Pleasant Surprise From Poker Stars
Grip 'n Rip
this weekend in Nashville by playing in a few $5 SNGs on Stars last
weekend when I suspected Chip Dumping in a $5 SNG! At first I thought I
was crazy, but decided to see if Stars' support was any good. After
reading the posts the past couple of weeks, I thought that I would give
props (unpaid) to PokerStars for their response:
Message one:
----- Original Message -----
From: Me
Sent: Sat Mar 06 13:29:16 2004
To: sup...@pokerstars.com
Subject: Chip Dumping in a $5 SNG!
Please review TDuncan and Slickrik87 in Tournament number 1136435. I know
that it is foolish of me to think that two players would collude in such a
low limit event, but it has happened. On more than one occassion, TDuncan
folded to an all in bet that was less than even one bet in that round.
Then
when they got heads up, they would raise the minimum two or three times,
and
then the one with the most chips would fold.
I know you say that integrity is important to you, so please follow up on
this allegation. I do not expect a refund because I made the money, but
it
was too obvious to ignore.
Thank you
Grip'nRip
(Okay, now I feel better, but I know nothing will come of this. right?)
Message Two:
Hello Grip'nRip,
I am forwarding your email to one of our poker experts for review. We will
get back to you as soon as time permits.
Kind Regards,
Andres
PokerStars Support Team
(Thanks for the update, but I still do not think anything will come of it.
Anyway, nice words from a woman never hurts.)
Message Three:
----- Original Message -----
From: sup...@pokerstars.com
Sent: Sun Mar 07 11:05:56 2004
To: Me
Subject: RE: Chip Dumping in a $5 SNG!
Hello Grip'nRip,
A quick update on the status of the ongoing review of 'slickrik87'
and 'TDUNCAN' in tournament #1136435. I have confirmed suspicious action
while replaying the tournament with all cards revealed.
Both accounts have been suspended while the investigation continues. The
players have been contacted by email and will be given a chance to
respond. In the interim, we will investigate their play in other
tournaments.
This process can take a few days but I assure you that appropriate action
will be taken and I will contact you at that time. Thank you for your
patience and for taking time to report the incident.
Regards,
SteveW
PokerStars Support Team
(Okay, at least I know that I am not crazy and my perception was at least
on point, but nothing will come of this. Right? Wrong.)
Message Four:
Hello Grip'nRip,
The review of 'slickrik87' and 'TDUNCAN' is now complete. Both players
have been disqualified from tournament #1136435 and their accounts have
been closed permanently.
Due to the disqualifications you have advanced from 3rd place to 1st
place. Your account has been credited with $13.50 to reflect the change.
Thanks for playing at PokerStars. Let us know anytime you have questions
or concerns.
Regards,
SteveW
PokerStars Support Team
To Stars, cudos. I have resisted putting much of my bankroll on line
because of concerns of this activity without much protection. However, my
hesitation is reduced and your response is congratulated.
Thank you Stars.
Grip'nRip
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
King of the off deuce
response:
It's easy to be strong-handed when it's only $13.50 on the line.
* Learn Where & Where NOT to Play at http://www.LiveActionPoker.com
** $30 Free Poker Bankroll at http://www.liveactionpoker.com/free30
Marc Gilutin
wrote:
>
>
>It's easy to be strong-handed when it's only $13.50 on the line.
Just curious, King. Why would you say something negative about such a
positive thing? Aren't you glad to hear that it was taken care of?
Marc Gilutin
DennyLynch
evidence here.
AlwaysAware
>It's easy to be strong-handed when it's only $13.50 on the line.
I don't get the logic, they barred two players that probably contributed a
whole lot more than $13.50 in juice and rake. Plus I doubt it was a $13.50
decision. They probably advanced payouts in other Sit n Go's that they played
in.
I have to admit, I read something the other day you posted and I thought you
were very funny. I smile now just thinking about it. I guess no matter
whether Stars does the right or wrong thing in your opinion you will never be
happy with them. When you find that perfect site let me know, i'll give it a
spin.
Joan
DennyLynch
start of a trend.
Collusion is a topic that sites should realize customers are concerned about.
Thus, it would make sense for them to publicize their efforts in fighting it.
In this particular case, it would be very helpful knowing how they "knew"
collusion took place. (It would also be interesting to see if their rationale
is the same of that used with Sambot.)
King of the off deuce
positive thing? Aren't you glad to hear that it was taken care of?"
Yes, very glad to hear it, especially for the guy that got screwed. But
this is a little too much too late. It's easy for the site to be strict
when there is only $13 on the line. In the other instances, where there
was much, much more on the line, they backed down and found no concrete
evidence.
When it's $13, the concrete must abound.
It's like 'Stars got whipped by someone on the mean streets and then
went home and beat the wife.
King of the off deuce
doubt" evidence here. "
Eggsractly. There was no detailed explanation of how the all-ins were
folded to. There was no extensive list of doubletalk and excuses...
DennyLynch
guys played and asked if they were honest, like they did with sambot and
Schamattes.
(Sorry, couldn't resist.)
But seriously, folks, kudos to PS for canning the cheaters. Let's hope they've
dropped that ridiculous "beyond a reasonable doubt" burden of proof line and
have instead adopted a more reasonable criteria for catching cheaters, whether
they be in $5 SNG or tournies with 50K first prize.
AlwaysAware
>It's great news that a couple of players were banned. Let's hope it's the
>start of a trend.
I would hope that it's not part of a trend but part of something that is
already in place (at least at Stars). Sambot was high profile, but check the
archives people were posting way back that "out of the blue" they received an
email from PS saying they were advanced in a tourney, their account credited
and players disqualified due to collusion.
Many may not like the decision (sambot), some question the thought process, but
to say that hopefully a trend has began, I think is a bit unfair.
Joan
King of the off deuce
in other Sit n Go's that they played in."
Hm. Seems like a bold statement to make. The logic is that it's easy
to flex muscles on a $5 sng - show the RGP world how committed 'Stars is
to rooting out cheats. Two schlubs that get booted from the site for
cheating at a $5 sng aren't going to get publicity. No one here would
care if they came and posted their sob stories about the ban.
Two guys losing $10K seats, now THAT is a different story. The stink
that those two could raise, and the headaches that they could cause for
the 'Stars is much too much to handle, so they let it slide by because
Bruno vouched for the French and there is no concrete evidence.
Simplified reasoning of course, but more than one person here has shot
holes into Lee's responses as pertaining to the way in which the hands
were played.
"I have to admit, I read something the other day you posted and I
thought you were very funny. I smile now just thinking about it. "
I'm just a clown here to amuse you Joan.
"I guess no matter whether Stars does the right or wrong thing in your
opinion you will never be happy with them. When you find that perfect
site let me know, i'll give it a spin."
There is no perfect site, but I did hold 'Stars to a much higher
standard because of the management of the site and the cred that the
site has gained.
So when management goes back to playing ostrich like all of the other
sites, yeah, I'm going to hold it against them. Half of the other sites
don't even have players saavy enough to recognize collusion and chip
dumping, let alone report it. Ignoring it doesn't make it go away. And
giving "stern warnings" because it is a first time offense doesn't make
it go away. And acting like Scut Farkas with a $5 table doesn't make it
go away.
AlwaysAware
>From: King of the off deuce
>I'm just a clown here to amuse you Joan.
cool...
>Hm. Seems like a bold statement to make. The logic is that it's easy
>to flex muscles on a $5 sng - show the RGP world how committed 'Stars is
>to rooting out cheats.
They didn't show the world. They do what they do as usual, quietly. To assume
that someone is going to come on rgp and show the world is a stretch.
> Two schlubs that get booted from the site for
>cheating at a $5 sng aren't going to get publicity.
I thought you just said PS flexed their muscle to show the rgp world.
> No one here would
>care if they came and posted their sob stories about the ban.
PokerMillion might :-)
>Two guys losing $10K seats, now THAT is a different story.
disagree...
>The stink
>that those two could raise, and the headaches that they could cause for
>the 'Stars is much too much to handle,
same could be said for the two that busted on the bubble.
>so they let it slide by because
>Bruno vouched for the French and there is >no concrete evidence.
Concrete evidence is key, you don't think so? French vouching prob had very
little to do with the decision, However, if it was said, "I threw them out of
my clubs for cheating years ago" it might way in the decision. It can weigh
heavily on one side and not so heavily on the other, because let's face it -
these guy's probably play in Bruno's club and even though he is French has to
be "politically correct" to some extent. I doubt that was lost on Stars, you
may think otherwise.
>Simplified reasoning of course, but more than one person here has shot
>holes into Lee's responses as pertaining to the way in which the hands
>were played.
I doubt that all the evidence was presented here. I have problems with Lee's
writing style. I think people brought up some valid questions. Some people are
concerned what the thought process is. I don't see Stars hiding under rocks.
Show one other site that would even engage.
>
(snip the part about you being here for my amusement)
>
>"I guess no matter whether Stars does the right or wrong thing in your
>opinion you will never be happy with them. When you find that perfect
>site let me know, i'll give it a spin."
>
>There is no perfect site, but I did hold 'Stars to a much higher
>standard because of the management of the site and the cred that the
>site has gained.
thus the farther and harder the fall, when you disagree or are disappointed.
>
>So when management goes back to playing ostrich like all of the other
>sites,
I must have missed this. I don't see them sticking their heads in the sand.
>yeah, I'm going to hold it against them.
This is the part I don't understand. You may not agree. Methinks that what you
are holding against them is the idea that they took the easy route, you may not
agree with their decision but I honestly don't understand how you feel they
took the easy road.
<Half of the other sites
>don't even have players saavy enough to recognize collusion and chip
>dumping, let alone report it.
You sure it's only half?
> Ignoring it doesn't make it go away.
I don't see them ignoring it, and I honestly don't see how you can say that.
> And
>giving "stern warnings" because it is a first time offense doesn't make
>it go away.
You think javahound is still telling people how to play their hands? I don't.
(and for what it's worth, nothing probably.. I talked to someone last weekend
that knows javahound met him in Aruba. He tells me UB is rampant with people
colluding in chat and he seriously doubts that javahound knew that it was
wrong. Stars isn't only balancing right and wrong, they are balancing what
other sites have taught people)
> And acting like Scut Farkas with a $5 table doesn't make it
>go away.
>
I don't know who Scut Farkas is.
Joan
Grip 'n Rip
I did not push the issue with them, nor promise any positive news. The
reason I did not aggressively pursue it absent my email is because it was
worth any potential loss on my part to see their response.
I did not provide all of the evidence of the cheating that I recorded on
these two chumps in my post here or in my email to Stars. I wanted to see
if their investigation would weed out what had happened. I have been
playing on line for three years and B&M for more than 15 years, and I know
cheating when I see it. These guys cheated. Period.
As for my decision to invest money in on-line poker, I will still retain
the vast majority of my bankroll in live actoin because I have won far
more money in live action than I ever anticipate winning on line because I
am better live player. I know why (and do not wish to change that aspect
of my game) and I chose to not invest where my EV is low.
However, the purpose of this post is to state that I no longer question
Stars' integrity. I will not invest more than before on line because I
play better in live games. In my opinion, Stars' response was dead on
perfect and they dealt with cheaters the way they should, permanent
extermination. And when I see it again, I will trust that the casino
operator, either B&M or on line, will deal with it accordingly.
See you at the tables.
Grip 'n Rip
_________________________________________________________________
Dave L
impressive. They put the same amount of effort and research into a micro
limit scam as they would into a larger one. THAT, to me, is impressive.
And btw, I didn't see pokerstars coming on here and touting it, or see any
mention of it on their website. They did it to preserve the integrity of
their games as best they could. The reason i believe is two-fold: They
know that if they lose the confidence of their players, the will eventually
lose those players, and 2) They seem to me to be the only site out there
backed by workers with integrity. Genuinely nice people, who I would like
to hang out with on my free time. Party and UB are understaffed and their
support barely speaks English and barely understands the game.
Not only does pokerstars support answer you quickly, thoroughly, and
efficiently, but when creating their support staff they MADE SURE to hire
people who understand the game, as well as the language. I have run into
(or meet) a stars employee who just didn't seem to care, whether it be about
poker or about their site. That is a rare trait to have in any employee,
much less those of an online gaming site.
Now, if only they could do something to loosen up their 10/20 games a bit, I
would have no reason to ever log back onto party again ;).
-Dave
AlwaysAware
>Now, if only they could do something to loosen up their 10/20 games a bit, I
>would have no reason to ever log back onto party again ;).
>
>-Dave
>
Maybe they could announce in the chat box that you were seated :?)
Joan
Dave L
"AlwaysAware" <alway...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040312160242...@mb-m28.aol.com...
Bah, all I know is I'd LAST LONGER than you... ;)
Dave L
"Dave L" <dli...@cox.rr.com> wrote in message
news:NYo4c.28$Cf3.1@lakeread01...
> I have run into (or meet) a stars employee who just didn't seem to care,
whether it be about
> poker or about their site.
That should read.. "I have YET to run into a stars employee who just doesn't
seem to care....."
AlwaysAware
>Bah, all I know is I'd LAST LONGER than you... ;)
>
>
>
One lucky weekend, c'mon tough guy heads up sng... let's go.
Joan
Dave L
JTAutry
Dave,
Are you trying to say that "all the Stars employees you've run into seem to
care"?
JT
Dave L
"JTAutry" <m...@no.spam.com> wrote in message
news:s7q4c.9882$Hg4....@chiapp18.algx.net...
> >
> > That should read.. "I have YET to run into a stars employee who just
> doesn't
> > seem to care....."
>
> Dave,
>
> Are you trying to say that "all the Stars employees you've run into seem
to
> care"?
>
> JT
Yes, and even those I just walk into.
AlwaysAware
>> One lucky weekend, c'mon tough guy heads up sng... let's go.
>From: "Dave L" dli...@cox.rr.com
>You're on!
I won I won!! Well, depends on how you look at.. Dave suggested a $5 I
suggested a $100, we compromised at $50.... so, I lost $50 less than I could
have... (note to self stop challenging lilie until he hits the losing streak )
Joan
Dave L
Crap, I just realized that that tourney HU SNG wiped out the last of my
$T!!! Now I either gotta enter a few more sats (and pay REAL CASH FOR
EM...UCK!) or suck up to Peg.
Sigh, I guess you may have won this round, after all...
JTAutry
>
> I won I won!! Well, depends on how you look at.. Dave suggested a $5 I
> suggested a $100, we compromised at $50.... so, I lost $50 less than I
could
> have... (note to self stop challenging lilie until he hits the losing
streak )
>
What about the juice?
JT
AlwaysAware
>What about the juice?
>
>JT
I paid the juice either way, whether it was a 5, 50 or 100... Dave wanted to
do a $5 with a $200 sidebet.. Not sure I could trust him (smile) so I told him
we hijacked a thread why not let Stars have the juice. Either way I would have
lost the $50, the consolation is that Dave didn't make $50 only $47.50 :-)
Joan
AlwaysAware
>Either way I would have
>lost the $50, the consolation is that Dave didn't make $50 only $47.50 :-)
>
>Joan
or wait he paid juice too, so he only made $45.. I am feeling better already
:-)
Joan
Vodkaputtputt
First online withdrawal... That is my pleasant surprise from Poker Stars.
Mark
Dave L
> >(AlwaysAware)
>
> >
> >Joan
>
> or wait he paid juice too, so he only made $45.. I am feeling better
already
> :-)
>
$47.50
C06777
>Kind Regards,
>
>Andres
>PokerStars Support Team
>
>(Thanks for the update, but I still do not think anything will come of it.
> Anyway, nice words from a woman never hurts.)
Ummmm, hate to break it to you, Grip hon, but I think "Andres" is a male.
"Andrea" would be the female.
mb
King - is there any possibility, even the slightest one, in your mind that
you are wrong and Stars was right in their decision? Is there any
possibility that that the play there was above your head and the
"doubletalk and excuses" is something that you are simply not capable to
grasp? What is the highest buy-in tournament you have played online or in
b & m?
_________________________________________________________________
PrestoET
Now this is the kind of action we have been hoping for.
Sends the right message too.
Thank you.
"Grip 'n Rip" <anon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3gm4c.10504885$Of.17...@news.easynews.com>...
> I was practicing last weekend for a local tournament that we are having
> this weekend in Nashville by playing in a few $5 SNGs on Stars last
> weekend when I suspected Chip Dumping in a $5 SNG! At first I thought I
> was crazy, but decided to see if Stars' support was any good. After
> reading the posts the past couple of weeks, I thought that I would give
> props (unpaid) to PokerStars for their response:
>
> Message one:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Me
> Sent: Sat Mar 06 13:29:16 2004
> To: sup...@pokerstars.com
> Subject: Chip Dumping in a $5 SNG!
>
> Please review TDuncan and Slickrik87 in Tournament number 1136435. I know
> that it is foolish of me to think that two players would collude in such a
> low limit event, but it has happened. On more than one occassion, TDuncan
> folded to an all in bet that was less than even one bet in that round.
> Then
> when they got heads up, they would raise the minimum two or three times,
> and
> then the one with the most chips would fold.
>
> I know you say that integrity is important to you, so please follow up on
> this allegation. I do not expect a refund because I made the money, but
> it
> was too obvious to ignore.
>
> Thank you
>
> Grip'nRip
>
> (Okay, now I feel better, but I know nothing will come of this. right?)
>
> Message Two:
>
> Hello Grip'nRip,
>
> I am forwarding your email to one of our poker experts for review. We will
> get back to you as soon as time permits.
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Andres
> PokerStars Support Team
>
> (Thanks for the update, but I still do not think anything will come of it.
> Anyway, nice words from a woman never hurts.)
>
> Message Three:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: sup...@pokerstars.com
> Sent: Sun Mar 07 11:05:56 2004
> To: Me
> Subject: RE: Chip Dumping in a $5 SNG!
>
> Hello Grip'nRip,
>
> A quick update on the status of the ongoing review of 'slickrik87'
> and 'TDUNCAN' in tournament #1136435. I have confirmed suspicious action
> while replaying the tournament with all cards revealed.
>
> Both accounts have been suspended while the investigation continues. The
> players have been contacted by email and will be given a chance to
> respond. In the interim, we will investigate their play in other
> tournaments.
>
> This process can take a few days but I assure you that appropriate action
> will be taken and I will contact you at that time. Thank you for your
> patience and for taking time to report the incident.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> SteveW
> PokerStars Support Team
>
> (Okay, at least I know that I am not crazy and my perception was at least
> on point, but nothing will come of this. Right? Wrong.)
>
> Message Four:
>
> Hello Grip'nRip,
>
> The review of 'slickrik87' and 'TDUNCAN' is now complete. Both players
> have been disqualified from tournament #1136435 and their accounts have
> been closed permanently.
>
> Due to the disqualifications you have advanced from 3rd place to 1st
> place. Your account has been credited with $13.50 to reflect the change.
>
> Thanks for playing at PokerStars. Let us know anytime you have questions
> or concerns.
>
> Regards,
>
> SteveW
> PokerStars Support Team
>
>
> To Stars, cudos. I have resisted putting much of my bankroll on line
> because of concerns of this activity without much protection. However, my
> hesitation is reduced and your response is congratulated.
>
> Thank you Stars.
>
> Grip'nRip
AlwaysAware
>$47.50
Oh yeah, I was right the first time. I need to learn to quit when I am ahead,,,
thanks for depressing me :-(
Joan
Linda K Sherman
> I was practicing last weekend for a local tournament that we are having
> this weekend in Nashville by playing in a few $5 SNGs on Stars last
> weekend when I suspected Chip Dumping in a $5 SNG!...
The only problem with this whole affair is that PokerStars' software
should have caught something as blatant as chip dumping. This is not
rocket science. There's really no excuse for not having the means to
detect probable chip dumping and immediately alert support.
Lin
--
Linda K. Sherman
linsherman [atsign] tampabay [stop] rr [stop] com
John Kerry for President.
TD Lowball
> And btw, I didn't see pokerstars coming on here and touting it, or see any
> mention of it on their website. They did it to preserve the integrity of
> their games as best they could. The reason i believe is two-fold: They
> know that if they lose the confidence of their players, the will eventually
> lose those players, and 2) They seem to me to be the only site out there
> backed by workers with integrity. Genuinely nice people, who I would like
> to hang out with on my free time. Party and UB are understaffed and their
> support barely speaks English and barely understands the game.
I have to give kudo's to Paradise and Planet Poker support as well.
Paradise support has always been friendly, and responded promptly to any
requests. I was once in a game where I felt things weren't kosher, and
they promtly investigated it, and gave a report back to my satisfaction in
less than 24h. (No collusion was found, but the players involved were
warned and flagged)
Planet earns kudo's for having live chat support, which is friendly and
competent. Recently I was unable to buy into a tourney becuase of a
website problem, and so I was given a free buy into a differnet
tourney(Which I placed first in).
TD Lowball --
King of the off deuce
> King - is there any possibility, even the slightest one, in your mind that
> you are wrong and Stars was right in their decision? Is there any
> possibility that that the play there was above your head and the
> "doubletalk and excuses" is something that you are simply not capable to
> grasp?
No. Not at all. The decision may have been correct in the end, but
the reasoning behind it and the excuses that Lee made to get to it are
seriously flawed. They leave LARGE holes open for people to continue
to cheat.
>What is the highest buy-in tournament you have played online or in b
& m?
Wow. Haven't seena straw man like this since the Wizard of Oz. Not
that it matters, but one time I played in a $1 sit and go.
