blonde poker forum

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29/news-views-gossip/shady-dealings-partypoker-live-1724977/?highlight=brs

Just seen this thread on two plus two.

Please delete if inappropriate but this is an interesting and topical issue in today’s poker world.

Interesting thread, seems like there is a whole underworld to what’s going on but it’s not so in the shadows as everyone knows about it, lol. I know a few people that have been with BRS, some ex, some still there, always seems the ex players are disgruntled and the current players don’t have a bad word. No real shock there.

Skin read some of the thread.

Bizarro goings on

Party setting up their own cryptocurrency and then just printing it to buy players into events. Paul Jackson heavily involved threatening ex horses, talks of collision between brs members in satellites.

Just an ugly mess for all involved.

Has there been any public comment on this from Party/BRS or anyone accused?

The thread is kind of a joke because it's so obvious that 85% of the posts are just a collection of shills with various axes to grind, the "reporter" guy leading the investigation I spoke to him privately and he has a HUGE vendetta against party for various reasons.  I think for that reason Party aren't gonna bother themselves with it.

Incredible reading!

Given the accusations and concerns, you would perhaps have expected a statement from PP, PPLive, BRS etc but they have made no comment it seems.

One of the guys on there has big money (200k dollars plus I think) in PP dollars.

Seems PP funds are ring fenced but not sure its clear about PP dollars?

Given the history in online poker, its not unreasonable to make sure your funds are safe?

If they are not supposed to knock each other out online - my main reason for blocking myself from party poker
Should we not presume it’s similar instructions live ?
 Truth is it stinks of cheating and scheming against regular players trying with their own money hence why I no longer play
I can’t be the only one who thinks this ?

How many people need to have an axe to grind before their collective axes gain sufficient credibility to no longer be classed as shills?

Surely if this many people have axes and vendettas then there must be something bad going on?

for clarity, my post was referring to why (imo) party/ppl etc didnt respond to the thread, im not saying the point of the thread is/isn't valid or somethign is or isn't going on, just the actual thread itself is wall to wall nonsense and for that reason i cant imagine party responding to it.

I mean in that thread there is loads of accounts that to me are very obviously all the same person/collection of people, hoards of brand new accounts come along all writing in the same incredibly well informed succinct manner basically all making the same point, pretty obvious whats going on there. So i would ask, if the matter truly is as much of an outrage then why do they need to regurgitate new fake accounts to build the outrage?

Then there is a few guys in there with valid points who i think actually deserve a response from Party, but they are drowned by the chaos.

You don't play anymore because you're shit and can't be bothered with sitting there all day!

Just like me ;D

There is a real mixture on there isn't there?!

Someone needs to respond as it isn't going to disappear by the look of it and the accusations of organised collusion are pretty serious don't you think?

Shame to see PeeLeeno's name drawn in to it as well  :'(

Got to feel for the guy who sits second in that leaderboard comp. He's spent thousands of his bankroll to win $200k tournament dollars only to find that other participants that he's up against are seemingly recycling existing dollars.

If that's actually happened it's pretty disgusting.

Interesting YouTube video for anybody who doesn't want to read the 2p2 thread:

Skip to 3:30 for the relevant bit.

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhQmsp4OvnQ

Worth watching the whole thing for a nice little Will Kassouf snippet as well

And I do better at roulett3 😂😂

I actually am not that fussed by this and maybe I should be.

They havnt seen my hole cards or anything, they just are staked into the games and instead of a random backer getting it the company does. Ive gone deep and even won some of the non live party events and Im pretty happy that the guarentees are artifically inflated!

Maybe I'm missing something, but I think I'd rather have the overlay rather than face X allegedly terrible players being thrown into the PPLive comps by BRS/PPL/Various other stables simply so that they could increase their equity in the tournament and simultaneously reduce their overlay exposure.

Of course you want be facing bad players - until you get smashed in the face by their aggregated variance. There's a post on the 2+2 thread by a guy who played a series of comps on his own dime for c.£12k that struck a chord with me. If the game is going get back to any kind of health, surely the serious recs (like that guy and me) need to be nurtured rather than enraged.

How can you not be concerned by effectively having a team of players all allegedly under the instruction to play as a team?

There can't be a stable that exists that hasn't been accused of this?  I dare say it was trud with most. 

I remember a hair pulling discussion on Blonde years ago where a few people thoughg it was reasonable to take into account their total money invested on the table and not just their own stack.   

but gets messy when operators are on the team & have financial interest in outcomes

What say I need the operator to deliver a ruling vs company horse

Maybe they want to be able to play at DTD in the future?

You are as vocal as anyone there.  I understand from your posts that you had a dispute over £6k and there may have been legal action.   When you got banned from here, was that connected?  Can you still play at DTD and/or on party? 

 Because its always been this way. Whether staked by Party or in a large stable it is what it is. Bear in mind they are in for 40% of winnings so will still play relativly selfishly.

https://mobile.twitter.com/martymath/status/1061285390433312768 (https://mobile.twitter.com/martymath/status/1061285390433312768)

Marty Mathis (The Lipo Fund) has issued a statement after speaking to Party and Rob Yong.  I think he has something like 200k ppl$ and was a big critic originally.

cliffs.   
he is now happy
ppl$ is segregated by Party
Rob Yong can give favourable treatment to who the hell he likes st DTD, it is his business.

There is more in there, but I have to work.

If guys are being put into party poker tournamanets where there is an overlay and then playing splashy wouldn’t this be counter productive on the reason party poker put them in? They put them in to win back a slice of the overlay, by them getting it in as underdogs won’t show a high ROI on Party’s investment. And if they are playing a lose aggressive style then I trust people playing £500+ tournaments to be able to adjust there game accordingly and not overplay one pair hands? I played the Side events at Millions Nottingham this year and like every poker player has experienced had my AQ lose to a a lose aggressive guy/girl who deceived A7 suited was good enough to call a  3 bet and then flop top 2 vs my top pair. It happens all the time and will continue to. Maybe investing a year or so savings in a high variance game just isn’t the best thing to do if you won’t be happy with being outdrawn or outplayed.

Most of the players are put in to these by stables, staking threads, or by selling to friends and family.

I understand however when friends or stable mates are soft playing as that is just against the rules of the game and I witness it all the time in online Sats on PP and Starts. Nothing gets done about it which is wrong. So I just don’t play them any more.

Rant over I guess. And I guess the point I am making if you don’t like the conditions for whatever reason just don’t play.  We should try to promote the game for the right reasons and not put it down due to a bad beat.

Have I sent you a PM about this? I have written one twice but it doesn’t seem to be in messages folder.

But if you get to sit at a table where loose and splashy is getting it in with A-7 that’s a big advantage for you. If I’m at a table where the operator isn’t providing me with opportunities at loose and splashy chips then that means I’m at a disadvantage. My preference is for others not to have an unfair advantage over me.

It doesn’t actually matter how loose and splashy/tight and aggressive or whatever they are.

Nobody puts a gun to the head of the promoter and forces them to have overly ambitious guarantees. If they miss the guarantee then that’s their mistake and is at their cost.
If a £5000 entry with £5,000,000 gtee gets 800 runners then those 800 share the benefit of the overlay between them. Effectively they have bought a £6250 ticket at a reduced price.

If the organiser inserts an extra 200 runners on an incentivised basis then the added value for the 800 is removed. It doesn’t matter how they were added, if there was any form of incentive to them, even just travel cost reimbursement, they are taking value from those who have had their potential return reduced.

What is the unfair advantage? That they have more bullets to fire? That they are staked? They are better players than you?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I remember your post saying that the guy hit a gut shot or something like that to bust you? You got your money in good and just got unlucky. I would have been happy that I got my money in good. My bust out hand was AJ VS KQ who ended up making trips.

If the operator is playing snug then it means you can just steal more pots from them.

I’m not part of a stable, or have a ton of money to burn. So I guess every time I play I’m at a disadvantage to most of the field? I seem to be doing pretty well this year in tournaments without being amazing.

Tournaments are tough, most people generally look for any edge they can get.

@PokerPops!

I agree with you.  PP have staked pros playing. I guess Technically they are just increasing the amount of sponsored pros in the tournament. I read the thread and understood it to be saying that the players that are being put in have an unfair advantage due to being staked. Rather than should PP be reducing overlays by the method of putting more players in. Most of the field are staked or have swapped action with someone. So for me the environment is just the norm. Everyone still wants to win and plays there cards how they think they should be played.

Selling a bit of yourself to mates, or swapping a piece with a friend are very different to being one of dozens of players inserted into a tournament by a mate of the promoter where the source of the buyin and the destination of any returns is clouded in uncertainty.

Not sure about that. We know they are going to PP and BRS, split with the player. :-)

You are looking at it wrong. Overlays are not good. But big guarantees are.

Using your example. If a 5k buy in 5 million guarantee overlays by a million then the organisers are likely to reduce the guarantee next stop to let's say 4 million. But alternatively, the sponsor/owner/BRS/whoever can put an extra 200 players in the tournament to make the guarantee.

In the first example we have an 800 runner field, which may or may not be good value.
In the second example we have a 1000 runner field, the prizepool is one million bigger and we have 200 extra players, who couldn't afford to buy in for 5k and who failed to satellite in for whatever reason, who are possibly backed, maybe not cash rich, quite possibly not much experience of playing buyins as big as 5k.

I like those additional 200 people in the field and the boosted prizepool, it doesn't really matter to me how they got in there, but they make the tournament better.

How would you feel if those additional people were all pros? Let’s say they include Trickett, Toby Lewis, Pads, Fedor Holz, and a host of top tournament players.
Let’s then say that the organisation responsible for the guarantee now has 20% of the field in play, and a financial interest in the results of those players.
How would you feel about stumping up your own cash to enter?

I think the point here is if they are good players they would already be in the field. I have never seen the floor siding with a Pro in the laws of the game in any PP Live event and I have now played in 3.

If they made it clear up front that it was £5M guaranteed but with a zero chance of an overlay then it would be fine.

What they actually do is advertise the 'incredible value' and 'huge potential overlays' all over facebook to get people in to the tournament knowing full well that there won't be one.

All they need to do is be transparent and let people know that it's a £5M guarantee but they'll be putting their own players in on some kind of split to ensure that it actually gets the runners necessary to make the guarantee.

It's all about transparency. Let people know what they're getting in to up front and nobody can ever complain. Any kind of sneakiness in there will always upset a few folk.

There’s so many illogical and untruthful thoughts around all these talks. Not wanting to get it in against people with bad hands being the most obvious one. You’re there to win the tournament or progress in the tournament you have to gain chips, poker is tougher every year being to gain chips, especially if you’re an amateur who is a dog in the field is tough right? If somebody is actually playing like this it will be the easiest way for anybody to gain chips and progress in the tournament.  Somebody talked about a 5000 ticket being worth 6250 well if somebody is going all in with 30% equity against you then guess what your “ticket” will be worth around 5250! There’s probably a blackjack or roulette analogy but I’m tired.


No offence but I would be playing for 100% of myself as would Fedor, Trickett or whoever else were not going to try and take some small freeroll deal.


Of course some overlays hit mate but many, many don’t. Online on daily basis you will find 5+ tournaments with overlay, last week in Canada I think there was 1m overlay, I would say that there has probably been 100,000% more overlays in party tournaments than any other brand, it’s not really up for debate there are many tournaments in a regular basis that have big added value from overlay. 

What do you mean as a team? They are playing individually right? They aren’t showing each other their cards and if they are then it doesn’t have anything about being in a stable or whatever. There has been cheats, there are cheats and there will be cheats in the future. Just because somebody is staked doesn’t mean they are cheats. When Cos and the guys were staked by Blatchly you guys didn’t think they would cheat together right? It’s the same thing here.


“Of course you want to play bad players, till you lose” surely you can see the illogical sense behind this? What would you rather face? Somebody playing well?

We would rather be playing an empty seat and there still being 5k in the prizepool

Yeah, of course they would, maybe even firing a few bullets each. Totally just value hunting. No little deals with subsidised travel and accom. Absolutely open and above board. Transparent. Even when they are firing their sixth or seventh bullet at the point where the overlay is now insignificant. Entering with 30BB because their skill edge is so great that they can still be +EV.

I’m with Ledders on this

Sorry I was mainly referring to the specific £5M guarantee tournament and also the live tournaments I regularly see promoted on facebook which are generally the DTD ones.

I wasn't really talking about online as I don't see the info for those tournaments so don't have any knowledge of what goes on. I did read the 2p2 thread though and saw the following post which really paints a bad picture all being within 2% of the exact number of runners required to hit the guarantee:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Mystic View Post
There is definitely something odd going on with respect to field sizes.

$55 $10k - 198 runners
$109 $50k - 497 runners
$55 $25k - 494 runners
$530 $100k - 196 runners
$530 $40k - 80 runners
$109 $40k - 399 runners
$215 $100k - 494 runners

And looking at yesterday's fields it is a similar story
This is not normal at all, never used to happen. What's the deal?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This person may have been cherry picking of course but I read it as though this was the tournaments from one specific day. When I used to play on stars it was never like this, pretty much every tournament hit the guarantee but there was never a noticeable pattern of them being this close.

Anyone with a suspicious mind might well think there was a pool of players just sat there waiting with their tournament dollars to buy in at the last minute if they were needed to make up the numbers. There might even be someone instructing these players which tournaments to sign up for? The posts from ex BRS players seem to suggest that this was the case.

I'd like to take the unders on 100000% if I may please although we'll have to specify over how much time. Are we including the penny rolls and $1.10 tournaments here? I'll admit that they overlay quite frequently so would probably skew thing in your favour.

Comparing this to stars is comparing apples and pears.   Stars rarely makes an effort to increase guarantees and cuts them pretty quick these days.   I mostly play O8, but can say in that game on Stars, they were cutting guarantees so far, and so regularly, tournaments just disappeared.   I think a better comparison would be with Sky who are a bit more daring than Stars with guarantees, but even then, thet aren't pushing guarantees up like Party have been.  Sure somebody could paste the Sky numbers here from their latest UKOPS and a fair few are likely to be close to the guarantee.

Whilst the BRS theory is a reasonably hypothesis, you can also see Sky and Party pros/PR tweeting about overlays to close guarantees.  It just takes one big stable to realise an overlay could be on, and an overlay gets closed.  Then you get people like me who are far more likely to re-enter if the guarantee will be close.  There have also been posts on here mentioning overlays are possible/probably in various live tournaments.  Add in a few random regs ringing up mates and you get the same pattern of entries close to the guarantee.  Of there is a possible overlay, pros sniff it out and enter accordingly.

Hey Pads

I have no problems with stables.

I was referring to the posts on 2+2 from BRS players saying they were berated and intimidated by Paul Jackson if they knocked each other out of tournaments and that they received messages if they were on the same table as another BRS player around the bubble.

As a complete rec player I have no issue trying to get past staked players, I do have a problem if they are intentionally working together to ensure they both ladder instead of me.

Numbers being close to guarantees are because they get pushed and pushed and pushed. The same person forgot to mention the $20k, $10k, $30knoverlays In heaps of tournaments this week. I’m sorry but it’s #fakenews ;)

Definitely not #fakenews but undoubtedly #cherrypickednews

In his defence his list was from about a month ago when all of these accusations first came about so wouldn't include anything from this week anyway.

Are the huge overlays you've listed possibly because BRS have disbanded or were they always like this anyway?

They’ve always been like this. Not only is there millions and millions given out in leaderboards, but there’s also very handsome overlays on an almost daily basis. That’s why the regs play more there now because they know he site gambles with them. On other sites the guarantees are always smashed usually around 75% more than the guarantee thus not gambling with the players at all and of course not hitting close to the potential they could do. If you are recreational player you may only play 109$ if it’s 50k+ because 30k isn’t attractive, instead the 30k hits 50k but people won’t buy into it once it’s shallow stacks.

The reason the numbers are close to the guaranteed amounts is because party are dynamic and can estimate what the field numbers look like and if they are slightly missing then regs will jump in for last minute overlay hunting. It’s very normal.

Yh this never happened.

I’m curious, at what point does a reg decide that the overlay isn’t going to be juicy?
70% of the required field?
80%?
How do they make the decision given that there is a finite time for entering?

It seems counter-intuitive to suggest that tournaments being 95%+ get filled by overlay hunting regs.

It depends on the reg, his bankroll and his roi.

Why would that be counter intuitive. It seems very intuitive to me.

Because to me, the extra value that the overlay represents, the value that the regs are supposedly chasing, diminishes with each additional entrant and the potential for the use of their ‘edge’ reduces as their SS represents fewer BB/chip value.

Someone posted on 2p2 to say they were flying out to the CPP because they forecast <1500 runners and that implied an additional amount of value in the tournament that would equate very closely to his cost of getting there. For him, if there is a sudden rush of entries/re-entries to take the game close to it’s guarantee he has lost his reason for going.
Online there isn’t the same expense, but there must be a stage at which an online reg says “nope, not worth it. Not enough incentive to be Mr 99% in this and be starting my game as a shorter stack”

That’s not really how it works either. In low field tournaments your roi is similar whether to reg first hand or last hand of late reg.  if you have the same roi but miss 2-3 hours then you instantly have way higher roi and can play way more games meaning make more money.

You should be on the Brexit negotiation team with logic like that. You can’t have the same ROI at both ends of the reg period AND have an instantly higher roi by choosing to late reg. I get the bit about playing more games, but the other bit looks nonsensical,

You didn’t answer the bit about being Mr 99% of the required field by the way.

I am no expert on this. But I would have thought if you late reg you are closer to the money, less players remaining, and be less than a double up away from average chips. Stealing blinds and antes are also much more profitable. For all of these reasons the ROI would increase for any player late regging and would be higher for solid pros or short, mid stack specialist.

Personally I don't want card-rooms to have overlays, they're not sustainable.

you have the same roi and thus a higher hourly late regging and higher roi on your session.

lets say there is a game every 30 minutes and you want to max 4 table

you start your session at 4pm and register 4 tables, assuming you have the same roi in all of the tournaments for argument sake then max ev would be to register every tournament at the very last second thus maxing your volume.

if you ever see a 25k online you'll see i do exactly this, i register with literally the last second of the tournament because rois are capped and thus i get best $/hour by playing it at the very last second, if there is a 2000 runner field with huge dead money early, then it is different, although still perhaps roi isn't increased enough to justify registering anything other than last second.

and yes, you're probably right, I would most likely do a better job than the current person negotiating brexit.

well it would also be higer ev for amateurs too.

what do you think an amateur loses the most money in? 200bb deep or 1bb deep?

well lets assume when they go all in vs a pro with 200bbs deep, the pro will likely have 70%+ equity.

lets assume they go all in with 1bb, even if they go all in blind they will have 35% equity vs the top 10% of all hands in poker, by the time they have 15bbs and are selective with what they go all in with, lets say they go all in with top 20% vs pros top 15% their equity is 46%

its a reason why all live tournaments should start 100bb deep, for many many years you would get the nittiest of regs getting it in with 80%+ equity vs amateurs and busting them way too quickly/easily, with the change of 100bb maximum, it at least decreases this.

ideally every tournament should be 40bb from the start to the very end, meaning there is the right amount of skill + luck and edges are capped that amateurs survive longer.

instead we get amateurs who complain that pros go all in blind vs them, again, im not sure how they are expecting to win the tournament or progress without winning chips and simply getting it all in with top 10% vs blind hand you're going to have around 75% equity which is more than almost any pro will have in almost any tournament live or online.

Thanks for that impartial clarification Rexas

 ;carlocitrone;

I was there, heavily involved in managing players at various points in my time with BRS, have nothing to protect now that BRS doesn't exist anymore, and am not hiding behind a fake account. We fired people for collusion, we didn't encourage it and we certainly never made anyone do it, it's a completely baseless accusation that I find pretty insulting and (shocker) noone has provided anything in the way of proof. Please don't believe what you read on 2+2, especially since the moderators seem outrageously bias against BRS.

So BRS no longer exists ?

Is that because of the controversy ?

Or will it just re brand and basically carry on under a different name ?

BRS are still going. They have gotten rid of there online presence, however they still have their WhatsApp players group and players continue to be staked. Nothing wrong with that mind. I know a few of the BRS staked players and have done before they had been staked. I’ve never witnessed them cheating before in anyway.

It was downsizing before the controversy, and I think (although I don't know) that it's gone now because this latest drama made PJ realise that the business can't go anywhere. The name is such trash that it can't ever grow and is just going to decline amidst more drama. I don't know why it's gone and I'm not exactly happy about it, but that's what I think has happened. As far as I know BRS isn't going to continue under a new name, I've been with them for years as a player, coach and manager and I didn't get offered anything by PJ or by a company taking over from BRS, I'm now backed privately.

UgotNuts is right in thinking a bunch of the chats still exist, but these aren't anything more than groups of friends chatting on Facebook or WhatsApp or whatever. BRS is not still going.

Ok , thanks for replies.

I was at a table with a few BRS lads last time I was at DTD, and they'd have been in trouble if they were supposed to be softplaying one another :D

I think the argument about what is better EV for who is pretty moot, different sets of people have different desires from their poker experience and no-one really should be telling anyone what is best for them as it's all subjective and often boils down to preference;

Pros, mostly go where the money is, there's a £5m tournament with a load of people playing terribley, that's likely where they're gonna go - that being said some pros wouldn't take the bankroll risk/expenses ina  high variance, high EV spot, some would absolutely jump on it. Pure recreational players have a much different set of requirements, some prefer in soft games, they understand they lose vs better players and prefer to play in an enviroment where they can play with some expectation of profit/minor loss, some prefer to play against tough opposition and test themselves/enjoy the high calibre of play, and there is every different type of preference in between, from indifference to being unaware of all this and just wanting to play. The point is it's not really for any of us to say to anyone "well, this is good for you suck it up" when there is a whole host of other factors at play than the EV.

I've had conversations with Pro Poker players where I've said "you know you should really play X it's massive edge for you, i'll take a piece" and they've said, "nah not for me I'll just my own thing" and I've had same conversation with recreational players where I've said "yu know thats a very tough lineup you're likely getting murdered there" to which they've replied "yep bt who gives a fuck I'm taking them on." I've also had the same conversation about tournaments with recreational players where I've said to them (r.e some terrible play) "yeah, but you want that guy shoving on you with a gutshot" to which they've replied "I get your point, but that's just not the poker game I wanna play."

To suggest that a certain way is better for a certain people without understanding their desires for that situation is pretty arrogant an unhelpful really.

One thing I really miss is the old days of like GUKPT blackpool, you'd go there, would have this real buzz about it, everyone was there - winning it, going deep in it just felt really special and prestigious and these massive gte re-entry events just don't seem to have that, for me (as a non pro) i'd prefer that to a £1m top prize as I found it so much more fun. The scale of these poker events seems to have lost the sparkle, to me. I'd like to see a £5k at DTD with a £1m prizepool no re-entries and that old magic back - once again i'm just one guy with one opinion and respect that what matters to me doesn't matter to other people.

That’s a fantastic post Dave, very well said. I am firmly in the camp where I’d rather go up against worse players all day long. Outplaying someone better than me is just the icing on the cake (when it rarely happens).

Rexas-really appreciate your input here as I’ve been following the DTD/PPL/BRS scandal over on 2+2. Seems Rob Yong is steadfastly refusing to even post anything publically, let alone admit any wrongdoing. He must have been involved with the BRS being able to pool all PPL dollars won and send whoever they want to tournaments, which I think is wrong as it would fill those tournaments with much stronger players than the free-sat-ticket-firing minions who won the tickets.