maybe i share something about this by pm with you after i can be sure about who you are, by saying your stars nick for me at least, otherwise i won't.

yeah that's true, but in zoom none/very few of those accounts does answer.

point of that n.1 screenshot is that he did go on my trap and busted himself by anwering in that chat, i called seregax at the table, i did not mentonie his nick. even only that proves pretty good that there's botting/whatever it is, going on.

If you're talking about my Stars SN it has been public since 2010 and is quite easy to discern from my 2p2 name, just type in kingof in HEM and I will be the player you have by far the most hands on that matches that string. I play in those games quite frequently and if there is any suspected wrong doing I would like to know the suspected players involved so that I can do my own research into the matter.

It would be one of the most naive things of all time if you believed Pokerstars put a stop to the botting situation that was already proven BY THE PLAYERS to have been taking place


There is probably a 99.9% chance they are still playing in these games. Why wouldn't they?? If they were crushing for so long and all the top winners at 1/2 with so many diff accounts, there is nothing to stop them from doing it again.

It kind of is what it is basically, it is better to be on notice that bots/colluding is existing and then figure out a way to combat it than to assume it isn't taking place at all. You don't want to go overboard and think every single spot/situation is something happening but if certain players have unusual tendencies that the best players at your games don't have, take a note and proceed with caution against that opponent. There are different things you can do to bot check against a specific opponent if you think outside the box enough on it.

I would approach all my Bovada 10/20 sessions assuming everyone was working together and then figure out a gameplan to try to beat that if so. You can realize pretty quickly what most people are doing and then adjust your strategy from that point.

im playin normal 100-200 tables, and z200 atm, the botter does not play my tables at all, he quited instantly many accounts from 100-200 when i came online and sat at tables. hes playin only plo100 with 2 tight accounts at normal tables, and plo400-1k with 4accounts, and hes on the waitinglist to plo2k ante with 2 accounts(in a row at long waitinglist) too. pretty clear thats not just a coincidence. he also quited many accounts instantly from z200, and left there with 2.

same quitting thing have happened for a few days now, after he have mentonied about this things to him, like on that screenshot.

e. 2 tight "botter" accounts appeared again to waitinglist in 2k ante, in a row obv. those 2 are not from russia or ukraine.

they do play some spots same way all,(wont say it here what, to make sure they dont adjust that) but you can find prettymuch nothing arlaming from their stats, and there's a lot of differences in postflop stats too. making notes, adding tags, or stuff like that are prettymuch only way to find even a littlebit edge vs them/make your lossrate smaller against them.

and yeah, games are still beatable. but im pretty sure that first number on that wr would be 2 instead of 1 without those colluding accounts. n1 thing is that the games will die very fast because those accounts.

and games are still beatable, here's a tiny brag about that, just to prove this stuff here is not about just some random tilting from a fishreg.

Nice graph! You can thank it for your Hud!

You should be more clear about what you are actually accusing the suspected players of, based on your PMs if there was a spectrum with Fedor/seregax/4som single player per table botting on one side and collusion/soft play between multiple players on the other end, what you are claiming would fall on the latter side of things. When I responded to your PM I was only offering my insights into whether or not I felt the players were likely botting. Now that I know that you are talking about something quite different than what I had originally thought I would say that the first 3 or 4 players on the list I provided are somewhere between maybe and likely doing something team-orientated against the TOS and the bottom 2 perhaps only with each other with no overlap between the two groups. I still feel that given the playing history of the player at the very bottom of the list that the only thing he could be doing wrong is soft play.

Seaking is right.
A) Be more specific or
B) share some data we can work with.
Otherwise it is going to be impossible to prove anything shady. How do you know, that it is the same guy operating the accounts?

I'm not saying you are wrong here, but last time we investigated bots, you came up with lot of suggested accounts that turned out to be regular players (including a friend of mine ).

As for integrity I'll give you my SN in pm, however I think it's kind of irrelevant based on my involvement in the last 3 bot-cases.

The botter location is still Russia or other eastern european countries ?

I guess they went smarter but not too far so i expect them to be euro/asia

He didn't PM me any names but just listed the countries of the players at the time who were sitting and playing who he suspected of breaking the TOS, since the only country named that had > 1 player playing was Russia it was easy to see who the players from the other countries were with no guesswork. I looked through my database/online for any information that might stand out as something suspicious and replied with this:

This was just in regards to them being bots i.e. players who wouldn't need 100% real-time biological sensory input and motor output. From what I had gathered from Pasta's posts he wasn't referring to collusion so I didn't address that nor did I have enough data in my current database to notice anything that would seem out of the ordinary at a high enough frequency to be relevant, not to mention that most of the times that knowledge of dead cards would be most impactful would be in pots that didn't reach showdown, analysis on these types of hands can only begin to be done by the people with access to all holecard information which would be restricted to people who work at PokerStars HQ afaik. I haven't seen any blatant collusion in a while e.g. pot SQ raise post flop and fold getting like 3:1 after the player in the middle folds on JT4ss type stuff

i could have understood your pm kinda wrong at first then, but there was for example most suspected nick on your no-bots on list by ppl who i have pm/mail/chatted in skype for me, you made it pretty quick also. all the reasons you explained have absolutely nothing to do with that if account is a botter/colluder/whatever it is.

it is possible im not talking about different thing than you, your kind of way to think and trying to find something out, is just way too narrow. you should keep all the opinions open because there's not a bot insted of human behind the bots/whatever they are, and no one knows how they exactly do it.

e. and one of nicks you got there, no one have ever suspected that 6600 mtts played for example.

e2. and imo that passive/pseudo reg is at least as good player as you for example.

i'll share some data with you and prolly few others later today, and i still would like to hear your stars nick by pm before that. i became father less than month ago, so for example i sleep atm only when i can, not when i want, so forgive me if my replies does not come instant there or anywhere overall.

That is not my list of accounts I think are suspicious, but merely a list of all players who match the parameters you set which was limited to the countries you said had suspicious accounts playing. My own list of potentially suspicious accounts would have only included the first 3 names on the last and the bottom 3 left off entirely.

Don't forget that you mentioned multiple times in the other thread that you suspected MDU of being a bot. I think you are casting your net a bit too far this time as well. ~

just once, years ago, and i instantly apoligised about that.

I think you'd just make yourself to look suspicious, if i'd have to say someone who's behind all of those. but it is just too likely you're just a nit who's brain is working same way as greenpeace activists mind, so i'll still leave your nick out of possible suspects for the time being.

ukraine, belarus, russia, romania, japan, argentina, poland, very likely i forgot at least 2 coz im not at gaming computer atm, i'll check later if necessary.

I know most of polish plo community so if you want i can confirm some accounts

ive messaged few regulars now already, also trying to reach schwein, so i'll wait their response now at first, before i or they will say any nicks for public.

ppl who have asked by pm/skype or mail about suspicious nicks for them, all does have a good hunch, and they all 're hitting right like 9/10 ratio except seaking. i still have confirmed 0, because it would just be too risky for me. that's why i wont ask about polish nicks yet also.

i'll also check and do some data stuff about their game too now, it will take a while. i'll browse handhistories one by one if necessary, wich would take loooong time, but i can proof something like that at least for sure, because they all do same things against few kind of plays with onekind of hands at postflop for example. still trying shorter ways now at first.

Hi who is the character I remember not urub or joey a bit aggro and onparteypoker? I an aggressive.

I could tell about argen account , if you send nick obv.

just to avoid possible ****storm, i really would like to hear people starts by saying nick, instead of asking me to tell. i still don't confirm 'em to be bots for sure, but i could give some info or chat more about, if i see it would/could helpful. i won't tell any1 even/especially if some one's wrong, because it's just not wrong to be a bit over paranoid in this kind of situations, and all the people still don't understand that. all, even that kind of help would be highly appreciated.

You are missing the point, the list I provided was only of the 6 players who were playing at the time who matched the countries you said had suspicious accounts playing, not the players that I actually suspected myself whether they were from those countries or not. That list was also only comparing the relative level of suspicion between those 6 accounts of being bots, not anything related to how suspicious I was that they could potentially be colluding or anything else unrelated to being a bot or not. I felt the 1st player on the list was most likely of having some type of machine assistance and more likely than the 2nd who was more likely than 3rd down to the 6th player who I felt was the least likely. Based on a few factors (playing history, country, style of play relative to the previous banned bots) I actually felt the 6th player on the list was significantly less likely than the average account in the entire PokerStars player pool to be playing with some type of machine assistance. I never mentioned anything in regards to collusion or anything unrelated to who was most likely to be a bot. It could be the case that the 1st player on someones list is the most suspicious of being a bot and actually the least suspicious of being involved in some type of collusion as well as the inverse being the case. You did about as poor of a job as possible in your first few posts of explaining what suspicious activities you felt the suspected accounts were engaging in recently and I am not the only person who felt this way either.

If you want to know if it is snowing or not outside you don't ask someone "What is the temperature like compared to yesterday?" And when they reply "It's about 5 degrees colder" you look outside, see that it is snowing, and reply "No, you're wrong, it is snowing."



Like I said earlier ITT, in regards to collusion there might be something going on between the Eastern Europe accounts AND the two Japanese accounts in isolation, but I felt the probability of the latter was near 0% and an even lesser probability that the Eastern Europe accounts were working with both of the Japanese accounts. As an example, if you had these 5 accounts:

Japan1 (account I feel is 100% legit)
Japan2
Europe1
Europe2
Europe3

J1 and J2 are specific players, E1 - E3 are not and should only be thought of as 3 potentially suspicious accounts registered somewhere in Europe. If J2 is doing nothing wrong, based on my assumptions that J1 is 100% legit as well, there can be no isolated collusion between the Japanese players as well as no cross over collusion involving both geographically separate locations. I can't say this is 100% the case but I am personally much less suspicious of Japanese accounts than those in Eastern Europe for the obvious reasons. This would presumably leave the potential pairings from most likely to least likely as:

1) Some combination of E1, E2, E3 (any of the 3 potential combos or the single instance of all 3 working together)
2) J2 with Some combination of E1, E2, E3 (J2 paired with at least one member of E1 - E3)
3) J2 with J1
4) J1 and some combination of E1, E2, E3
5) Both J1 and J2 and some combination of E1, E2, E3

With some collusion between European accounts being the most likely scenario and the least likely scenario that both Japanese accounts are involved in cross-continental collusion with at least 1 European account. It should be noted that Pastafiore has not explicitly stated that both Japanese accounts were suspicious, just the 2 happened to be playing at the same table together after he named Japan as the country of origin of some of the suspicious accounts so this could mean only one or that he was suspicious of both accounts that were playing. The Japanese PLO player pool is very small and I can name on one hand the PLO "regs" with a Japanese location at .5/1+ so there is close to 0 possibility he was referring to an account other than one of two who were playing at the time. Also the Japanese reg Kj***a who wins at 500z+ is not J1 or J2, that should be obvious but felt it should be clarified as well.

Pastafiore, I hope this clear it up, in the future please do not say I am wrong on topics that you do not actually know my opinion or view on. Perhaps I am not the best judge of what is going on this those games as my recent play has mostly been at zoom with my top 3 most played limits being 100z, 500z, and 200z with 200reg being a distant 4th. The times I have played the 100 - 1K regular tables recently I did very well and didn't notice anything that would stand out as incredibly suspicious. You are probably going a least a tad too wide with your accusations to which you already stated you have 0 proof and only circumstantial evidence you have not shared, at least not publicly.

Pasta, if you come up with some data or results pls record it in a video, because I wanna jerk off to your English accent, thx

that's really pathetic you're understanding my message wrong there on purpose, you know what i mean by that when i wrote your "suspects" was wrong even if you did not have own suspects, every1 can read that from there. this stuff is frustraiting enough already, so pls grow up.

you were "comparing" accounts by absolutely meaningless things about that are they bots, and it suggests to me only about that you have really narrow wiew, and don't know what you're talking looking for/arguing about. you wrote that message in few minutes also, wich is suggesting only about that you just want to prove me wrong for some unknown reason. or could that reasone be that because i have told you in table chat to stop crying to funplayers because it's super stupid and pathetic/that you should learn play your self before teaching your father to **** in table chat?



those things have still absolutely nothing to do with that if someone is a bot or not, and you gotta think me at least braindead if you think i haven't checked those out already before i post here.

yeah, only all the players have mentonied that nick is really suspicious, who have pm'd me nicks who are suspicious for them, inclouding one highstakes reg and few regs at skype also.


why i have got way better results sofar than i expected, we're running like 100bb/100 above EV in this case atm. and i really would like to hear that why n.1 nick on that list is more suspicious? is he russian and that's why, or? i dont remember his country and not going to change computer to check out that now.


yeah, i'm a male.


it is pretty sure thing you felt the propablity wrong by ~99%.

i'm not sure did i even understand all what youre trying to say there, but pretty much nothings' there even close right, if you're not trying to say that japanese accounts cant do collosion or anything like that with accounts from other countries, but other countries still can do between theirselves? if it is like that, why?

kind of did, but not the way you propably wanted. and i did know your view, wich was really narrow view, and ill-advised view wrong understood on purpose at public, and done in few minutes. after you've shared PM (there's a reason for that why those are Private messages) here, you dont have any kind of authorization to come here and ask me to not say you're wrong. thats really pathetic.

Perhaps I am not the best judge of what is going on this those games as my recent play has mostly been at zoom with my top 3 most played limits being 100z, 500z, and 200z with 200reg being a distant 4th. The times I have played the 100 - 1K regular tables recently I did very well and didn't notice anything that would stand out as incredibly suspicious. You are probably going a least a tad too wide with your accusations to which you already stated you have 0 proof and only circumstantial evidence you have not shared, at least not publicly.[/QUOTE]

yeah, as joey said for example, it's only ~99% sure that there's something happening, forgive me if i'm trying to do somethign for that, and asking for help, and i do have also some proof i haven't showed yet here for a reason wich is ppl like you for example, and tell me please, why this screenshot does not prove at least 99% sure that there's something going on? if it does, how can i go to 100%? or just shut up n stop trying to sabotage this on purpose/because that you dont like me as a person. i'm pretty sure most of regs who comment here, does not like me, but they still can behave in this kind of things.

you're that silly maybe i do.