You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
DYM FIX?!
Dozza
Member Posts: 303
Is it just me or does this hand seem very suspicious? What makes it even more suspicious is that both of these players were both from the same area (Liverpool). It didnt matter too much in this game because i trebled up in the next hand and still finished in the cash. So does anyone else think these 2 players were in cahoots? Is there any way to stop this happening aswel?
| Player | Action | Cards | Amount | Pot | Balance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dozza | Small blind | 200.00 | 200.00 | 665.00 | |
| Demc | Big blind | 400.00 | 600.00 | 5680.00 | |
| Your hole cards |
| ||||
| london5 | Fold | ||||
| dannydemc | Call | 400.00 | 1000.00 | 85.00 | |
| Dozza | Fold | ||||
| Demc | Check | ||||
| Flop | |||||
| |||||
| Demc | Check | ||||
| dannydemc | Check | ||||
| Turn | |||||
| |||||
| Demc | Check | ||||
| dannydemc | Check | ||||
| River | |||||
| |||||
| Demc | Check | ||||
| dannydemc | All-in | 85.00 | 1085.00 | 0.00 | |
| Demc | Fold | ||||
| dannydemc | Muck | ||||
| dannydemc | Win | 1085.00 | 1085.00 | ||
Comments
The board gives possible flush and low str8 so as 1 goes all in the other naturally folds. I think sometimes people are a little too eager to see cheating when this could just be 2 people who know each other playing a friendly game online. I have loads of people online i play against that are friends, i'm not cheating just because i know or am related to them.
For 85 chips, any 2 should ideally be an inst call given the amount of chips the leader has.
The names and locations does seem ifffy. Sky should be able to see the frequency of play of these 2 players. But then again, if I and a pal were in cahoots, doubtless, I would choose completely different names and locations as to try and throw people off the scent, so this may just be coincidence.
Even if Sky do nothing, it would be worth a word as it could keep them on guard for future occassions.
I have just sharkscoped both of them, coincidently, both players have played a similar amount of games, both have the same profit/loss (to within a pound) although one has had an account a year longer than the other.
So it appears the one that has the account longer took a huge break away from the tables and has suddenly come back.
Coincidently, the other player also only played 3 games yesterday.
Now it may be that at 4am, the only people around invariably meant they were gonna meet twice and all of this could be coincidence, but doubtless, if it were me, I would be asking questions.
This is not a money Spinning Idea. In fact this is a stupid idea lol
Just another pal deliberately NOT taking out his mate is still collusion.
I have personal friends and family here, but I will never play online with them. I leave that for home games. It is best not to generate suspision, even if it is unwarranted. I would not want any fold I did to a pal scrutinised and my account risked for this.
On a serious note, as there is no advantage money wise (i think we can agree on that) and 1 folding to an all - in from the other doesn't particularly look suspicious (as the coard has a couple of draws with pre-flop play that could mean any 2 cards are the holding of either player) then this enitre thread is based on the fact that they share a similar name and live in the same city.
There may be collusion here but just as easily there may not be. The thought that these 2 are cheating would be suposition and assumption
Yes, I fully agree.
The issue lies within the fact that the chip leader folded for 85 chips into a 1000 pot when he had almost half the chips in play. (I would be calling with 37 in this spot, just to see what he was calling with)
The fact that the small stack did not push for his last 85 chips in the first place. (may just be inexperience)
The fact they come from the same town, Liverpool. (known for its honesty, lol)
The fact they share an uncanny similarity in their usernames.
The fact they played they both only played 3 games yesterday, and 2 together, one of them after over a years break.
All these are coincidences that raise questions. Albeit, these coincidences could just be genuine and that the best hand just won.
Without seeing the hole cards of the players, and only Sky could do that, no one knows.
Like I say, these are questions that when I play, I would not like raising. Hence the reason that I steer clear of pals on the tables.
dannydemc = 85 chips behind him.
1000 in the pot.
It will cost Demc 1.5% of his stack to make the call and possibly finish the game. Furthermore, there is no way he can fail to cash from this position with such a commanding chip lead and 2 others really really short-stacked.
you've also got to ask yourself why the massive chip leader (Demc) didnt put dannyDemc all-in for an extra 85 pre-flop?
The answer is quite obvious really.
Call me Devils advocate if you will, would be a boring thread if peoples only comment was yeah i agree
Yet another reason why I hateeee these kind of games - Obviously theyre in it together - 100%
My advice is to report it via live support so Sky are aware of it. Then if you feel it necessary, keep a little record of the games they play together via sharkscope.
If you see more and more games being played together, then a pattern starts to emerge and this new evidence can be then given to Sky to coroborate your original report.
To satisfy my own curiosity, I have made a note of the usernames before Sky delete the names and will have a little look at their sharkscopes next week to see if they have played anymore together.
From what I have seen of it, it looks dodgy, but ultimately, could just be a couple of mates playing a friendly game. The stakes concerned were hardly big enough to worry about.
haha, this post made me laugh. :-)
If the all in for 85 chips had been called by the other player and the short stack won, then there was no collusion provable.
If the big stack would have lost, but folded, no collusion likely, as if he knew he was going to lose then he would happily give 85 more chips to his mate.
If he had not called but would have won, then collusion is likely.
You would call here with a pair of 2's or even a high card for 85 chips. (like I say, I would call with anything)
If you are worried that this thread may alert them, take out all the players names.
You know who they are, and you can continue to monitor any activity anyway.
it's really important that all suspected fraud is Reported through the correct channels (customer care).
posting on the forum is likely to be less effective than going straight to the team (using the links at the very bottom of this page)
having said that i'll make sure the Fraud team see this thread.
thank you