collusion at Party Poker

[PokerNeophyte]

I wouldn't normally post a hand history, but this is just absurdly blatent. The two players' involved (Bruno13 and Dykee_Doo) are even listed as being from the same town (Findlay, wherever that is).

I emailed partypoker; will report back when i get a response.

**** Hand History for Game 409643698 *****
Table Candle Light (Real Money)
Seat 8 is the button
Total number of players : 10
Seat 7: bulllets ( $89.5 )
Seat 9: frege ( $40 )
Seat 8: mmazzaro ( $230 )
Seat 1: helrazor ( $226.5 )
Seat 6: middletonjr ( $13 )
Seat 5: shawnp56 ( $207 )
Seat 4: jmandick ( $84 )
Seat 10: Bruno13 ( $197 )
Seat 3: Dykee_Doo ( $197 )
Seat 2: texleo ( $68 )
frege posts small blind [$1].
Bruno13 posts big blind [$3].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to frege [ 3c Jd ]
helrazor folds.
texleo calls [$3].
Dykee_Doo calls [$3].
shawnp56 calls [$3].
middletonjr folds.
bulllets folds.
mmazzaro calls [$3].
frege folds.
Bruno13 checks.
** Dealing Flop ** [ Js, Qc, 6c ]
Bruno13 checks.
texleo checks.
Dykee_Doo bets [$3].
shawnp56 calls [$3].
mmazzaro calls [$3].
Bruno13 calls [$3].
texleo calls [$3].
** Dealing Turn ** [ 9c ]
Bruno13 checks.
texleo folds.
Dykee_Doo bets [$6].
shawnp56 folds.
mmazzaro calls [$6].
Bruno13 raises [$12].
Dykee_Doo calls [$6].
mmazzaro calls [$6].
** Dealing River ** [ Kd ]
Bruno13 checks.
Dykee_Doo bets [$6].
mmazzaro calls [$6].
Bruno13 raises [$12].
Dykee_Doo raises [$12].
mmazzaro calls [$12].
Bruno13 raises [$12].
Dykee_Doo calls [$6].
mmazzaro calls [$6].
Bruno13 shows high card king.
Dykee_Doo shows a flush, ace high.
mmazzaro doesn't show.
Dykee_Doo wins $136 from the main pot with a flush, ace high.

[Losing all]

I think that's in Ohio. Probably dirty buckeye fans. btw- That does look funny, if you don't get a decent response I'd email Mike O'Malley if I were you.

[PokerNeophyte]

Thanks for the tip--where can I find Mike O'malley's email? It definitely was dirty. There was another hand where Dykee_Doo flopped a set of jacks; Bruno raised for him on the flop so he could just call and then folded the turn.

[bigpooch]

[crockpot]

if they do nothing about this, then party's support really is as bad as everyone claims.

[PokerNeophyte]

I have to say--I'm very impressed with the Party customer service response to this. I received an email today telling me that the two player accounts involved had been closed.

[Zwiggelte]

That is good news...Did also the players who lost, their money back from Party?

[bouh]

hi,

How can you say it's collusion ? is it because bruno13 raise when the 3rd diamond hit and he has nothing at this moment and then go in a raise war to build a big pot ? perhaps he could just try to steal the pot ?
Sorry for the (probably) dumb question but I just try to understand /images/graemlins/smile.gif

bouh.

[PokerNeophyte]

So far as I know, players weren't refunded losses. But, it's unclear whether there were any losses to refund. The email I received also indicated that the colluders were doing a particularly poor job at cheating. Thank can't but make me smile. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[UncleDuke]

[ QUOTE ]
How can you say it's collusion ? is it because bruno13 raise when the 3rd diamond hit and he has nothing at this moment and then go in a raise war to build a big pot ? perhaps he could just try to steal the pot ?


[/ QUOTE ]

It was a third club actually, but I think it's the river that removes all doubt about it being collusion. Bruno check-raises with nothing and then raises yet again when he is obviously beaten by at least one and almost certainly both of the other players. Even if he's a spectacularly bad player, it's pretty inconceivable that he could have any hopes of both other players folding to the final raise on the river.

Interestingly, the two suspects even started the hand with the same amount of money. It looks like they probably sat down at the same time with the default buy-in and posted 1 BB to get started.

-UD

[holycowholycow]

there is definitey some collusion on the internet. i have never done, but have thought about it. but, it is wrong, so I decided against it. however, i see too many crazy raising in the 15-30, etc and no longer play online in the upper limits. stick to the smaller limits 5-10 and down to avoid cheaters. but, i would say that cheating still happens there. the bottom line is that there is nothing new under the sun and corruption runs in the blood of men, especially poor players looking for an edge, the only one they can get.

[Nottom]

Maybe it was collusion this time, but I've seen too many nutjobs on party do this kind of crap on their own to think much about it unless these two were often involved in pots together.

[Reverend]

I played in a tournament with these two at Party a day or so ago, 100+9, and they were accused of colluding by another one or two of the players. I didn't accuse them myself because yes, they seemed to be doing a really bad job of it but their play was suspicious.

They ended up 1st and 2nd, I finished 3rd and did have the feeling that they were making no effort to take chips from one another at the end but it wasn't so blatant that I actually felt I could email Party about it (or maybe I'm just a lazy git). It was the first ever time I put in notes that I thought players could be colluding though, put each other's names in their notes.

No doubt these guys were cheats now though - I have all the hand details from the tournament summary and in Pokertracker, anyone reckon I have a chance of getting some more of that 1000$ prize pool from the 100 dollar tourney I was third to their 2nd and 1st in?

Seems like morally I should take 1st in that tourney, 4th and 5th should take 2nd and 3rd, chances of Party Poker sorting it out?

Rob

p.s. 4th place was smooth4693, 5th no1butme, 6th Mattfeld06 (who had been correctly accusing them of colluding) so if any of them are reading (or anyone is mates with them)please PM me. Thanks.

[HavanaBanana]

Sure, should be a good shot at getting the money, let us know what happened.

[Reverend]

I am copying you gentlemen in on my email to Party support regarding their collusion in the tournament I'm involved in. I will let you know of their response but any advice on dealing with Party (at least I came out of the tournament up, two players ended up losing 109 dollars because of it) would be gratefully received. Note I have not put in the hand history, I don't think it's relevant given the background we have, if anyone is desperate for it let me know.

Cheers.

Rob (Email to PP below)

Dear Sirs,

I am forwarding a transcript of a $100+9 tournament NL Holdem tournament where there appears to have been significant collusion between the first and second place finishers throughout the entire game.

You will note that there are comments during the tournament accusing Dykee_Doo and Bruno13 of colluding and when it came down to myself and these two at the end of the game the hand history shows their play is peculiar to say the least. I suspect that with the benefit of being able to see their pocket cards and the way in which they played throughout the tournament it will be obvious that they were playing as a team and communicating with each other outside of the game table.

Further, I have been advised by other players at your site, through the discussion forums on the twoplustwo.com poker forums, that these two players have been seen to be colluding in cash games.

Assuming that, as it appears, these players have been colluding, it would seem reasonable that they would be disqualified and their winnings from this tournament redistributed appropriately amongst myself and the 4th and 5th placed finishers, smooth4693 and no1butme respectively.

I trust that the integrity of your games is of paramount importance to yourselves as it is to your customers and you will investigate this matter thoroughly.

Kind regards.

Yours faithfully
....

[SwordFish]

Well written, Reverend. It will be interesting to see how they respond.

SF

[Reverend]

Well, Michael from PartyPoker has responded to me already via email having read my post on this forum.

Although I have not had the full amount for a 1st place credited to my account, which was not expected anyhow (hell, I was playing presuming they were working together, I may not have made third place if they hadn't been), he did make a very reasonable credit and assured me that the accounts in question have been closed down because of their suspicious behaviour and explaining in detail their policy regarding suspected collusion.

He also informed me that those involved have actually lost a lot of money to us honest /images/graemlins/wink.gif players and have never cashed out. When their accounts were closed they had only cents in them. As far as I can see colluding profitably is harder than playing good poker so this doesn't surprise me, especially having watched them in action. It really was a fluke they both made it to the money in that particular tournament or at best because others were trying to take them out stupidly because they saw them working together.

Good work Michael/PartyPoker. I know we have problems with Party but try emailing any UK company and getting any response out of them within a week, let alone a satisfactory one within a few hours.

We can all get back to bítching now, let's start on the live support /images/graemlins/tongue.gif.

Rob

[smudgex68]

[ QUOTE ]
but try emailing any UK company and getting any response out of them within a week, let alone a satisfactory one within a few hours

[/ QUOTE ]

This probably reflects their UK customers' inherent (or inherited) inability to complain about anything, even the British food.

[bwana devil]

For all the complaining everyone does about Party, they sure do seem to have their act together. I've been reading this forum for about three weeks and every real issue someone has brought up, Party responds. I'm really impressed how they handled this particular situation.

I understand they have software problems though. That sounds like a good thing if you ask me. If their demand for their site grew so fast they cant keep up, that just means more fish signing up. Their site isn't getting flooded w/ Phil Iverson types.

Anyway, the more I read about Party, the more comfortable I am to play there. Keep up the good work, Party.

Bill

PS Hey, my first post!!

[DaPlaya]

[ QUOTE ]


He also informed me that those involved have actually lost a lot of money to us honest /images/graemlins/wink.gif players and have never cashed out. When their accounts were closed they had only cents in them. As far as I can see colluding profitably is harder than playing good poker so this doesn't surprise me, especially having watched them in action. It really was a fluke they both made it to the money in that particular tournament or at best because others were trying to take them out stupidly because they saw them working together.

Good work Michael/PartyPoker.


[/ QUOTE ]

If this response was from Mike O'Malley, I'm sorry i am making this post because i respect him.

However, the assumption above is that they got down to "cents" because of inept play. I can assure that good colluders would never try to cashout from the screenames that they play the aggressive styles from.

I will take it a step further and say that party has not done their job on this until they investigate where the 2 players lost their money. Doughnuts to dollars (sorry PBO) says they covertly dumped them. They may have sucked as colluders, but excel in dumping. I'm sure that party never checks this properly.

[RocketManJames]

I read through the other posts in this thread... and something entered my mind. Everyone is happy/satisfied with how Party handled the colluders, but why did it require players to point it out? The hand history posted is about as blatant as it can be for collusion. Party advertises how they have software that detects this type of cheating. Why didn't it? Or am I missing something here? I play on Party often, and I personally have not run into any blatant colluders. But, it scares me a bit knowing that they advertise having auto-collusion detection software, and it seems that it took players who played watch dog to inform them.

Anyone have a response?

-RMJ