Possible cheating at UB

[HavanaBanana]

I play like this pretty frequently, and I have been wondering when some sore tightass loser would 'turn me in'.
Usually they just call me idiot, and make a note on me, that makes me 10-fold back what I just lost [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I don't know these players, but colluders wouldnt call on the river? Oh, maybe they did to disguise it?

BBB calls on river making you have to overcall, now why possibly would he do that if colluding, you dont think he wanted your last bet?

I do think one should alert the sites if one suspect colluding, but cry Wolf too often and no help will be given when you need it.

MS, should everyone be allowed to play husband and wife on the same table if they play from kitchen and livingroom?


In Poker Trust noone, except your mother, and even then cut the cards!

[Glenn]

Ms-

If they don't give you a better answer, try emailing Annie Duke. She might be able to help you.

-Glenn

[Wake up CALL]

This looks more like sour grapes than collusion to me. It seems you played the hand quite poorly, I am surprised this was not pointed out by other posters.

[MS Sunshine]

Actually, I was not happy with my pre-flop play. I centered on the limper and should have folded for two more bets.

MS Sunshine

[MS Sunshine]

"It seems you played the hand quite poorly"

I hoped by my aggressive betting to announce my presence with authority.

MS Sunshine

[CreamPuff]

On the surface this hand doesn't look too bad.
He was in the BB. I think players tend to get a
wild hair in their you know what more often on sites
that have very fast action (servers)...So maybe
your just not used to the occassional lapse of reason.

However, you were there and I wasn't. For all I know
these guys could've been rocks of all rocks.

I have money/played on UB for a few years..I can probably
count on one hand the number of times Ive suspected
cheating, so I know its not out of control, anymore
than the other major sites. But the tempo is fast, for
sure. The swings are brutal in the short 10/20 game.

[Hotchile]

Two things.
First, whether the player calls or doesn't call, this would be a good situation for an investigation. The "house" is going to look into the hand whether called or not. They have that right.
Second, MS. is right, even a sub 90 IQ would have to realize that their holding is suspect in this situation. I would like to get a history on the two, but the play just plain looks wrong to me.
Third, did I say only two things? I lied) it's not my place to questions policies but the policy of "we can't reveal what action we will take or if you have been cheated" is counterproductive to trying to legitimize online poker, IMO. I think that players have the right to know if they have have been put in the middle of a team and what action is being taken.

In a live room, the floor has the right to open hands, whether called or not, in situations where collusion appears evident. Although rare, it is sometimes necessary to send the message that collusionary tactics are not tolerated.

I hope that all online sights will accept the responsibility for ensuring game security. Sometimes, that may include making a difficult but necessary decisions.

HC

[GrannyMae]

If BBB was anything close to a good colluder, don't you think he would have folded the river?

i think a fold makes it MORE suspicious.

as much as i hate to say it (because i respect sunshine and usually agree with his feelings on these matters), i do not think this was collusion.

imho, colluders would have taken more action on the turn. i think BBB is just steaming or overly aggressive. he caught a piece of the flop, but actually slowed down.

the preflop play looks suspicous, but from then on, i just don't see the collusion.

having caught a piece of the flop, good colluders would have capped the turn.

sunshine has enough time spent as a floorman to spot scumbags, so i could be wrong. i have not been wrong since 1992, so i am due.

[XlgJoe]

What is your problem with UB.

This seems like a bad beat story, which you then try to blame UB for. You seem to go out of your way to find faults with them.

BTW I dont work for UB, or have any reason to shill for UB. I don't doubt colusion occurs, I just find your motives questionable.

[zooey]

I don't see it. Squirrely capping with junk is a relatively frequent emotional repsponse, not folding the river is strange, and ESPECIALLY the turn slowdown.

I've turned prople I suspected in, twice I was right, and once the house disagreed. Here's what I expect from my case before I write.

At least three suspicous hands, I prefer 5. I would like this to become a Zoo standard of collusion accusation: "One hand doesn't cut it."

Statistical certainty that two players are plying together more often than chance would dictate. This isn't hard to determine.

And my last criteria (which I admit might not be shared by all) is that they be winning players. This elimnates the vast majority of suspicious opponents.

But I think its reasonable that the accuser do a little legwork other than crying foul after one frustrating hand.

Best,

zooey