blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 31, 2020, 05:23:44 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2255030 Posts in 66558 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 ... 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 ... 18 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Felt colluded against in UKPC DTD Mega sat just finished now on ipoker..  (Read 38412 times)
Mango99
Donk King
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 866



View Profile WWW
« Reply #150 on: February 21, 2014, 02:11:47 PM »

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

When setting up tourneys on iPoker there is a box to tick on the request form 'allow players from same IP'. When setting up tourneys for APAT I have ticked this, as know we have a lot of members who are couples and both want to play in our leagues etc.

It's up to each skin if they allow this or not on a tourney by tourney basis. Perhaps for sats it would be better if it wasn't allowed. However, I don't think it really makes a difference. It's just as easy to share info when you're not sat together (skype, phone, etc.).

So logically it cant be same the ip address in this case......

I don't follow your reasoning?...
Logged
The Camel
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17427


Under my tree, being a troll.


View Profile
« Reply #151 on: February 21, 2014, 02:46:14 PM »

The main general lesson to be learned from this is that satellites are not worth playing.

Especially on IPoker where chat is not turned off near the bubble.

If you want to play a big tournament for a fraction of the buy in, use a regular tournament in lieu of a satty.
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
Jamier-Host
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1821



View Profile WWW
« Reply #152 on: February 21, 2014, 02:54:46 PM »

I notice the iPoker security guys aren't rated too highly. Probably lots of personnel changes from when I worked with them, but in those days it was mainly degenerate poker geeks in the roles so they were pretty sound on the background in these sort of cases.

You're right though - i'd imagine the same IP thing got weighted highly and so anything a bit suspect would probably tip the balance.

I thought the PS response was quite amusing. As long as you pinky promise not to sit next to each other you'll be ok Smiley

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.
Logged

Side Project - making games for Amazon Alexa devices

pressthe8.com
smurf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 815


View Profile
« Reply #153 on: February 21, 2014, 03:43:48 PM »

The main general lesson to be learned from this is that satellites are not worth playing.

Especially on IPoker where chat is not turned off near the bubble.

If you want to play a big tournament for a fraction of the buy in, use a regular tournament in lieu of a satty.

fair enough if you live local...i play the sats as i live 50 miles from DTD and they are half or a third of the time to complete than a live game would...i suspect a lot of other players live a fair distance away aswell.

The chance of satting in cheaply and then even playing a day one online is perfect for those living some distance away.

I do prefer live play but some times it's just not practical.


Logged
George2Loose
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15213



View Profile
« Reply #154 on: February 21, 2014, 03:47:09 PM »

Barring same ip won't solve the problem. If people want to collude they will find a way
Logged

Ole Ole Ole Ole!
The Camel
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17427


Under my tree, being a troll.


View Profile
« Reply #155 on: February 21, 2014, 03:49:43 PM »

The main general lesson to be learned from this is that satellites are not worth playing.

Especially on IPoker where chat is not turned off near the bubble.

If you want to play a big tournament for a fraction of the buy in, use a regular tournament in lieu of a satty.

fair enough if you live local...i play the sats as i live 50 miles from DTD and they are half or a third of the time to complete than a live game would...i suspect a lot of other players live a fair distance away aswell.

The chance of satting in cheaply and then even playing a day one online is perfect for those living some distance away.

I do prefer live play but some times it's just not practical.




I'm suggesting playing an online tournament INSTEAD of playing an online sat and using and winnings to buy in to the bigger tournament.
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
Graham C
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20678


Moo


View Profile
« Reply #156 on: February 21, 2014, 03:50:49 PM »

The main general lesson to be learned from this is that satellites are not worth playing.

Especially on IPoker where chat is not turned off near the bubble.

If you want to play a big tournament for a fraction of the buy in, use a regular tournament in lieu of a satty.

fair enough if you live local...i play the sats as i live 50 miles from DTD and they are half or a third of the time to complete than a live game would...i suspect a lot of other players live a fair distance away aswell.

The chance of satting in cheaply and then even playing a day one online is perfect for those living some distance away.

I do prefer live play but some times it's just not practical.

Play a regular online tournament and use the money for the live event?

I don't see how they can be barred for using the same IP address if you can quite easily sit down in DTD and play on the same IP address.
Logged

Doobs
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14992


View Profile
« Reply #157 on: February 21, 2014, 03:55:16 PM »

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.

All seems a little simplistic from here too.  It is just so obviously wrong.  There are a bunch of people here who have said they have done the same without issues.  So it is unlikely to be solely down to the same IP.

Dom earlier stated that people were playing differently vs him than others, Milli put up a hand that just looked incredibly suspicious.  If there are a bunch of shoves vs Dom and a bunch off limps vs Milli then whilst you can't prove anything, you can have grounds to believe cheating is more likely than not.

In a court of law, people are only found guilty if it is beyond reasonable doubt.  To get yourself barred from a casino, there is ok such test.  They could just bar you if they didn't like you.  I am sure Ipoker doesn't go as far as the reasonable doubt, and aren't likely to choose to lose customers without a reasonable suspicion something was going on.  So what has happened is likely somewhere in between.  If they have a series of hands that play out noticeably different to those where Dom/others were in the hand then they could bar them without having to be 100% sure they are guilty.  

Given the potential for a shit storm was always there in this case, I very much doubt that they just ban people because someone had complained as others have stated.  I have probably complained about collusion a handful of times, and on only 2 did the people disappear.  One of the ones where they survived they were not only soft playing, they were discussing it in chat.  I have absolutely no idea what more evidence they needed, but maybe they got away with it as I got a seat too.

I can fully see how the hand histories/reasons for banning weren't revealed, and it has never happened in the cases I saw.  You start publishing how they find people were cheating, then some people are bound to use that info to cheat better.

I haven't had any access to hand histories etc, so can't have any idea what the nature of any alleged collusion was, or whether they are guilty, just can't believe people really think it is just down to the IP sharing.

Hope the final result is the correct one obviously.  
Logged

Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
smurf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 815


View Profile
« Reply #158 on: February 21, 2014, 04:02:02 PM »

The main general lesson to be learned from this is that satellites are not worth playing.

Especially on IPoker where chat is not turned off near the bubble.

If you want to play a big tournament for a fraction of the buy in, use a regular tournament in lieu of a satty.

fair enough if you live local...i play the sats as i live 50 miles from DTD and they are half or a third of the time to complete than a live game would...i suspect a lot of other players live a fair distance away aswell.

The chance of satting in cheaply and then even playing a day one online is perfect for those living some distance away.

I do prefer live play but some times it's just not practical.




I'm suggesting playing an online tournament INSTEAD of playing an online sat and using and winnings to buy in to the bigger tournament.

that could work
Logged
david3103
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6104



View Profile
« Reply #159 on: February 21, 2014, 04:04:07 PM »

The main general lesson to be learned from this is that satellites are not worth playing.

Especially on IPoker where chat is not turned off near the bubble.

If you want to play a big tournament for a fraction of the buy in, use a regular tournament in lieu of a satty.

fair enough if you live local...i play the sats as i live 50 miles from DTD and they are half or a third of the time to complete than a live game would...i suspect a lot of other players live a fair distance away aswell.

The chance of satting in cheaply and then even playing a day one online is perfect for those living some distance away.

I do prefer live play but some times it's just not practical.




I'm suggesting playing an online tournament INSTEAD of playing an online sat and using and winnings to buy in to the bigger tournament.

that could work

Hard to find an online tournament where coming 20th pays £1100.
Logged

It's more about the winning than the winnings

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

Posts: 17427


Under my tree, being a troll.


View Profile
« Reply #160 on: February 21, 2014, 04:09:01 PM »

The main general lesson to be learned from this is that satellites are not worth playing.

Especially on IPoker where chat is not turned off near the bubble.

If you want to play a big tournament for a fraction of the buy in, use a regular tournament in lieu of a satty.

fair enough if you live local...i play the sats as i live 50 miles from DTD and they are half or a third of the time to complete than a live game would...i suspect a lot of other players live a fair distance away aswell.

The chance of satting in cheaply and then even playing a day one online is perfect for those living some distance away.

I do prefer live play but some times it's just not practical.




I'm suggesting playing an online tournament INSTEAD of playing an online sat and using and winnings to buy in to the bigger tournament.

that could work

Hard to find an online tournament where coming 20th pays £1100.

Play FTW young David!

That is what, after all, what poker tournaments are supposed to be about.
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
ripple11
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6298



View Profile
« Reply #161 on: February 21, 2014, 04:09:23 PM »

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

When setting up tourneys on iPoker there is a box to tick on the request form 'allow players from same IP'. When setting up tourneys for APAT I have ticked this, as know we have a lot of members who are couples and both want to play in our leagues etc.

It's up to each skin if they allow this or not on a tourney by tourney basis. Perhaps for sats it would be better if it wasn't allowed. However, I don't think it really makes a difference. It's just as easy to share info when you're not sat together (skype, phone, etc.).

So logically it cant be same the ip address in this case......

I don't follow your reasoning?...

Sorry, badly worded.........I meant : "your post shows that using the same ip address cant be the reason why they were disqualified"
Logged
dreenie
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2484



View Profile
« Reply #162 on: February 21, 2014, 04:14:21 PM »

The main general lesson to be learned from this is that satellites are not worth playing.

Especially on IPoker where chat is not turned off near the bubble.

If you want to play a big tournament for a fraction of the buy in, use a regular tournament in lieu of a satty.

fair enough if you live local...i play the sats as i live 50 miles from DTD and they are half or a third of the time to complete than a live game would...i suspect a lot of other players live a fair distance away aswell.

The chance of satting in cheaply and then even playing a day one online is perfect for those living some distance away.

I do prefer live play but some times it's just not practical.




I'm suggesting playing an online tournament INSTEAD of playing an online sat and using and winnings to buy in to the bigger tournament.

that could work

Hard to find an online tournament where coming 20th pays £1100.

Just spinnnnnnnnnnnnnn it up, or double down!!!!
Logged
BangBang
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1066



View Profile
« Reply #163 on: February 21, 2014, 04:53:30 PM »

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.

All seems a little simplistic from here too.  It is just so obviously wrong.  There are a bunch of people here who have said they have done the same without issues.  So it is unlikely to be solely down to the same IP.

Dom earlier stated that people were playing differently vs him than others, Milli put up a hand that just looked incredibly suspicious.  If there are a bunch of shoves vs Dom and a bunch off limps vs Milli then whilst you can't prove anything, you can have grounds to believe cheating is more likely than not.

In a court of law, people are only found guilty if it is beyond reasonable doubt.  To get yourself barred from a casino, there is ok such test.  They could just bar you if they didn't like you.  I am sure Ipoker doesn't go as far as the reasonable doubt, and aren't likely to choose to lose customers without a reasonable suspicion something was going on.  So what has happened is likely somewhere in between.  If they have a series of hands that play out noticeably different to those where Dom/others were in the hand then they could bar them without having to be 100% sure they are guilty.  

Given the potential for a shit storm was always there in this case, I very much doubt that they just ban people because someone had complained as others have stated.  I have probably complained about collusion a handful of times, and on only 2 did the people disappear.  One of the ones where they survived they were not only soft playing, they were discussing it in chat.  I have absolutely no idea what more evidence they needed, but maybe they got away with it as I got a seat too.

I can fully see how the hand histories/reasons for banning weren't revealed, and it has never happened in the cases I saw.  You start publishing how they find people were cheating, then some people are bound to use that info to cheat better.

I haven't had any access to hand histories etc, so can't have any idea what the nature of any alleged collusion was, or whether they are guilty, just can't believe people really think it is just down to the IP sharing.

Hope the final result is the correct one obviously.  

Good Post..

I agree we should be questioning the process instead of the actual content.. It beats me why people are asking for hand histories...

Hate to say it, but members are just going to make fruitless demands without organization.

If you want stop this from happening get organized, if not carry on wasting your time with fruitless demands that will lead to very little... 

 
Logged

"Look! There's a rhythmic ceremonial ritual coming up" ... Dr. Emmett Brown

https://twitter.com/#!/Steven_Sethi
https://www.instagram.com/stevensethi/?hl=en
h
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1452



View Profile
« Reply #164 on: February 21, 2014, 05:41:38 PM »

wow what a mess this is


i have played as many DTD sats as any one i think
i play them because i rarely play live so if i am going to play live i prefer to play at DTD  
DTD Spends lots of money marketing these sats with freqaunt overlays so i think for me at least playing sats on there made sense before and makes sense still  

However
i feel for both the banned players and the complainant no hand for hand and chat box remaining open leads to paranoia

given the dynamic of multi seat sats i do not believe HH  could  prove or disprove collusion in that sat or any other
in fact if some one was to review the hand histories of two random players who got seats in same sat
i wouldn't be surprised to see similar patterns

the only possible real evidence is folding the nuts surely ?

The reality is i have shoved any two cards into other players when i have needed too and am confident i am getting a fold from everthing except perhaps AA and KK not because i know or am friendly with that player but because it doesn't make sense for a thinking player to call at that point
What happens when that's reviewed if he folds JJ is that because he likes me or because he waiting for two short stacks being forced in against each other

I think Milli posted he folded AA to chipleaders raise  because he didn't need to get involved at that stage surely if any thing this prove there wasn't any collusion as it would be easy for Milli to ship knowing he gets a fold from his mate or did i read that wrong ?

got to say playing on same IP  is not the smartest thing to do if you intend to colluded having said that do players not play on same table live


think the players involved should be speaking to Rob/ Simon directly to try to at least get DTD club ban removed
although if it was me and i knew i had not colluded i want the £1k back  
 



Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 ... 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 0.212 seconds with 20 queries.