|
|
|
|
#1
11-13-2005, 05:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Obvious collusion...worth pursuing?
[ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Missed that name thing. They are just rubbing it in your face, eh? Let us know how it goes. [/ QUOTE ] Dear [TheMainEvent], Thank you for contacting us. We have completed our investigation in regards to player?s *OnlyBusiness* and *OnlyPleasure*. We have looked into all the necessary aspects of their account history on our card room and we would like to share with you the following important facts that helped us to come to a conclusion: 1. These players have been confirmed to play from different states and hence log in from different locations. 2. They together played only on table xxxxxxxx from the day they created their account at our site. 3-They opened their accounts at a different time and do not have any common information on their financial profile. 4- We have gone through all the game records and have confirmed that there is no sign of collusion at all. We have focused not only on the hands in which you have been included, but also all the hands in which they have been together by themselves. 5-We have further studied the frequency of their logins and logouts, in order to confirm any pattern that suggests that they are scheduling their presence at the tables, but no strange coincidences have shown up either. 6-We then proceeded with a check on their accounts in the given below format: - a. We have investigated to see if there is any Inter Account Transfer in between their accounts. b. We have verified their biographic information and financial information to see if there is any association in between them. c. We have checked their buddy chat and chat messages on the table to see if there is any kind of personal and prolonged contact with each other. In this particular case, we assure that there is no foul play. We have logged their account name in our records and we would be monitoring their game logs on a regular basis. If found any suspicious activity we will further investigate and take further necessary actions. We are glad to have players who care for partypoker.com integrity, and will always investigate fully any suspicious activity submitted by our players. Please feel free to contact us if you need any clarifications in this regards. Contact us anytime, we are available around the clock to assist you with your account related questions and suggestions. Sincerely, Smita Investigations Team alerts@partypoker.com 
|
|
#3
11-13-2005, 06:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Obvious collusion...worth pursuing?
[ QUOTE ]
We're overlooking the possibility that OnlyBusiness is just a moron. [/ QUOTE ] It does look bad, but we are forgetting that some people online are so bad they won't even realize that is an obvious call. The moran factor needs to be considered.
|
|
#4
11-13-2005, 06:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Obvious collusion...worth pursuing?
A username I play under is bunny_neorab and I've run into the problem of playing with people with bunny in their names twice. Everyone at the table freaks out. I think you're to quick to dismiss the players in question to be idiots that don't really know what's going on. I mean, it's a low limit party sng after all.
|
|
#6
11-13-2005, 06:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Obvious collusion...worth pursuing?
Bob, is that you cat or just A cat?
Some questions had to be asked, hehe.... And yes, don't worry, I like cats [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#7
11-13-2005, 06:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Obvious collusion...worth pursuing?
It is my cat, Amanda.
She just now came out to ask for some turkey and I obliged. She can frequently be found purring in my lap while I'm trying to make money at the tables.
|
|
#9
11-13-2005, 08:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Obvious collusion...worth pursuing?
[ QUOTE ]
I get the impression that Party Poker doesn't care much about collusion at low limit SNGs...should I even bother trying to get them to address this? Seat 1: OnlyBusiness ( $2270 ) Seat 3: Hero ( $3080 ) Seat 6: Seat 6 ( $1350 ) Seat 7: Seat 7 ( $1045 ) Seat 8: OnlyPleasure ( $255 ) Blinds(100/200) ** Dealing down cards ** Dealt to Hero [ Jc Th ] OnlyBusiness calls [200]. Hero folds. Seat 6 folds. Seat 7 folds. OnlyPleasure is all-In [55] OnlyBusiness folds. OnlyPleasure does not show cards. OnlyPleasure wins 555 chips [/ QUOTE ] This happend to me once, I got my hand and with out thinking I clicked Check/Fold...action go to the SB and he raised all-in 70 and i folded...common mistake
|
|
#10
11-14-2005, 11:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Obvious collusion...worth pursuing?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I get the impression that Party Poker doesn't care much about collusion at low limit SNGs...should I even bother trying to get them to address this? Seat 1: OnlyBusiness ( $2270 ) Seat 3: Hero ( $3080 ) Seat 6: Seat 6 ( $1350 ) Seat 7: Seat 7 ( $1045 ) Seat 8: OnlyPleasure ( $255 ) Blinds(100/200) ** Dealing down cards ** Dealt to Hero [ Jc Th ] OnlyBusiness calls [200]. Hero folds. Seat 6 folds. Seat 7 folds. OnlyPleasure is all-In [55] OnlyBusiness folds. OnlyPleasure does not show cards. OnlyPleasure wins 555 chips [/ QUOTE ] This happend to me once, I got my hand and with out thinking I clicked Check/Fold...action go to the SB and he raised all-in 70 and i folded...common mistake [/ QUOTE ] I never click the check/fold box for precisely this reason. I do check the auto check box a lot though. It looked a lot like collusion to me given their names and the play, but given the results of their investigation, if true, it looks like one of those weird coincidences on the names combined with a boneheaded play. Still, it looks suspicious enough that I'd think seriously about jumping tables if i saw them both on the same table. (Have to be paying pretty good attention to pick that up in a sit-n-go fast enough to jump off though.) --Zetack
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
