blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 26, 2020, 12:46:36 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2254916 Posts in 66557 Topics by 16625 Members
Latest Member: thrytiarod
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Poker Forums
| |-+  The Rail
| | |-+  Felt colluded against in UKPC DTD Mega sat just finished now on ipoker..
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 ... 18 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Felt colluded against in UKPC DTD Mega sat just finished now on ipoker..  (Read 38285 times)
jack2off
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 261



View Profile
« Reply #120 on: February 21, 2014, 05:24:28 AM »

I can imagine that friends playing a satellite in same house would naturally want to help each other? Human nature again? Let's say they are in different rooms, I have no doubt they would still be talking/shouting & staying away from each other.

Dom has made a complaint not knowing these 2 knew each other never mind were in same house, it seems he has provided specific details on specific hands to I poker who have investigated & taken action & advised DTD regarding the prizes etc.

To take a decision this quickly I can only assume the findings are quite obvious.

If it were me I'd defend myself to death over this and want to rack up as much expert support as I could (like here) I can't imagine posting hand histories will help because if someone as savvy as Dom has picked out several hands where he feels collusion was In play with just his poker knowledge & instinct to fall back on & an expert bans both payers within a few hours based on this evidence I imagine those several hands will not favour their defence well.

This isn't a court of law, posting evidence isn't going to compromise them in anyway (as was mentioned in guys response) only gain support but I truly believe based on what we know it's a waste of time & will only confirm Ipoker/Dtd findings

Logged
stato_1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1347

#Team_Eureka


View Profile
« Reply #121 on: February 21, 2014, 05:40:19 AM »

I've played satellites on the same IP address as possibly up to four or five people hundreds of times. Never colluded. Absolute million iPoker have any proof collusion occurred imo. They could ban people from the site without proof as they dont need it right? But to confiscate a prize worth £1100 I'd imagine they'd want to have pretty decent proof for that
Logged
The Camel
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17427


Under my tree, being a troll.


View Profile
« Reply #122 on: February 21, 2014, 05:47:01 AM »

I've played satellites on the same IP address as possibly up to four or five people hundreds of times. Never colluded. Absolute million iPoker have any proof collusion occurred imo. They could ban people from the site without proof as they dont need it right? But to confiscate a prize worth £1100 I'd imagine they'd want to have pretty decent proof for that

Tis a joke that IPoker allow players in the same tournament from the same IP Address
Logged

Congratulations to the 2012 League Champion - Stapleton Atheists

"Keith The Camel, a true champion!" - Brent Horner 30th December 2012

"I dont think you're a wanker Keith" David Nicholson 4th March 2013
stato_1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1347

#Team_Eureka


View Profile
« Reply #123 on: February 21, 2014, 06:04:43 AM »

I've played satellites on the same IP address as possibly up to four or five people hundreds of times. Never colluded. Absolute million iPoker have any proof collusion occurred imo. They could ban people from the site without proof as they dont need it right? But to confiscate a prize worth £1100 I'd imagine they'd want to have pretty decent proof for that

Tis a joke that IPoker allow players in the same tournament from the same IP Address

Every site does afaik? For MTTs?

Im pretty sure on stars there's a number x when if the field <x you cant play

In regular MTTs collusion is probably far more easy to detect though so I guess it matters less.

Guess I'm in the minority but if I'm on a final table with someone sat across the room from me and theyre a mate I probably play harder against them than anyone else lol
« Last Edit: February 21, 2014, 06:07:27 AM by stato_1 » Logged
GreekStein
Hero Member
Hero Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 20852



View Profile
« Reply #124 on: February 21, 2014, 07:35:57 AM »

I've played satellites on the same IP address as possibly up to four or five people hundreds of times. Never colluded. Absolute million iPoker have any proof collusion occurred imo. They could ban people from the site without proof as they dont need it right? But to confiscate a prize worth £1100 I'd imagine they'd want to have pretty decent proof for that

Tis a joke that IPoker allow players in the same tournament from the same IP Address

ftp, starts etc also allow this keef
Logged

@GreekStein on twitter.

Retired Policeman, Part time troll.
david3103
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6104



View Profile
« Reply #125 on: February 21, 2014, 08:32:52 AM »

There is a group of very regular satellite players/winners on DTD and I would be absolutely stunned if that group hadn't on one or more occasions been guilty of soft-playing vs each other.
Then there's always the potential for people who travel together to events to work together in qualifying.
Do the chat logs get reviewed at any stage? Are HHs only looked at if someone objects? Is there no regular process of checking the play to ensure a level playing field for a Billy No Mates vs a crew from wherever?

I've bubbled or close a lot of satellites on DTD.
In ALL of those I am 100% confident that people were colluding on one level or another. Asking openly in chat for walks, whole tables agreeing in chat to slow the game down so that 'their' shortstack would hit the blinds after someone on another table.
The issue was so bad last year that this forum debated it at length here (names were removed from that thread) http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=60769.0


That was nearly a year ago and Lord knows how many seats have been won since yet it seems that Dave and Guy, two people whose word I would be very happy to trust, are the only people who iPoker think have done anything wrong?

Logged

It's more about the winning than the winnings

5 November 2012 - Kinboshi says "Best post ever on blonde thumbs up"
StuartHopkin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7849


Turny


View Profile
« Reply #126 on: February 21, 2014, 08:33:11 AM »

Sends a very clear message.

What message exactly?

I suppose it does.

Don't play sats on DTD if you enjoy being able to play at the club?
It is such a small player pool on there that everyone knows someone sat at their table.

The whole 'they are playing in the same house' thing is complete rubbish.
It is obviously quite possible to have 10 people connected over the internet in many ways all sharing their hands and plans for each hand.
Two people being sat next to each other is really no different to if they were in different countries.

I am pretty sure if you have chips you do actually have the right to pick someone out at the table who you don't like the look of and decide you want to bust them.
Surely IPoker need solid proof that they were communicating their cards to call them colluders here?
I am pretty sure that if I was playing live and sat next to Jakally we would both want to knock Kinboshi out, we wouldn't even need to communicate it, its just natural.
Is this collusion?
I doubt very much whether IPoker have a clue at what they are looking for to prove a case like this.

Therefore I don't feel safe playing DTD sats anymore as I really enjoy having the option of, albeit very occasionally, walking through the doors of DTD.
All it takes is one person to spit their dummy out on here, call me out as a cheat and get me banned.


 
Logged

Only 23 days to go until the Berlin Marathon! Please sponsor me at www.virginmoneygiving.com/StuartHopkin
YEAHMAN123
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 689



View Profile
« Reply #127 on: February 21, 2014, 08:57:11 AM »

Think this is why we'd need to see hand history and stuff from the players before making judgement of any sort. Just like a recent tread with friends coming on saying ''they wouldn't do it' 'sound people' etc etc then for further stuff to come out and people made to look like fools.
Like Aaron has stated, your in tw same house on a ft and your not guna help each other out? I say your a liar if u say no or been banned before and super paranoid. I think in my opinion they did collude but it happens on all sats. Going to be very hard to stamp it out.
I met guy at Grand Prix last week and wasnt the first time but he was a complete idiot towards me at the table, I accepted his apologise hours later at the bar whilst drinking yet continued to slag my play off ,still consider he rude and very disrespectful towards me, suppose it is me but some heavy karma come down on u UL Wink

Saying there blondes and shouldn't be banned is stupid also sayin it's harsh is stupid, think about what they have done and then try defending them. They must take this as a lesson
Dave stated this earlier in the thread and kinda feel for him but rules our rules
Logged

When you get to where you wana go
and you know the things you wana know
your smiling Smiley
Pawprint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1055



View Profile
« Reply #128 on: February 21, 2014, 09:25:19 AM »

David and Stuart have pretty much summed up my thoughts on all this.

I play a lot of sats online with DTD, and with such a small player pool, it's always obvious that you are sat with players that know each other well.

That does tend to raise my paranoia levels and I regularly see situations that make me go WTF ?

All anyone wants is a level playing field, which is what I thought DTD were aiming for with the work around the Club Cash Tables.

Not a great thread to read, but hopefully something positive comes out of it going forward.
Logged

TightEnd
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #129 on: February 21, 2014, 10:35:41 AM »

I think it would be prudent of blonde poker to remind its members that there has been no substantiated proof provided to the open forum of guilt or otherwise and therefore members providing specific comment in respect to people cheating would seem ill advised.

Thank you
Logged

My eyes are open wide
By the way,I made it through the day
I watch the world outside
By the way, I'm leaving out today
sonour
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1664


View Profile
« Reply #130 on: February 21, 2014, 11:25:50 AM »

Perhaps I phrased it wrong

Whatever they post on here will make no difference to the ban being reversed or not, and any reputational loss being restored

Far better to do it privately, and concentrate on the important stuff than being distracted on this thread

In my opinion

It depends what's important to them.

And if they are innocent.

As they played on the same IP address I would think that's enough to get them banned from IPoker. And nothing will change that.

That doesn't make them cheats though.

So if they are innocent, then publishing HHs showing they didn't collude definitely would repair their reputation.

If they did cheat, then their reputation deserves to be in tatters.

I emailed Pokerstars to ask if Pete and I could play from the same house on the same IP address. I was told yes as long we played from separate rooms and should we find ourselves on the same table that we were to play the same way against each other as we would against a random.

Is IPoker different ?
Logged
Karabiner
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 22120


30 million light-years away


View Profile
« Reply #131 on: February 21, 2014, 11:52:08 AM »

I obviously have nothing to go on here but gut instinct but it appears to me that i-poker have acted a little hastily here putting 2+2 together and getting 5.

Allegations of cheating+two guys who won seats playing from the same i/p address=guilty.

It all seems a little too simplistic to this observer.
Logged

If I'm not here I'm probably hacking it round the back nine
verndog158
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1919


omgpoker


View Profile
« Reply #132 on: February 21, 2014, 11:55:11 AM »

Agree with posters above, same IP address is totally irrelevant when it comes to collusion. Most of us chat on fb/ have skype groups open while we play and can chat just as easily as if they were in the same room.
Logged

ignore verndog he's a fool

'he had a deep run in EPT Barnsley'
david3103
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6104



View Profile
« Reply #133 on: February 21, 2014, 12:14:53 PM »

Agree with posters above, same IP address is totally irrelevant when it comes to collusion. Most of us chat on fb/ have skype groups open while we play and can chat just as easily as if they were in the same room.

Really? What do you chat about?
Logged

It's more about the winning than the winnings

5 November 2012 - Kinboshi says "Best post ever on blonde thumbs up"
jack2off
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 261



View Profile
« Reply #134 on: February 21, 2014, 12:19:39 PM »

I'm assuming that Ipoker will provide the two players what evidence it has against them. I would also suspect that they have already had this. They won't disqualify and ban them & not explain why.

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 ... 18 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.09 seconds with 20 queries.