Absolute Poker overraking? See this HH

Please forgive the bad beat post but it makes their devious tactics painfully obvious because we were both all-in preflop. Raw hand history given because it contains full information. Important stuff bolded.

What they are doing: When a player goes all in in Texas Holdem, they may push more money then is actually called by an opponent if the bettor has more chips than the caller. If this is the case any chips in excess of the called amount is returned to the bettor. Absolute, instead of refunding the uncalled bet, places these extra chips in a side pot. This side pot is raked.

It would save this side pot rake if the player bet exactly the amount the caller will call, but this only works if there is one potential caller.

Is this fraud? Their rake schedule isn't posted so I have emailed support for it so I can verify what I agreed to in the TOS. Maybe I'm overreacting but it seems like their rake is uncapped ($3 rake in .10/.25 NL? Prima caps it at $.30) and these incorrect side pot rakes are costing high stakes players non-trivial amounts of money.

EDIT: from their website:
When a player puts the last of their chips into a pot, that player is said to be all-in. An all-in player is not eligible to win any money wagered above their final bet.If a player makes a wager and another player calls him using the last of his chips, any excess part of the bet is returned to the bettor, or it is used to form a side pot with another player or players who matched the amount bet. There is no limitation on the number of side pots. The all-in player is eligible to share in any of the pots that he contributed to, and therefore cannot be forced from the hand.

or maybe this is common and I'm a moron for posting.


STAGE #205124630: HOLDEM NO LIMIT $0.10 - 2005-10-14 17:41:43 (ET)
Table: CLOVER LN. (Real Money) Seat #2 is the dealer
Seat 2 - SHUTTERBUG50 ($8.15 in chips)
Seat 3 - FOLDBABYFOLD ($8.25 in chips)
Seat 4 - FULLHEEZEY ($10.70 in chips)
Seat 6 - YOIMRICK0620 ($25.15 in chips)
Seat 8 - JUDASMCFLY ($9.65 in chips)
Seat 9 - THEDUSTBUSTR ($35.40 in chips)
FOLDBABYFOLD - Posts small blind $0.10
FULLHEEZEY - Posts big blind $0.25
*** POCKET CARDS ***
Dealt to THEDUSTBUSTR [Ah Ac]
YOIMRICK0620 - Raises $0.75 to $0.75
JUDASMCFLY - Folds
THEDUSTBUSTR - Raises $2.25 to $2.25
SHUTTERBUG50 - Folds
FOLDBABYFOLD - Folds
FULLHEEZEY - Folds
YOIMRICK0620 - Raises $5 to $5.75
THEDUSTBUSTR - All-In(Raise) $33.15 to $35.40
YOIMRICK0620 - All-In $19.40
*** FLOP *** [8s 6s 7h]
*** TURN *** [8s 6s 7h] [6h]
*** RIVER *** [8s 6s 7h 6h] [10s]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
YOIMRICK0620 - Shows [As Ks] (Flush, ace high)
THEDUSTBUSTR - Shows [Ah Ac] (Two Pairs, aces and sixes)
THEDUSTBUSTR Collects $9.75 from side pot-1
YOIMRICK0620 Collects $48.15 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total Pot($60.90:$50.65,$10.25) | Rake ($3:$2.50,$0.50)
Board [8s 6s 7h 6h 10s]
Seat 2: SHUTTERBUG50 (dealer) Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 3: FOLDBABYFOLD (small blind) Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 4: FULLHEEZEY (big blind) Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 6: YOIMRICK0620 won Total ($48.15) All-In HI$48.15) with Flush, ace high [As Ks - P:As,P:Ks,B:10s,B:8s,B:6s]
Seat 8: JUDASMCFLY Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 9: THEDUSTBUSTR won Total ($9.75) All-In HI$9.75) with Two Pairs, aces and sixes [Ah Ac - P:Ah,P:Ac,B:6s,B:6h,B:10s]

[mosquito]

It would appear you are correct. I'd like to see what CS does with this, please post any responses from them. Assuming the HH was unaltered (except bolding) then the side pot was raked .50, and should not have been a side pot at all. Seems like a new bug??

I did not alter anything. I will post any response I get... I want my 50 cents back!!

[theblitz]

Weird.
I had noticed that on Pacific but not on Absolute.
In fact I have an opposite examples. Here's one:

Stage #204903600: Holdem No Limit $0.50 - 2005-10-14 07:27:05 (ET)
Table: ESPERANZA AVE (Real Money) Seat #7 is the dealer
Seat 7 - CALLMEBIATCH ($125.65 in chips)
Seat 8 - JAY_DOG87 ($11 in chips)
Seat 3 - TMUELLII ($58.17 in chips)
Seat 4 - TOROPAINEN ($70.15 in chips)
Seat 5 - DAN1001 ($94.01 in chips)
Seat 6 - THEBLITZ ($181.15 in chips)
JAY_DOG87 - Posts small blind $0.50
TMUELLII - Posts big blind $1
*** POCKET CARDS ***
Dealt to THEBLITZ [3d As]
TOROPAINEN - Folds
DAN1001 - Folds
THEBLITZ - Folds
CALLMEBIATCH - Folds
JAY_DOG87 - Calls $0.50
TMUELLII - Checks
*** FLOP *** [Ks 2c 10c]
JAY_DOG87 - Bets $2
TMUELLII - Calls $2
*** TURN *** [Ks 2c 10c] [5c]
JAY_DOG87 - Bets $3
TMUELLII - Raises $15 to $15
JAY_DOG87 - All-In $5
*** RIVER *** [Ks 2c 10c 5c] [Qs]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
TMUELLII - Shows [6s Kc] (One pair, kings)
JAY_DOG87 - Shows [5s 10s] (Two Pairs, tens and fives)
TMUELLII Collects $7 from side pot-1
JAY_DOG87 Collects $20.90 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total Pot($29:$22,$7) | Rake ($1.10:$1.10,$0)
Board [Ks 2c 10c 5c Qs]
Seat 3: TMUELLII (big blind) won Total ($7) HI$7) with One pair, kings [6s Kc - B:Ks,P:Kc,B:Qs,B:10c,P:6s]
Seat 4: TOROPAINEN Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 5: DAN1001 Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 6: THEBLITZ Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 7: CALLMEBIATCH (dealer) Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 8: JAY_DOG87 (small blind) won Total ($20.90) All-In HI$20.90) with Two Pairs, tens and fives [5s 10s - P:10s,B:10c,P:5s,B:5c,B:Ks]

Yours is raked correctly, nothing wrong with pacific...
[ QUOTE ]
Total Pot($29:$22,$7) | Rake ($1.10:$1.10,$0)

[/ QUOTE ]
the rake data means total rake $1.10, with $1.10 from main pot and $0 from side pot. Side pot was unraked, which effectively returns the chips. Absolute's side pot is raked, which is not the same as returning the chips.

[theblitz]

You misunderstood me.

The hand I have posted is from Absolute.
What I said about Pacific is from something I noticed once. I have not checked it again so I may be out of date.

However, I have more than one example from Absolute where the uncalled part of the pot was NOT raked and have not managed to find a single one that was.

[BigBiceps]

I posted this exact same problem in this thread: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=inet&Number=359997 5&Forum,,All_Forums,,&Words=&Searchpag e=1&Limit=25&Main=3599975&Search=true& amp;where=&Name=8631&daterange=&newerv al=&newertype=&olderval=&oldertype=&am p;bodyprev=#Post3599975=

No one here seemed very bothered by it.