouldnt have thought collusion was that big a problem on the internet simply because the edge gained is too small to make it worth while. Most players wouldnt be able to make the small edge count. I thought casinos monitor to see if players are constantly playing on the same table??????


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    I would hope casinos monitor these things too, but what happens when you're the victim? What these guys were doing was so obvious once you've seen a reasonable number of hands with them involved. The were building large pots by raising and then reraising, they were playing very passively against each other. Their constant rasing/reraising strategy also bought them pots they wouldn't have got on their own. If left unchecked it was far from a small advantage they were gaining.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 836 ✭✭✭OilBeefHooked2


    correct me if i'm wrong but in order to pull off collusion succesfully one has to have the winning hand?
    or are you saying that these guys get you to fold after raising and reraising?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    david-k wrote:
    correct me if i'm wrong but in order to pull off collusion succesfully one has to have the winning hand?
    or are you saying that these guys get you to fold after raising and reraising?
    Partly. They were trying to get people to fold as well as building pots with their good hands. The first guy was taking ages to act almost every time he called/raised. They lost some pots but overall they were making money. They also had the advantage that they knew 2 hands every time. They never played a pot between themselves with anywhere near the same intensity that they played against others.

    Also the bit about the other guy who accuesed them of collusion (see my first post).

    There was only 2 hands I have recorded that both of their hands were shown. The first one they had T9o and A7o yet raised reraised preflop and on flop. They checked each other once everyone else was out.

    The other both of them had AKo. The first guy was BB, his mate raised, everyone folded to the BB who called. This was from the guy who raises with T9o! Single bets then on flop and turn and then checked the river.

    I'll attach the Hand Histories for anyone who wants to have a look. I didn't want to name the site, but the casino (UB) have been back on and this is what they've said:
    "Our poker experts' checked the hand logs again and they came out with the conclusion that everything is according to their hands, please remember that we can see everybody's cards and that it is one of our tools to determine if there is collusion or not."

    Now the 2 hands I can see look very suspect. The other hands I noted in my mail to UB also look suspect but I don't know all the cards. I've requested this from them so I shall have to wait and see.

    Actually this is really pissing me off. I'd be grateful to anyone who could have a look at these hands to see do they think i'm right. The histories work fine in PT. Allow a pause for autiger before he acts to recreate the hand a bit better. Below are the hands of interest but all the hands while I was sitting at the table are in the file.

    Hands the hands of interest (taken from the mail I sent UB):
    6029924-2040 - raise-reraise and then passive against each other
    6029924-2044 - raise-reraise and autiger2000 folds
    6029924-2046 - raise reraise fold on flop
    6029924-2057 - played very passively between the 2 for such good starting hands
    6029924-2059 - raise reraise fold on flop
    6029924-2062 - BEST example - raise reraise preflop, flop and turn, checked when only 2 of them left on river
    6029924-0264 - raise reraise preflop - they bet against each other here on flop
    6029924 - 2070 - reraise (after my raise), reraise preflop (4-bet with J8s!!)
    6029924 - 2071 - call, reraise, reraise preflop
    6029924 - 2072 - raise, reraise on flop - trying to buy pot


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,323 ✭✭✭Hitchhiker's Guide to...


    Some of those hands seem strange - there seems to be a few cases where there is three players in a hand and post-flop the first guy raises, the next guy reraises, and the third innocent player folds. Then the first guy who raised initially doesn't call the (minor) re-raise of the other person. Strange!

    Wonder how much of the hands are collusion; or just bad play?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 836 ✭✭✭OilBeefHooked2


    Also the bit about the other guy who accuesed them of collusion (see my first post).

    Just because some other guy accuses them aswell doesn't make so.

    "Our poker experts' checked the hand logs again and they came out with the conclusion that everything is according to their hands, please remember that we can see everybody's cards and that it is one of our tools to determine if there is collusion or not."

    What does this mean. They are not saying anything here.

    Actually this is really pissing me off. I'd be grateful to anyone who could have a look at these hands to see do they think i'm right. The histories work fine in PT. Allow a pause for autiger before he acts to recreate the hand a bit better. Below are the hands of interest but all the hands while I was sitting at the table are in the file.

    Seems strange to play J8s so strong preflop. personally I dont but this guy did and hit his st8 on the turn, whats really strange is the way you reraised him on the river with only 2 pair! :eek:

    tbh you lost about $100 and this is why your pissed. Quit pointed the finger and looking for someone to blame for your bad play. :p

    Pog-Mahone on ppp
    Phil helmuth is a whining muppet!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,636 ✭✭✭henbane


    david-k wrote:
    tbh you lost about $100 and this is why your pissed. Quit pointed the finger and looking for someone to blame for your bad play. :p
    plyd!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,188 ✭✭✭Dr_Colossus


    I heard of a similar instance involving PokerStars. I was playing in a cash game and chatting to a guy about collusion and he said he was victim to it in a sit and go. I forget some of the details as it was a good while ago but as far as I remember the buy in was relatively expensive and there was at least two players involved. When it got down to 4 or 5 players he said he suspected collusion as some of the betting patterns were unusual. Anyway he busted out 4th with a zero payout in a suspecious play.
    After the sit and go was finished he contacted PokerStars' support and reported the instance and his suspecions. He didn't hear anything from them for a while but then they got back to him stating that their records and investigations also led to the conclusion that collusion was involved. They credited his account with 1st place money and confirmed that the other parties would be appropriately dealt with. Overall the guy seemed pretty surprised with the action PokerStars had taken by crediting his account but obviously he was delighted with the result and seemed pretty confident that the site was proactively managed.
    I also heard of an unrelated instance where someones account was frozen due to the suspecion of collusion. Aparently the site's management (don't know what site was involved here) had tracked the activity in their account. They had traced similar activity coming from another account with the same ISP address and had blocked both accounts. Don't know if it's possible that they can trace your ISP address but this is what I heard on the grape vine.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,600 ✭✭✭roryc


    I still dont get how it can be that much of a problem when there is only 2 of them at it. Fair enough if theres 3 or 4 they can affect the game a lot, but with only 2 at it surely they can't do much?

    Other than raising other players out of a pot to ensure one of them wins it, and telling each other what cards they have, what else can they do?

    Oh and thats true about being able to trace your ISP address but theres ways around that. Anyway I think it can only narrow it to like Dublin, Ireland, not your exact location, so they can't really accuse you of collusion because you are always playing with someone else from Dublin. Apparently they do moniter betting habits and that to try and stop collusion. Ask Pitboss who i'm sure will know the full story.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    david-k wrote:
    Just because some other guy accuses them aswell doesn't make so.
    It serves to prove that their play was not normal and someone else noticed it as well.
    "Our poker experts' checked the hand logs again and they came out with the conclusion that everything is according to their hands, please remember that we can see everybody's cards and that it is one of our tools to determine if there is collusion or not."

    What does this mean. They are not saying anything here.
    Exactly. They have said nothing. I've asked them for a detailed analysis about why 2 players would constantly raise, reraise together yet play passively against each other. They declined to comment but I now have all the hands which I have yet ot look at.
    Seems strange to play J8s so strong preflop. personally I dont but this guy did and hit his st8 on the turn, whats really strange is the way you reraised him on the river with only 2 pair! :eek:

    tbh you lost about $100 and this is why your pissed. Quit pointed the finger and looking for someone to blame for your bad play. :p
    If you follow the hand and the betting patterns, which is all any of us can do as poker players, you would not put this guy on J8s. If he had a pair that made trips then fair enough I was beaten and I played the hand badly. I didn't have him on that hand and I was right. This unusual betting pattern taken together with all the other hands is the problem. If that was a standalone once off hand, I'd have marked him as a muppet and thought nothing more of it, but taking it in context with the other hands it is highly suspicious.

    Scratch that about having the hands. They've just sent me the hand histories that I already have.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    roryc wrote:
    I still dont get how it can be that much of a problem when there is only 2 of them at it. Fair enough if theres 3 or 4 they can affect the game a lot, but with only 2 at it surely they can't do much?

    Other than raising other players out of a pot to ensure one of them wins it, and telling each other what cards they have, what else can they do?
    So you'd have no problem sitting at a table if you knew that 2 players (out of max 6) knew each others hands and were raising reraising constantly yet not playing against each other?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    henbane wrote:
    plyd!
    Funny kid. I bet you haven't even looked at the hands I posted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,124 ✭✭✭NickyOD


    Imposter wrote:
    Has anyone here ever been the victim of collusion on the internet? If so what joy did you get out of the casino?

    Don't be surprised if you have to wait for a very long time for Stars to get back to you. I was the victim of a blatant squeezeplay in a $50 SnG and it took them 6 weeks and 5 e-mails to finally sort it out but to be fair they did freeze their accounts and send me the money.... eventually.

    I had an email once where I was refunded a small amount because of collusion going on in a cash game that I was never aware of. I didn't even remember the game. Just goes to show how much collusion is really going on.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    NickyOD wrote:
    Don't be surprised if you have to wait for a very long time for Stars to get back to you.
    It's not Stars it's UB.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,124 ✭✭✭NickyOD


    Imposter wrote:
    It's not Stars it's UB.

    Whoops! I play a lot of 3-6 and 5-10 myself and I see a lot of crazy plays particularly when loose players make position raises/reraises but when an aggressive player starts softplaying a particllar player postflop and makes squeezeplays whenever the same players is onvolved multihanded its pretty obvious they are working together. Whether thay actually know eachother's holding or just play together a lot and want to do eachother a favour is dificult to know but either way I'd just leave the table and e-mail the HH to support. That's all you can do. That was a pretty lame response from UB.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    NickyOD wrote:
    Whoops! I play a lot of 3-6 and 5-10 myself and I see a lot of crazy plays particularly when loose players make position raises/reraises but when an aggressive player starts softplaying a particllar player postflop and makes squeezeplays whenever the same players is onvolved multihanded its pretty obvious they are working together. Whether thay actually know eachother's holding or just play together a lot and want to do eachother a favour is dificult to know but either way I'd just leave the table and e-mail the HH to support. That's all you can do. That was a pretty lame response from UB.
    They've sent me an excel spreadsheet of the hand histories minus the hidden hand info which basically highlights all major raising in the game and not the play of these two players. They've not commented other than to say:
    We have send you an attach from the hands 2040 to 2070, please take a look at the way that everybody played, if you are right, everybody were colluding.
    and they seem to have missed/ignored my point completely. In 10 of 32 hands they raise reraised at least once, yet UB don't think this is suspicious. UB also failed to comment on how they played against each other compared to how they played against others.

    If I don't get any joy from them soon I'm going to start a thread over at twoplustwo and maybe rgp to get a wider set of opinions.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 914 ✭✭✭PPP-Pit Boss


    My two cents.
    It does happen. It has happened to me. I have been know to get so pissed I wait for an opportunity then take them both out. Play them at their own game. It is a VERY serious issue. At PPP we run reports several times a day looking for "Players playing together" if players show up.. hands are reviewed, if parties are guilty they are completely banned from the site. We dont wait for the complaints to come in.. To use a bit of wordy boardroom bingo. We are "proactive" about it. Before you ask what for instance about people who simply like to play together? When reviewed no suspicious play is found, end of story.
    The same applies to Fraud. Numerous auto generated reports per day are checked to try elliminate the launderers. Held funding kicks in instantly giving us sufficient time to weed out any prospective cheaters and retrieve funding.
    Both these are serious issues. Thankfully we have a way to tackle it.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,254 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dub13


    PPP Pit Boss,

    What would happen if the two "suspects" were playing on Doyles Room or one of the other sites on the network...?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 914 ✭✭✭PPP-Pit Boss


    Hi Dub. Can't speak for their process but they certainly have the same collusion reporting tool that we have. "players playing together" reports are network wide so we can catch them even if they are playing on different sites within the network.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    What protections do you have in place for the victims should such a thing occur? I'm assuming you get a report, decide they were colluding and then what?

    Of course my problem is different in that I cannot even get UB to discuss the matter in detail, or get them to admit collusion actually occured. It is also past their 48hr mark for withdrawals now too.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,254 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dub13


    Hi Dub. Can't speak for their process but they certainly have the same collusion reporting tool that we have. "players playing together" reports are network wide so we can catch them even if they are playing on different sites within the network.


    Thats reassuring, Thanks.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 914 ✭✭✭PPP-Pit Boss


    Hiya imp.. can I call you Imp. I feel more comfortable using cute names. It takes the edge off you know? ;0)
    We take every situation on a case by case basis. To be honest we have never had a formal complaint of collusion (ie anything similar to your story). Any cases I have come accross have been few and far between and nipped in the bud before any damage was done as a result. In trying to answer your question.. your case would most likely be escalated to me I would review and make a decision from there. These things are clear.
    Collusion and Fraud investigation occurs several times a day with PPP. It is taken very seriously and a lot of resource is invested in it.
    Players caught colluding on paddy power poker will be banned completely from playing on all Tribeca sites.
    Any player who suspects collusion should immediatley contact live customer service via ping and we will act at once.
    Any particular case of abuse or victimisation should be brought immediately to our attantion and we will review and act accordingly.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,632 ✭✭✭✭okidoki987


    I heard of a similar instance involving PokerStars. I was playing in a cash game and chatting to a guy about collusion and he said he was victim to it in a sit and go. I forget some of the details as it was a good while ago but as far as I remember the buy in was relatively expensive and there was at least two players involved. When it got down to 4 or 5 players he said he suspected collusion as some of the betting patterns were unusual. Anyway he busted out 4th with a zero payout in a suspecious play.
    After the sit and go was finished he contacted PokerStars' support and reported the instance and his suspecions. He didn't hear anything from them for a while but then they got back to him stating that their records and investigations also led to the conclusion that collusion was involved. They credited his account with 1st place money and confirmed that the other parties would be appropriately dealt with. Overall the guy seemed pretty surprised with the action PokerStars had taken by crediting his account but obviously he was delighted with the result and seemed pretty confident that the site was proactively managed.
    I also heard of an unrelated instance where someones account was frozen due to the suspecion of collusion. Aparently the site's management (don't know what site was involved here) had tracked the activity in their account. They had traced similar activity coming from another account with the same ISP address and had blocked both accounts. Don't know if it's possible that they can trace your ISP address but this is what I heard on the grape vine.

    I also heard the same type of story about Pokerstars and how they go out of their way to make sure people aren't been scammed (as much as they can)
    and that is one of the reasons i would play all the time.

    Had a brief time on PartyPoker but some of the beats were unbeliveable
    and I just stopped playing there.

    If you think you are the victim of collusion, walk away from the site immediately. Doesn't matter how easy the players are, it's your money they're stealing :mad:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,375 ✭✭✭padser


    just a question for ppp pit boss. I had only ever played on pokerroom, pacific poker and vc up to yesterday when i opened a ppp account not realising until afterwards that its the same tables as VC. It set me wondering how the rake is divided up between the different sites. Also who pays out??? (sorry if this has been dealt with in a previous thread).

    The reason i ask is just curiosity, it must be a very difficult thing to manage fairly and to everyones satisfaction


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 204 ✭✭Rodge


    Party Poker do absolutely nothing if you report collusion to them. I sat down at a 6 seater cash table a few weeks ago and when I was checking where everyone was from I noticed that three players all sitting beside each other were from Valhalla!

    Every single hand was raised by one of them and folded by the other two, the only time they got in a pot was in SB and BB when it was folded to them.

    One of the times, one of them checked down AA after hitting trips on the flop.

    I reported them and got the hell out of there with about two dollars profit. Nothing was ever done though that I am aware of, not even a reply to me.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 914 ✭✭✭PPP-Pit Boss


    padser wrote:
    just a question for ppp pit boss. I had only ever played on pokerroom, pacific poker and vc up to yesterday when i opened a ppp account not realising until afterwards that its the same tables as VC. It set me wondering how the rake is divided up between the different sites. Also who pays out??? (sorry if this has been dealt with in a previous thread).

    The reason i ask is just curiosity, it must be a very difficult thing to manage fairly and to everyones satisfaction
    The answer is simple really. Our customers pay rake to us in turn we pay a percentage of that to the network. VC customers pay VC rake who in turn pay a percentage to the network. Network = Tribeca Tables.
    http://www.paddypowerpoker.com/si_rake.php
    Above is a link about how much rake our site takes etc.
    Hope this answers your question
    ;0)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 914 ✭✭✭PPP-Pit Boss


    Rodge wrote:
    Party Poker do absolutely nothing if you report collusion to them. I sat down at a 6 seater cash table a few weeks ago and when I was checking where everyone was from I noticed that three players all sitting beside each other were from Valhalla!

    Every single hand was raised by one of them and folded by the other two, the only time they got in a pot was in SB and BB when it was folded to them.

    One of the times, one of them checked down AA after hitting trips on the flop.

    I reported them and got the hell out of there with about two dollars profit. Nothing was ever done though that I am aware of, not even a reply to me.
    Can't comment on the particular case but the lack of reply is an absolute disgrace in my opinion


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,375 ✭✭✭padser


    The answer is simple really. Our customers pay rake to us in turn we pay a percentage of that to the network. VC customers pay VC rake who in turn pay a percentage to the network. Network = Tribeca Tables.
    http://www.paddypowerpoker.com/si_rake.php
    Above is a link about how much rake our site takes etc.
    Hope this answers your question
    ;0)


    Im still confused. The rake in a table for example might be $1. But some of the money has been contributed by VC players and some by PPP players (im assuming). How do you decide on what proportion to divide up the money.

    Also is there not a danger that one site will get screwed. For example if PPP players are on average better then VC players, then VC will be taking in all the money (through the weaker players topping up accounts) while PPP will be making all the pay outs (through stronger players cashing out).

    Or maybe im missing something??? :rolleyes: Again


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 914 ✭✭✭PPP-Pit Boss


    padser wrote:
    Im still confused. The rake in a table for example might be $1. But some of the money has been contributed by VC players and some by PPP players (im assuming). How do you decide on what proportion to divide up the money.

    Also is there not a danger that one site will get screwed. For example if PPP players are on average better then VC players, then VC will be taking in all the money (through the weaker players topping up accounts) while PPP will be making all the pay outs (through stronger players cashing out).

    Or maybe im missing something??? :rolleyes: Again
    :0) We calculate what the players have contributed. In other words If Pit Boss were allowed to play on PPP and was PPP player and pit boss contributed on any given session x amount in rake + x amount in tourney fees that would be PPP rake contribution. The same applies for all of the other members of Tribeca. The table rake is a total of all rake contributed by all participating RAKED players. They are broken down then by Site Member. Individual rake contribution is counted.

    On second Q. Sites dont really get screwed. It is very fair to say that some players are better than others. But that is not restricted to PPP verses other sites on the network. There are good and bad players on all sites. The OBJECTIVE of course is to educate your customers. Help them get better at poker and win more.
    Another point is that weaker players (GENERALLY) tend to play lower stake games and stronger players are not afraid to play for higher stakes. Of course the education element comes back here and you try to help players to become better lose less win more.. rather than jump into a $50 cash table with 3 years five card stud experience gained at the age of ten against two older brothers staking cola bottles, texan bars and chores.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,047 ✭✭✭Culchie


    I'd say the piece of the puzzle you are missing padser, is that you logged in under whatever Partner, be it PPP or VC etc ... for that session you are that partners customer, you contribute to their rake.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,375 ✭✭✭padser


    Ah........the penny drops. Im that little bit more educated now. Thanks.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    While this discussion is all well and good (not to mention interesting and useful), has anyone else taken the time to have a look at the hands posted? Do they think my analysis is correct do they think my argument is complete bullsh1t?

    Pitboss, have you had a look at the hands? If so what do you think, seeing as your role has you dealing with this sort of thing every day (even if you haven't had to yet)?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 914 ✭✭✭PPP-Pit Boss


    Imposter wrote:
    While this discussion is all well and good (not to mention interesting and useful), has anyone else taken the time to have a look at the hands posted? Do they think my analysis is correct do they think my argument is complete bullsh1t?

    Pitboss, have you had a look at the hands? If so what do you think, seeing as your role has you dealing with this sort of thing every day (even if you haven't had to yet)?
    I can't comment really Imposter sorry. Without the ability to view all cards ie replay the hands it would be unfair of me to make a stand on it. I will say that the fact that you are a seasoned player and spotted it straight off suggest something may be amiss. Not knowing for instance if that player raising with 10 7 os was bluffing / sweetning the pot / completely incompetent, pissed as a coot. I do review this stuff every day. What I meant was I have never received a formal complaint from a customer with regard to this.
    Your grievence is not bull. I think it is valid.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,832 ✭✭✭careca


    Hiya imp.. can I call you Imp. I feel more comfortable using cute names. It takes the edge off you know? ;0)
    We take every situation on a case by case basis. To be honest we have never had a formal complaint of collusion (ie anything similar to your story). Any cases I have come accross have been few and far between and nipped in the bud before any damage was done as a result. .


    I did contact a PPP host one night (I posted up here about it the following day) where I was convinced two players were using chat to let each know what cards they held. It wasn't English they used and it was just too dodgy by far. They never got involved in pots with each other and were only typing in chat when it transpired that one of them had a big hand. Now I'm not sure if you can see chat history, so maybe it was impossible to tell if there was collusion. Althought the host informed me that they would check it out straight away , I never heard anything back. Now I did leave the site straight away as I was steaming but I was hoping to get an email or a call to set the record straight. BTW , I still have their usernames !!!!!!!!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    UB got back to me:
    email wrote:
    We have send you and attach please take a look at it.

    Unfortunately we cannot send you the hands of the rest of the players. Please remember that we have much more information than you or anybody else and without that information you can only guess, rest assured that those accounts would be closed by now if we had the slightest doubt.
    So I did as they said.
    attachment wrote:
    People play in so many different ways that first you have to establish how they play or what their style is, what we were trying to show you was the fact that they play their hands the same way when they played together or when they played with other players, and how other players did the same too, for example:
    <some hand history stuff nicely highlighted in red and green>
    Dmeyer started this hand raising $6 in the pre-flop and as you can see he had 8c 2d( the worst thing is that he won, just imagine what the other player had)
    <some more hand history stuff nicely highlighted in red and green>
    Checks with the fourth card and then raises in the river. Is very obvious why.
    <some more hand history stuff this time only highlighted in red>
    You raise to $6, autiger2000 re-raises to $9, and when dmeyer bets $3 he folds
    I do believe they think i'm stupid! (They may be right but that's a different thread) So they're trying to teach me poker.

    Now i'm really pissed. So I spend a nice chunk of time looking at the rest of the hands until they both left. So I wrote them a mail. Be warned it's a bit long but I think it's a good read. So see the next post.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    Fabian,

    I am getting very tired of this. You'll be glad to know that this is my last email to you on the matter, unless you accept that collusion occured.

    Firstly thank you for your explainations, but i know people play hands in different ways. I already had pegged dmeyer as someone who was liable to raise with anything, but thanks for the tip anyway. The last example however does not fit in with my theory and i'll agree this one example makes a small point in your favour.

    Now Fabian, the reason I am so tired at the moment is I have been reviewing all the histories, right up until these 2 left the table. As you may or may not know retreiving hand histories after the fact, gives you hand histories that doesn't include comments. So thankfully I have a memory, but no doubt you have all the information on your system. Now to my conclusions after this arduous task of reviewing all the hands.

    As I have been saying, I have been focusing my investigations on the way this pair play when both of them are in a pot. I've been moaning to you about how they were using this raise-reraise tactic all the time be it to build pots or to force others out. Now you have told me you can see both cards, so you obviously can see if they are taking the preverbial pee.

    Now here's some facts that I have noticed from hands 2031-2137:
    2136: mic maple and autiger are the only 2 left, they play a hand against each other and autiger wins. He has top pair throughout (a jack) and only bets the river which mic maple sportingly calls, again pretty passive I would reckon. But I digress my main point is about to come. Here is the hand numbers when this raise reraise tactic was used by the pair (Please note in some hands it was used more than once):
    2037
    2040
    2044
    2046
    2057
    2059
    2062
    2064
    2070
    2071
    2072
    2074
    2080
    2094
    2095
    2098
    2099
    2106
    Wow was it that often! 18 times in 106 hands. Just WOW!!!

    Now you might remember that I mentioned that both of them played until hand 2136. That's right a whole 30 hands where they never once raise reriased each other. Looking at the list above that looks like a lot doesn't it?

    Right assuming you agree with me (go on, you know you want to), you must be saying to yourself "What could have happened at hand 2106 for them to change this tactic?". Would you believe I know the answer to this, but i'll need a little help from you. But before I get too carried away you should go have a look at this hand, it's a cracker!

    Right now that you've seen the ultra advanced raise resiase tactic, i'll tell you that this is is the hand that caused dragon12 to accuse them of being muppets of the highest order and/or of colluding with each other. Now I know I was paraphrasing there, but you have all the history so you can see what was actually said. I would have chimed in shortly afterwards informing dragon12 that I had already reported them for collusion.

    Now back to some numbers. Remember 18 times in 106 hands but look it's also 18 times in 75 hands one raised and the other reraised. Now lets look at the last 31. Yep that's right 0 out of 31, amazing, unbelieveable even! And just after they were accused of cheating.

    Fabian, I do hope you are still reading! As you may have noticed I have withdrawn my entire monies from my account. I trust that there will be no problems with the last 170 odd $ getting into my neteller account!

    I think what I have presented to you here and over my previous emails is proof enough that collusion was occuring. Yes I know you know more than me and you have "more information than you or anybody else", including but not limited to the hands of all players, so could you please use it?

    Now i'll give you a reasonable timeframe to respond to this with either your tail between your legs, or a DETAILED (that word is important) explanation of why collusion was not occuring. Treat it like school, I want the full analysis, hand by hand including the hole cards I cannot see. Then when your hand by hand analysis is complete take it all together and analyse that. If you opt for the tail between your legs option I'd like to know how you intend to compensate the victims of this collusion. That's me and also the others that were at the table.

    Now i don't mean this as a threat, so please don't take it like one, but if you come back here spouting the same rubbish as you have over the last few emails I will be publishing all hand histories and correspondence we have had on some of the more popular poker forums on the internet. Now as I said this is not a threat, because that would be wrong, but I feel it would be only fair to warn others that UB either have no intention of dealing with collusion or their stafff and 'experts' are too stupid to be able to recognise it when it happens.

    Lastly, I do hope you enjoyed this diatribe as I thoroughly enjoyed writing it.

    Me.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,323 ✭✭✭Hitchhiker's Guide to...


    shakespeare couldn't haven't written better! - vg!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 836 ✭✭✭OilBeefHooked2


    Absolutely Brillant!

    Very well said.

    I cant wait to hear their reply. :o


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,632 ✭✭✭✭okidoki987


    Fabian, I do hope you are still reading! As you may have noticed I have withdrawn my entire monies from my account.

    Now you're talking.

    Love to see the response you get back (if any).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 914 ✭✭✭PPP-Pit Boss


    careca wrote:
    I did contact a PPP host one night (I posted up here about it the following day) where I was convinced two players were using chat to let each know what cards they held. It wasn't English they used and it was just too dodgy by far. They never got involved in pots with each other and were only typing in chat when it transpired that one of them had a big hand. Now I'm not sure if you can see chat history, so maybe it was impossible to tell if there was collusion. Althought the host informed me that they would check it out straight away , I never heard anything back. Now I did leave the site straight away as I was steaming but I was hoping to get an email or a call to set the record straight. BTW , I still have their usernames !!!!!!!!
    We did have an incident with that complaint a while back I was informed. Entered the room and warned both of them to speak only english on the site. Not sure if it was your case though.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,832 ✭✭✭careca


    We did have an incident with that complaint a while back I was informed. Entered the room and warned both of them to speak only english on the site. Not sure if it was your case though.


    Thats fair enough.

    As I said I have both their names anyway so if I saw the two of them again at the same table I wouldn't play there.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 914 ✭✭✭PPP-Pit Boss


    Jesus! ;0) Bet Fabian wishes he just worked in the UB facilities department..


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 914 ✭✭✭PPP-Pit Boss


    careca wrote:
    Thats fair enough.

    As I said I have both their names anyway so if I saw the two of them again at the same table I wouldn't play there.
    Send me their names via private message and I will check em out


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    Jesus! ;0) Bet Fabian wishes he just worked in the UB facilities department..
    Do you blame me in fairness? The hands are there for all to see and he persists in saying there was nothing unusual happening, yet he won't respond directly to my allegations/questions!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 914 ✭✭✭PPP-Pit Boss


    Imposter wrote:
    Do you blame me in fairness? The hands are there for all to see and he persists in saying there was nothing unusual happening, yet he won't respond directly to my allegations/questions!
    Not at all! Applause all round. You should not have to do his job for him!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭Imposter


    over 3 days, no reply.
    Posted on 2+2.
    All hand histories also attached.


Advertisement