In Response to Re: DYM FIX?! : You will find that people that collude are not that clever, otherwise they would use their own skills. Torryboy has an excellent point and in turn, I do not play with my partner for this reason. Plus, we only have one laptop in the house. Would you keep your friend in or enjoy taking them out, especially in a DYM. Best to steer clear of the issue and never worry about it. Posted by Hale72
Well it's good to see you back and firing on all cylinders )
hey guys, ok so i've had word from the fraud team... "the accounts in question have been suspended pending a poker audit" they would also like to again reaffirm that all complaints should be made via email/telephone/live chat and not the forum. thanks again everyone Rich Posted by Sky_Rich
Wow, that was quick.
2 games together doesnt seem like much evidence.
But if they were using the same I.P. adress, then...........
But all heresay and gossip. If you have acted that quickly then something must be afoot.
In Response to Re: DYM FIX?! : Wow, that was quick. 2 games together doesnt seem like much evidence. But if they were using the same I.P. adress, then........... But all heresay and gossip. If you have acted that quickly then something must be afoot. Well done Sky, and thanks Rich. Posted by Hale72
Can you enter a sit an go from the same i.p. address? You cant sit at a cash table or enter an mtt if there is somebody with the same i.p. already there.
Any suspisions of collusion like this need to be reported to customer services via the live chat option 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. GameID Date (UTC) 2244410 8-Jan-10 04:44 2244372 8-Jan-10 04:05 2244355 8-Jan-10 04:01 1174661 23-Dec-08 01:26 I have also looked at the last 10 results for both. After over a year off the site, he came back yesterday and played 3 games, and he met the other player on 2 of those games. 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. Posted by Hale72
In Response to Re: DYM FIX?! : You will find that people that collude are not that clever, otherwise they would use their own skills. Torryboy has an excellent point and in turn, I do not play with my partner for this reason. Plus, we only have one laptop in the house. Would youkeep your friend in or enjoy taking them out, especially in a DYM. Best to steer clear of the issue and never worry about it. Posted by Hale72
As always innuendo after innuendo lol - or is it just me!!
In Response to Re: DYM FIX?! : Can you enter a sit an go from the same i.p. address? You cant sit at a cash table or enter an mtt if there is somebody with the same i.p. already there. Posted by MADMOO
No i don't think you can? MTT's might be poss but i know you can't log onto the same cash table and would presume DYM's are the same
In Response to Re: DYM FIX?! : As always innuendo after innuendo lol - or is it just me!! Posted by loonytoons
Loony!! You are rude.
After 11 years of marriage, I would rather have a pork chop!!!
Seriously though, collusion is a real hate of mine and it can easily be used to turn a tidy profit in DYM games.
Sitting in the car waiting to take my son to school, I worked out the following.
I have used £11.00 DYMs as an example here as it makes the maths easier.
If 2 unknown average players were to meet regularly, you would expect that the breakdown of cashes as follows.
25% neither cash 50% one cashes. 25% both cash.
Over 100 games, this would equate to £2200 being invested for a £2000 return with the loss being the rake.
A collusionist could easily increase these percentages by carefully dropping chips and not taking on your pal.
Now a bad collusionist could easily change these percentages to
20% neither 30% one cash 50% both cash.
Again over the same 100 game sample would generate £2600 return giving £400 profit between them, on top of that would be the £10 each cash for points and at least one place in the league stars freeroll.
It is easy to get both players into the final 4 by just playing carefully and not getting in to any big arguments. By then it is a 75% chance both will then cash.
If this were the case, the breakdown would be
15% neither 15% one cash 70% both cash.
Over the 100 game sample generates now £3100. This is serious money for little work on a mid stakes DYM.
To get 100 games is less than 4 games per night over a month, just a couple of hours work a night.
Now tell me a couple of pals playing together and not taking each other out is nothing too much to worry about.
Both these players have overall minus ROI's. In the game shown here 1 of the players made a £4.50 profit while the other made a £5.50 loss (putting my business brain in gear i make that the worst get rich quick plan in history lol)
One player has cashed in 2 and the other has cashed in 3 of their last 10 games, a cash in 5 out of 20 games pretty much equates with what you expected in your figures wasn't it Hale? only in 2 of the last 10 were they sat at the same tourney and as you can't do that from the same IP then they are not using the same land line broadband connection (so probably at a different house or one is using a dongle connection).
There last 10 results bear out as a £47 investment (not including the rake which will be min 10% on top) and cashes that add up to £14.23. So they have spent £51.70 minimum for a net loss of £37.47
Colluding or not....... these boys are giving money away lol
Mine was just an example of how collusion could give nice profits. These boys are obviously just pals or just starting out. Either way, anything that generates an unfair playing field needs stamping out. Posted by Hale72
Also, one could play via the T.V. whilst the other plays on line. Not the same IP address then is it? Even being in a different house, instant messanger or text messaging could easily give each other the hole cards. Like I say, it is a big bug bear of mine, and this case is probably genuine pals not wanting to take each other out. Posted by Hale72
I know what you mean Hale and collusion goes on all the time over this site & others. With skype you can conferance call with more than 1 person but this tends to work best in cash poker. Your right it is possible to make collusion pay (these 2 obviously are not making it pay if that is whats going on lol) and i know how you feel about this type of thing as i remember our Poker tracker thread we got involved in a while ago lol
I'm absolutly on board with the fact that this is going on every day and is not fair, Just not so sure that these 2 know there doing something wrong even if they are colluding as you would make a better attempt to hide it.
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 6 10 london5 Fold dannydemc Call 400.00 1000.00 85.00 Dozza Fold Demc Check Flop 2 J K Demc Check dannydemc Check Turn 6 Demc Check dannydemc Check River 5 Demc Check dannydemc All-in 85.00 1085.00 0.00 Demc Fold dannydemc Muck dannydemc Win 1085.00 1085.00 Posted by Dozza
i played a dym yestaday and was sat next 2 sum1 else from haverhill(poxy little market town),wont say his name,didnt talk 2 him,coz 2 me fawt it looked a little suss,but he wernt any1 i knew(as far as i know) and he wernt much cop either,he went out 1st...
In Response to DYM FIX?! : i played a dym yestaday and was sat next 2 sum1 else from haverhill(poxy little market town),wont say his name,didnt talk 2 him,coz 2 me fawt it looked a little suss,but he wernt any1 i knew(as far as i know) and he wernt much cop either,he went out 1st... Posted by philmenow
Comments
Torryboy has an excellent point and in turn, I do not play with my partner for this reason.
Plus, we only have one laptop in the house.
Would you keep your friend in or enjoy taking them out, especially in a DYM.
Best to steer clear of the issue and never worry about it.
ok so i've had word from the fraud team...
"the accounts in question have been suspended pending a poker audit"
they would also like to again reaffirm that all complaints should be made via email/telephone/live chat and not the forum.
thanks again everyone
Rich
2 games together doesnt seem like much evidence.
But if they were using the same I.P. adress, then...........
But all heresay and gossip. If you have acted that quickly then something must be afoot.
Well done Sky, and thanks Rich.
excellent work hale .
After 11 years of marriage, I would rather have a pork chop!!!
Seriously though, collusion is a real hate of mine and it can easily be used to turn a tidy profit in DYM games.
Sitting in the car waiting to take my son to school, I worked out the following.
I have used £11.00 DYMs as an example here as it makes the maths easier.
If 2 unknown average players were to meet regularly, you would expect that the breakdown of cashes as follows.
25% neither cash
50% one cashes.
25% both cash.
Over 100 games, this would equate to £2200 being invested for a £2000 return with the loss being the rake.
A collusionist could easily increase these percentages by carefully dropping chips and not taking on your pal.
Now a bad collusionist could easily change these percentages to
20% neither
30% one cash
50% both cash.
Again over the same 100 game sample would generate £2600 return giving £400 profit between them, on top of that would be the £10 each cash for points and at least one place in the league stars freeroll.
It is easy to get both players into the final 4 by just playing carefully and not getting in to any big arguments. By then it is a 75% chance both will then cash.
If this were the case, the breakdown would be
15% neither
15% one cash
70% both cash.
Over the 100 game sample generates now £3100. This is serious money for little work on a mid stakes DYM.
To get 100 games is less than 4 games per night over a month, just a couple of hours work a night.
Now tell me a couple of pals playing together and not taking each other out is nothing too much to worry about.
One player has cashed in 2 and the other has cashed in 3 of their last 10 games, a cash in 5 out of 20 games pretty much equates with what you expected in your figures wasn't it Hale? only in 2 of the last 10 were they sat at the same tourney and as you can't do that from the same IP then they are not using the same land line broadband connection (so probably at a different house or one is using a dongle connection).
There last 10 results bear out as a £47 investment (not including the rake which will be min 10% on top) and cashes that add up to £14.23. So they have spent £51.70 minimum for a net loss of £37.47
Colluding or not....... these boys are giving money away lol
These boys are obviously just pals or just starting out.
Either way, anything that generates an unfair playing field needs stamping out.
Not the same IP address then is it?
Even being in a different house, instant messanger or text messaging could easily give each other the hole cards.
Like I say, it is a big bug bear of mine, and this case is probably genuine pals not wanting to take each other out.
I'm absolutly on board with the fact that this is going on every day and is not fair, Just not so sure that these 2 know there doing something wrong even if they are colluding as you would make a better attempt to hide it.
They played 2 games together, one cashed in both, the other in one.
This would generate a + profit for them, but then again, I think that the games were different size buy ins.
Now based on their previous performance, this is a good increase on their previous efforts, and a little too coincidental.
Can someone have a look to see what profit/loss they earned just on the 2 games they played together? Like I say, my searches are gone.
I was just thinking that would make more sense.