Pokerstars Cheaters Nailed.

Pokerstars took 3 weeks to complete their investigation. They ruled in my favor. They placed 430.00 into my account which I lost in 2 hands. Pockets 99, I lost to Pocket 88. Then I had K8 suited. Flop is K64. I go all in for 210$...Guy calls with AQ....He catches the A on Turn. That place is so fuuckin rigged it is sick.

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=SecondaryTextColor>From:</TD><TD>PokerStars Support (support@pokerstars.com)</TD></TR><TR><TD class=SecondaryTextColor>Sent:</TD><TD>Thu 8/14/08 5:22 AM</TD></TR><TR><TD class=SecondaryTextColor>To: </TD><TD>anthonynapjr@hotmail.com</TD></TR><TR><TD class=SecondaryTextColor>Cc: </TD><TD>beaverkeen@att.net</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Hello Anthony:

Thanks again for your report of collusion in tournament T#95641688 my review
is now complete, and I write to give you my results.

First, however, I would like to kindly ask you to direct all contact with
PokerStars through your registered email address. (In this case I have CC:'d
your registered address to this email.) This ensures that we can give you
better service, and also helps us when reviewing cases like this.

Also, to help us in situations like this, we kindly ask you not to accuse
players of collusion at the tables. The reason is twofold, 1) it is
incredibly rude if you happen to be wrong, and 2) it tips the colluders off
if you are right. This might mean the colluders play some hands in a manner
that they wouldn't normally do and thereby makes our investigation more
complicated. Thus, accusing players at the table is a no win situation.

I'm sure you didn't know or think of this at the time, but I kindly ask you
to not accuse players at the table in the future. If you suspect someone of
collusion, simply write an email to support@pokerstars.com and we will make
a full investigation of the matter as we take the integrity of our games
very seriously.

Now back to your report of possible collusion between 'Budzer' and
'BMoney0505'.

After having made a careful review we have found a relationship between the
two players, and found that they go easy on each other from time to time
(soft play). This is a violation of our tournament rule #9 as posted at:

http://www.pokerstars.com/tournamentsrules.html

We have the advantage of being able to replay the games with all cards
exposed. We carefully reviewed all events in which at least one of the two
finished in the money. Based on the review we determined that their action
did not affect the outcome of any event apart from the one you partook in.

Since you clearly was harmed by their play when there were three players
left of tournament #95641688 we have decided to reward you first place in
this tournament. Thus we have credited your account with the first price
money of $429.

Although they did work together against you, the overall review - which
included requests for explanations from the players and consideration of all
account information - led us to conclude that might not be aware of the
seriousness of such action in tournament play. We have therefore decided
that they will be allowed to continue playing on the site. That said, we did
take action to see that they do not play in the same events in the future,
or at the same cash game table for that matter.

We have, of course, issued stern warnings and their accounts won't be
reopened until the acknowledge that they have understood the seriousness of
their actions.

The integrity of our games is of utmost importance as is fair resolution of
situations such as this. Our primary concern is to assure our players of a
fair and secure environment in which to enjoy online poker. Your vigilance
in noticing the situation and reporting your concerns are appreciated.

Please don't hesitate to let us know anytime you have questions or concerns.


Regards,

FredrikS
PokerStars Support Team
</PRE>

Thats amazing but anyways if your selling pokerstars for paypal lemme know because i got 390 i can do in increments and send first.

No way to stop all the online cheaters other than stop playing online. Sad but ture. I found a bot on there and they told me they take care of the player and he is back on again.

Interesting. Should post this on 2p2 if you haven't already

more cheaters offline than online. checking down to freinds, etc.

Common Railbird, you gotta be kidding me?

Railbird said:

more cheaters offline than online. checking down to freinds, etc.

Click to expand...

Are you serious? There are more people playing off 2 computers then you will ever know.

Do you think I live in plastic Bubble?

chipstack99 said:

Thats amazing but anyways if your selling pokerstars for paypal lemme know because i got 390 i can do in increments and send first.

Click to expand...

Man, what the hell is wrong with you. I should scam you, and teach you a lesson. You want to exchange and then hit the dispute with Paypal.

Wake up boy.

I've suspected collusion at some on-line cash games before, but it's tough to know for certain. I do know that it does happen occassionaly because I've personally met people that admitted to doing it.

I generally stick to the cheap games and don't run into that very often, as it isn't really worth their time.

I know alot of people that also play in the same cash game and would take it easy on their buddies over an other player but are not in conversation with each other. I know for a fact if I knew someone at a table I would try to knock their ass out just as I would anyone else. Noo friends in a poker game for me. Playing to win not waste time.

I don't get what in teh world your first paragraph is about. You say you got a collusion investigation started, what does those 2 beats have to do with collusion?

Matt24 said:

I don't get what in teh world your first paragraph is about. You say you got a collusion investigation started, what does those 2 beats have to do with collusion?

Click to expand...

Wondering the same thing.:think2:

at least explain how the guy holding AQ beating u on the next to last card was colluding with anyone. I know Im a moron and a rookie at poker but that, I found odd.

AnthonyNapJR said:

Pokerstars took 3 weeks to complete their investigation. They ruled in my favor. They placed 430.00 into my account which I lost in 2 hands. Pockets 99, I lost to Pocket 88. Then I had K8 suited. Flop is K64. I go all in for 210$...Guy calls with AQ....He catches the A on Turn. That place is so fuuckin rigged it is sick.

<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td class="SecondaryTextColor">From:</td><td>PokerStars Support (support@pokerstars.com)</td></tr><tr><td class="SecondaryTextColor">Sent:</td><td>Thu 8/14/08 5:22 AM</td></tr><tr><td class="SecondaryTextColor">To: </td><td>anthonynapjr@hotmail.com</td></tr><tr><td class="SecondaryTextColor">Cc: </td><td>beaverkeen@att.net</td></tr></tbody></table>

Hello Anthony:

Thanks again for your report of collusion in tournament T#95641688 my review
is now complete, and I write to give you my results.

First, however, I would like to kindly ask you to direct all contact with
PokerStars through your registered email address. (In this case I have CC:'d
your registered address to this email.) This ensures that we can give you
better service, and also helps us when reviewing cases like this.

Also, to help us in situations like this, we kindly ask you not to accuse
players of collusion at the tables. The reason is twofold, 1) it is
incredibly rude if you happen to be wrong, and 2) it tips the colluders off
if you are right. This might mean the colluders play some hands in a manner
that they wouldn't normally do and thereby makes our investigation more
complicated. Thus, accusing players at the table is a no win situation.

I'm sure you didn't know or think of this at the time, but I kindly ask you
to not accuse players at the table in the future. If you suspect someone of
collusion, simply write an email to support@pokerstars.com and we will make
a full investigation of the matter as we take the integrity of our games
very seriously.

Now back to your report of possible collusion between 'Budzer' and
'BMoney0505'.

After having made a careful review we have found a relationship between the
two players, and found that they go easy on each other from time to time
(soft play). This is a violation of our tournament rule #9 as posted at:

http://www.pokerstars.com/tournamentsrules.html

We have the advantage of being able to replay the games with all cards
exposed. We carefully reviewed all events in which at least one of the two
finished in the money. Based on the review we determined that their action
did not affect the outcome of any event apart from the one you partook in.

Since you clearly was harmed by their play when there were three players
left of tournament #95641688 we have decided to reward you first place in
this tournament. Thus we have credited your account with the first price
money of $429.

Although they did work together against you, the overall review - which
included requests for explanations from the players and consideration of all
account information - led us to conclude that might not be aware of the
seriousness of such action in tournament play. We have therefore decided
that they will be allowed to continue playing on the site. That said, we did
take action to see that they do not play in the same events in the future,
or at the same cash game table for that matter.

We have, of course, issued stern warnings and their accounts won't be
reopened until the acknowledge that they have understood the seriousness of
their actions.

The integrity of our games is of utmost importance as is fair resolution of
situations such as this. Our primary concern is to assure our players of a
fair and secure environment in which to enjoy online poker. Your vigilance
in noticing the situation and reporting your concerns are appreciated.

Please don't hesitate to let us know anytime you have questions or concerns.


Regards,

FredrikS
PokerStars Support Team

Click to expand...

I didnt know 50 cent worked for Pokerstars?

seems like a horrible call in which he got lucky. also dont see how that is colluding at all. how much was already in the pot when you went all in? how much $ did he have...

also since this was a tournament and you went all in for just 210, it seems to me as you were extremely short stacked making it not a bad call at all. maybe im missing something

is it possible they didnt mean to do what they were doing?

Probaly not but its possible...not saying its right but maybe it was a mistake

beaverkeen@att.net

you may want to edit your post to hide your real email address.

beaverkeen@att.net

like anyone is going to try and write to him, lol

Both the calls were badbeats but i think his point was they made these calls against him but wouldnt make them against each other, and if that email is legit Stars concluded the same thing.
A few weeks ago we were at a final table and the chipleader who was obviously a newbie nutcase just tells the small stack to go all-in on his blind so he can fold it to him to keep him in the game. The SS is screaming at him..DONT SAY THAT MAN YOU'LL GET US BANNED..but the guy just wont shut up, he keeps telling people what he's going to do, what they should do.etc and thinks its just all a big joke. well it was probably like a $6 MTT if i was in it but people take this shit seriously and we had a Stars Rep in the chat very soon...i saw the guy the very next night and his location was changed to "chat banned" , a few days later i got an email saying i had been moved up 1 place in the finish and was credited another 3 bucks or whatever it was...so u have people trying to steal 5 bucks wherever they can then u also have dumbasses that just dont know any better...
Ill end with 2 words i see often but dont remember ever saying myself....Thats Poker!!

Reread the initial post. The way it is written is that he was given the $430 (actually $429) as a result of collusion in a tournament and he then lost it at a no-limit game on the two hands described above that he was ahead in.
The hand or hands involved in the actual collusion are not mentioned in either the post of the email pasted, if I am reading correctly.