Latest communications I've had with Stars:

To which they replied:

So yes, they keep stonewalling me. I don't know what to do here anymore. I am going to try to make an appeal with the Isle of Man Gambling Supervisory Committee, but I have about 0% faith that that will accomplish anything.

I can't believe this is actually happening. I am being convicted without a glimmer of proof. I just don't know what to say. This is so ****ed up goddamn unfair.

is the "friend" meaning yourself and stars have somehow detected hands in your database that you shouldn't have and are enforcing their no buying hand histories .The don't want to reveal this as the reason but tallies with their war on sites selling hand histories to keep the games fair for all players.

Risk assessment!!! This seems to be the topic at hand. I will make a thread within a few days to explain in full detail what risk assessment means when it's the players money at risk and not Rational Groups. I'll pass on this thread if OP's account is reinstated and or an explanation to why his account was banned. What happened to OP could happen to anyone.

Actually i would also wish for further clarification from Stars......not that i can't imagine any wrong doing of OP, but i also can imagine he's telling the truth.

I feel sorry for OP they are taking his job away from him without telling him why. You should do better than this PS no way this is good for Your reputation but as no 1 why would you care

As an headsup-fish myself this thread made me pretty scared. The fact that Pokerstars just can say; no we do not want you here, has made me realise that my ''pokerlife'' can be ended just by a click of some investigation team.
It is really scary that OP does not get a reason why, and every single post that gets added to this topic makes it harder for Stars to prove he actually did something wrong.
And for the haters in this topic, you are in fact the most pathetic people on the planet. Even if you hate OP this much, you cannot hope for someone to get his income dissapear just like that.
That said, if OP has done some really scummy things, Stars can just say, ok he abused chat, he grimmed or whatever, but they did not.
Pokerstars, imo you have choosen some really awkward ways of communication, whatever he has done, he deserves to know why.

Oh and btw:
I might be a little incompetent in reading properly so forgive me for that, but WHAT reasons???

I'm confused please explain:



Q: This is the biggest loss hand from the HH provided. In this hand OP was the SB, why can't I see what hand OP had in this HH and only see what Palyonmes hand was ? Am I using the replayer wrong ? When viewing from the HM2 replayer it's totally like played by Palyonmes. This looks more like Palyonmes HH then your own. What does this mean ?

.

Idk this is the hand in question when I request my last 100 hands from the pokerstars client:

*********** # 81 **************
PokerStarshand #110640023003: Omaha Pot Limit ($5/$10 USD) - 24/01/2014 2:27:11 CET [23/01/2014 20:27:11 ET]
Tafel 'Sofala VII' 2-max Plaats #1 is de button
Plaats 1: lvanhoe ($2061.30 in chips)
Plaats 2: Palyonmes ($1722.89 in chips)
lvanhoe: zet small blind $5
Palyonmes: zet big blind $10
*** GESLOTEN KAARTEN ***
Gedeeld aan lvanhoe [7h 3c 5c Qc]
lvanhoe: raiset $20 naar $30
Palyonmes: callt $20
*** FLOP *** [3s 3h 5h]
Palyonmes: checkt
lvanhoe: bet $59.50
Palyonmes: callt $59.50
*** TURN *** [3s 3h 5h] [9c]
Palyonmes: checkt
lvanhoe: bet $178.50
Palyonmes: raiset $181.50 naar $360
lvanhoe: callt $181.50
*** RIVER *** [3s 3h 5h 9c] [4d]
Palyonmes: bet $540
lvanhoe: callt $540
*** SHOWDOWN ***
Palyonmes: toont [9d 2s 4h 3d] (een full house, Drieën over Negens)
lvanhoe: gooit hand weg
Palyonmes won $1978.50 van pot
*** SAMENVATTING ***
Totale pot $1979 | Rake $0.50
Board [3s 3h 5h 9c 4d]
Plaats 1: lvanhoe (button) (small blind) gooide weg [7h 3c 5c Qc]
Plaats 2: Palyonmes (big blind) toonde [9d 2s 4h 3d] en won ($1978.50) met een full house, Drieën over Negens

Last email from Stars, probably pointless to keep asking them for a reason:

Imo this roughly translates to: We can't provide a reason so we invented this clause to still be able to ban people without ever having to tell that person why.

They're just not that in to you. Move on.

"Find the Poker Star in you!" @ PokerStars, and once you do, you'll be banned. Well, this is the case for online poker in general, once you get good, poker sites will start making your life hard.

Whats up with all the hate?


I think that stars thinks you deal in drugs.

X-posted accidentaly PLO thread, but meant here:

What kind of DB? Your friend is dataminer?

Conspirancy theory:
OP is related with some datamine or similar business(es), and now PokerStars found a good reason to remove him from the game.

Thats why no exact reasons from PokerStars because company cannot say: Hey, we ban you, because you are related with site XXX.com.

I have a lot of HU friends and i asked them if anyone had hands in their db on these accounts. This is what someone came up with. I have no clue as to where he has gotten those hands from, nor do i want to know. I was accused of these accounts playing just me - well, they did not, they played an other player as well, for 7 hands on 3/6.

I don't know about the risk assessment stuff. I don't think they would just ban you for being good/winning player. I mean look at all the crushers hu crushers crushing as usual and not getting banned.

I know one thing, if I ever get good enough to play high stakes heads up and own all the fish. I will certainly be mixing in some six max games and some tournaments, finding ways to pay a little bit of it back in rake just to be safe.

fyp

I liked that pokerstars replied but we still need more clarification...

pokerstars need to post again in this thread....

cause people are throwing out the idea that if your big winner pokerstars may decide to ban you from there site eventually.

I want too know that that is not the case at all here!

It was just my guess.

I don't know why PokerStars banned you but at the same time I don't have any reason believe that PokerStars made a wrong decision. I can't recall a thread where PokerStars banned player without a strong reason.

Personally your case looks like these five players wasn't a real reason, it was just an excuse. Otherwise PokerStars would give out some more information: chipdumping, collusion, illegal software etc. or/and they would confiscate your funds.

Even if you know that you are related with something shady which is not directly against PokerStars TOS but bad for PokerStars business model (e.g. owning poker-bot site, datamining site, anti-pokerstars site whatever), then obviously you are not telling us, atleast in public forum. Also PokerStars can't say that in public too (forums, e-mails, etc) because it would be bad for their business.

I am sorry to say, but your arguments and words are weaker than PokerStars. Loyal customer dosen't mean that you have always right. And I am 100% sure that if you did something what looks shady but it was just a coincidence or you were wrong time in wrong place, then PokerStars wouldn't ban you.

IMO without a new information further discussion is pointless. PokerStars is proven over the years as fair judge. So you need to prove that they are wrong, but looks like your chances are close to zero, even if you go to the court.

New information should come from PokerStars. As long as they won't/can't give that, their reputation won't help them in this case.

And how can he proof they're wrong if he doesn't even know on what ground he has been banned.

They've already told you that you're not going to get it.

You already know that. Unless you think they're lying about not being able to say more due to regulation, or you think there's actually a regulation that prevents them from saying he's booted for being a winner.

He can't, and it seems that Stars is fine with that.

They dont need proof. They decided the site is better without him than with him and exercised their right as a private company to refuse him service. If theyd taken his money or something that'd be a different story.

Obv the thought that people can get banned wo a clearly proved breaking of rules is scary but this has been looked into by some of the top people at Stars and theyve come to a decision. It seems like most people ITT are siding with a company that has a solid history of not taking unfair actions over a player who bumhunts and has admitted to breaking rules on other sites to gain/keep an advantage.

My guess is him playing against those random accounts triggered a security check and during that check and a fresh overview of his account history they decided they didnt want him on the site.

Guys this is really simple it's this ^^^^^^^^^^^^

If PokerStars really banned OP because of his winrate, that it is a very, very serious development.

Someone should link this topic with some cliffs in NVG.

Not correct. If there was a slimmer of doubt they would keep the account open (or suspend it for a period of time with notice given) and confiscate the money in question won from these suspect accounts.

*

Edit/MH: glimmer