Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > > >

Notices

Lock Poker Support forum for LockPoker.com

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-06-2013, 03:07 AM   #1
Kilowatt
banned
 
Kilowatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,101
Lock Shady Practices 101

Lock Poker Shadiness 101

Recently we have been treated to "explanations" from several Lock Pros, all of whom have displayed a shocking degree of ignorance regarding both the recent and long-term shadiness of their company. We keep hearing that they trust CEO Jennifer Larson and that they believe everything will end up okay. We keep hearing excuses as to why the current cashout fiasco is occurring, and why it should get better very soon. We keep hearing that we are being over-speculative by stating that Lock is likely broke.

Understandably, this gets all of Lock's victims (and interested observers) very angry, as they know otherwise. It is highly frustrating to be not only cheated by a shady company, but to get nonsensical and uninformed answers back from its employees.

Therefore, I have written this handy guide where all Lock Pros (and any other Lock apologists) can refer when they are trying to understand this situation.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------


The 2013 Cashout Cancellations

What Happened: A large number of people found their Lock cashouts canceled, many of which occurred months after being approved and supposedly in processing. Almost all of these cancellations came with an excuse from Lock that the cancellations were related to chip transfers they received at some point.

Lock's Answer: Lock first claimed that these players received transfers and immediately tried to cash them out without playing. It was said at one point by 2+2 Lock rep Shane that all transfers require a 1:1 playthrough. When these players insisted (apparently truthfully) that they easily met playthrough requirements, a new story was peddled that there is some sort of nefarious cashout ring, where certain people are buying up Lock funds on the cheap (through Twoplustwo's trading thread) and then using "priority" affiliate accounts to cash them out. Supposedly affiliate accounts have priority to cash out much more quickly than regular players (which is wrong and unfair itself.) Lock claims that some affiliates were abusing this priority, and that the canceled cashouts were a result of being connected to these accounts abusing the system.

Why Lock's Answer is BS: Most of the players with canceled cashouts are longtime grinders, and almost none of them have these affiliate accounts. Many of the players have never received a Lock transfer. Lock has provided zero evidence of this supposed affiliate cashout scheme ever occurring. It has been more than two weeks, and Lock has done nothing to correct these bogus cashout cancellations, even though it would take about 5 minutes to verify for each account that they were not involved with anything shady. In addition, it would be very easy for Lock to prevent this supposed "affiliate cashout scheme" by either making everyone's cashout the same priority or just scrutinizing cashouts by affiliates and leaving everyone else alone. I could literally teach a 9-year-old to look at an account's history and easily be able to tell which were "abusing" transfers and which were legitimate players. The fact that this still hasn't been rectified after more than two weeks is evidence that this is a cashout stalling tactic by Lock, rather than any attempt to stop supposed abuse of their system.



Lock's Super-Slow Non-US Cashouts

What Happened: While it is acknowledged that US cashouts are very slow due to interference by the US Department of Justice, non-US (also known as RoW) cashouts are not affected by this. This is because financial transactions between Lock and non-US players are not illegal. Therefore, all other large and medium-sized networks are cashing out non-US players quickly. Lock's non-US cashouts are taking more than 4 months. This makes no sense, as the large delay in US cashouts is due to their illegality. Since there is no illegality involved in non-US cashouts, they should complete within hours or days, NOT months.

Lock's Answer: The affiliate cashout scheme referenced above caused a large number of cashouts to be processed through Skrill (the most common cashout method for non-US players), and this maxed out Lock's Skrill cashout limits, thus creating a large cashout backlog. Lock claims they have since put a stop to this affiliate cashout scheme, thus causing the backlog to clear up, and Skrill cashouts should be back to normal by June.

Why Locks' Answer is BS: In addition to the fact that Lock has provided no evidence that this affiliate cashout scheme really occurred, all cashout methods have been slow, not just ones through Skrill. Lock cannot explain why they can't send quick Western Union payments or quick checks to non-US players. They have also provided no evidence that they have actually reached Skrill's cashout limit. We are just supposed to believe this excuse. Even if the Skrill excuse is true, it does not explain why ALL non-US cashouts are ridiculously slow, and why none have been processed in the past month. The likely answer is that Lock is broke, and that all of their stories are fabricated.



Lock's Lack of Solvency

What Happened: Lock's recent actions (segregating players from the rest of the network, slow payouts, cashout cancellations, non-payment of skins) strongly suggest that they are broke, and that they stole all of the player money. Many have demanded proof that Lock is not broke, by way of an audit from an accredited, respected third-party accounting firm. Lock is refusing to do this.

Lock's Answer: Lock says that their status as a US-facing room puts their bank accounts at risk, and that the location of their money must be a well-kept secret in order to prevent seizures by the US Department of Justice. Therefore, an audit cannot be done, as the auditing firm could somehow leak the location of their bank accounts, and the US will seize them all, thus causing the loss of all player money.

Why Lock's Answer is BS: There are a few major problems with Lock's excuse. First off, respectable auditing firms take confidentiality extremely seriously. If such a leak occurred, it would destroy the well-cultivated reputation of these auditing firms, so such a leak would never happen. Second, the US DOJ has always held the position that they are not interested in seizing player money. In every case of seizure of poker site money (dating all the way back to the 2007 Neteller seizures), the US DOJ has refunded it to players (or allowed the company to do so) after learning that it was player money. Thus, Lock is not protecting the players from anything. Finally, even if there was a tiny chance that a leak could occur and the DOJ would seize the money, that risk pales in comparison to the risk Lock is taking to their business by allowing widespread speculation (and belief) that they are broke. Therefore, if this audit could assuage everyone's fears about Lock and bring the site back to respectability, Lock would do it in a second, even if it did carry a little risk (which it does not). In reality, Lock refuses to do this because they are broke, and an audit would prove that.



The Sun Will Come Out Tomorrow

Lock's Statement: Jennifer Larson told Lock Pros that everything with the cashouts would return to normal by June -- about 4 weeks from now. The pros want us to wait and see if this happens before we complain further. If cashouts do improve by June, that should be enough to know that Lock is indeed on solid footing.

Why Lock's Statement is BS: Recall that Full Tilt was doing a great job processing non-US cashouts after Black Friday, despite having only about 2% of all player money on hand. Simply put, Full Tilt had stolen 98% of player funds, and was still able to operate normally and cash out people in reasonable amounts of time. Therefore, simply processing cashouts by industry standard is NOT proof of solvency. All of Lock's actions indicate they are broke. They need to prove they actually have player money. Simply returning cashouts to "normal" (after two months of not cashing anyone out) is not acceptable, nor is it indicative that Lock is healthy. It is more likely that Lock is stalling for 2 months while they collect a little money (through deposits), and will use those deposits to pay cashouts in June -- a classic case of robbing Peter to pay Paul. This is unacceptable, and without an audit, it seems likely that Lock is broke.



International Lock's European Vacation

What Happened: Lock CEO Jennifer Larson held an expensive retreat in Portual for Lock Pros in late April-early May of 2013, despite the site's massive cashout problems and likely insolvency. She rented a castle, hired an expensive UK dance act for entertainment, and engaged in all sorts of other lavish expenditures for her employees. In the meantime, many players' cashouts have been arbitrarily canceled, and nobody has received a completed cashout since April 9th.

Lock's Explanation: A large number of Lock pros were at this retreat, and all of them were under strict orders not to talk or tweet about it. Of course, given the vast number of people attending this highbrow retreat, word slipped out, and I posted about it in the Lock forum. Shane denied it and told me that I needed to get "better sources" for information, but subsequent tweets and Facebook messages proved that indeed this really occurred. None of the Lock Pros posting on 2+2 are willing to talk about this, and keep ignoring all questions about Portugal. This is despite the fact that all of these pros claim to "care" about the plight of the Lock players and the money they have stuck on the site.



Girah and Lock's Cheating Complicity

What Happened: Girah, a supposed young Portuguese poker prodigy, became a Lock Pro. In April, 2011, Lock held a contest to where the player who won the most on the site would get a great prize prackage, including a WSOP Main Event seat. A dedicated grinder, who was unaffiliated with Lock, was leading the contest going into April 30. Girah, despite a lot of grinding of his own, was WAY behind in the contest, to where he'd have to win a nearly-impossible 100k in the final day to overtake the leader. As a 5-10 NL grinder with no experience at upper limits, there was no way Girah could win the contest. However, suddenly a previously unseen player showed up on Lock with $100k, played Girah heads up, and Girah crushed him for his entire bankroll. Thanks to this last-minute bit of obvious chip-dumping, Girah "won" the contest. Lock awarded Girah the prize and did not question the EXTREMELY suspicious nature of his last-minute win, including the fact that a 5-10 grinder suddenly played an otherwise unknown opponent at super-high stakes and won 100k, just enough to rocket to the top of the leaderboard. After the subsequent outrage regarding Girah's cheating, Lock changed course and disqualified him. However, they would not explain how he was awarded the prize in the first place given the obvious cheating, and Lock eventually refused to talk about it, claiming they had a pending lawsuit against Girah.

Lock's Explanation: Girah actually legitimately won the contest, and there was no chip dumping. However, since he had shared his account briefly at one point in the contest, he was disqualified on a technicality. Here is Jennifer Larson's statement about it:

Quote:
We pride ourselves in standing for trust, legitimacy and loyalty. The truth is sometimes hard to stand by but it is the only way we can move forward. Although Josť won enough money from his own IP to have legitimately won the challenge, the unfortunate fact remains that breaking the rules is strictly disallowed. It nevertheless remains Josť is an exceptional player and I firmly believe that his mistakes only lead to greatness if he learns from them and himself moves forward.

--Jennifer Larson, Lock Poker CEO
Lock later refused to talk about this, citing a pending lawsuit against Girah.

Why Lock's Explanation is BS: Girah's partner-in-crime, the chip-dumper himself (DogIsHead, aka Haseem Qureshi) later admitted that this was exactly as it appeared -- a blatant chip-dump in order to cheat in the contest. This means that Jennifer completely lied in her press release where she claimed "Josť won enough money from his own IP to have legitimately won the challenge" -- or at least she was being intentionally misleading. Yes, Girah "won" the money from his own IP, but he "won" it all through chip dumping! Therefore, her implication that he was disqualified on a technicality (despite legitimately winning) was COMPLETELY FALSE. Nobody was ever willing to explain how such a blatant and obvious attempt at cheating a contest was ignored by everyone at Lock, and Girah was declared the winner. When pressured on this matter, Lock reps insisted that there was a lawsuit against Girah, and therefore they could not comment. Two years later, nobody can find any evidence of such a lawsuit, nor will Lock present any. This has been completely swept under the rug.

What Really Happened: Girah and DogIsHead conspired to chip dump to win the contest. This was a last-minute decision, so the entire dump had to be done on the last day, which of course was stupid and raised huge red flags. Lock would benefit from Girah being crowned the winner of the contest (since he was their pro, and the winner was to get a big profile in BLUFF Magazine), and it was much better for business for their highly-touted poker prodigy to be profiled in BLUFF rather than just some no-name grinder. Therefore, Jennifer attempted to look the other way despite knowing the truth about the cheating, until public pressure forced her to change course. Even then, she lied about what really happened, hoping people would no longer question how Lock could have "missed" this ridiculously obvious cheating attempt.


-----------------------------

I could go on and on here with so many other Lock scandals and examples of shady behavior, but I'll stop here.

Please refer all uninformed and naive Lock Pros to this post if they show up spouting company-line idiocies.

Last edited by Mike Haven; 05-07-2013 at 02:54 PM.
Kilowatt is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 03:16 AM   #2
donkiman
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 506
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Should probably make this a Sticky
donkiman is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 03:36 AM   #3
nickj7777
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 379
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

a lock rep will be here shortly to clear everything up...........
nickj7777 is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 03:41 AM   #4
ungar2000
adept
 
ungar2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 871
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickj7777 View Post
the LOCK ness monster will be here shortly to clear everything up...........
fyp
ungar2000 is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 03:45 AM   #5
Kilowatt
banned
 
Kilowatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,101
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Crap. I just realized that this was about 8 paragraphs too long for Broseph to comprehend.

He's still learning the difference between Cypress and Cyprus, so I shouldn't be overwhelming his young mind with so much information at once.
Kilowatt is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 04:00 AM   #6
LiarsDice
old hand
 
LiarsDice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,518
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

If this is turning into a sticky...

The non-existent "new March payout options" also never transpired.

Also, I'm pretty sure I've read that the 1:1 requirements were from support too, not just imjustshamed.

I didn't want to believe much when I had a discussion w/ a moderator sometime last year about how the affiliate cut + player rewards was unsustainable but at this point it only fuels the potential ponzi scheme fiasco.

There was also the lock casino bonus thing. Damn, there really have been a lot of problems.

I'm going to use my ONE TIME right now for the 3 week deadline and hope that on my birthday, June 1st, I get a good present and Lock pulls through!
LiarsDice is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 05:02 AM   #7
Nobel1
grinder
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 659
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

After all this how could 2+2 ever put up ads for this company???

I wanted to try Lock a few month ago because of the ads here, but then luckily saw a thread title here with Lock cashout problems and decided against it...

Last edited by Mike Haven; 05-07-2013 at 02:55 PM.
Nobel1 is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 09:38 AM   #8
BEANO52
adept
 
BEANO52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Over Yonder
Posts: 942
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickj7777 View Post
a lock rep will be here shortly to clear everything up...........
By "shortly", do you mean we should just "give them a little more time" ?

*chuckkles (but actually not funny at all !)
BEANO52 is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 10:03 AM   #9
EasyMoney92
self-banned
 
EasyMoney92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Never ****ing lose
Posts: 4,956
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

What an excellent informative post. Thanks for this.

Lock indeed have a lot to answer for.
EasyMoney92 is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 10:05 AM   #10
LiveForever
banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 309
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Btw Kilowatt, their excuse about Skrill limits for RoW cashouts is hilarious. I have 'Gambler' VIP status on skrill and have unlimited deposits and withdrawals on skrill ... rofl
LiveForever is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 10:51 AM   #11
Metalguru87
banned
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 41
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by LiveForever View Post
Btw Kilowatt, their excuse about Skrill limits for RoW cashouts is hilarious. I have 'Gambler' VIP status on skrill and have unlimited deposits and withdrawals on skrill ... rofl
+1 here
Metalguru87 is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 10:56 AM   #12
Jerry_B
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 83
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Thanks for putting this together Kilowatt. It summarizes most of what's on this forum nicely. It would be worth adding the Fair Play Technology to the shady practices list, but I don't think we actually have enough information to classify it as Shady rather than just a bad idea.
Jerry_B is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 11:21 AM   #13
DonSwanLeon
journeyman
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK & Spain
Posts: 388
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilowatt View Post
Girah and Lock's Cheating Complicity
Wasn't he signed to Lock by Jim Erwood formerly of Poker Royalty who now works for Lock Poker? Maybe he has some answers?

http://twitter.com/lockpromanager
DonSwanLeon is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 12:29 PM   #14
vindictive27
journeyman
 
vindictive27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 283
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Yeah that Girah thing bothers me SO effin' much every single time I'm reminded of it. The part where Jen Larson also seems to be in on it by covering it up and wanting Girah to be the winner is so discouraging. It's just so hard to trust this company with anything, let alone money.

Always enjoy your posts Kilowatt.
vindictive27 is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 12:55 PM   #15
HaseebQ
journeyman
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: @hosseeb
Posts: 260
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Kilowatt

This is probably a bad idea to reply to this, but somebody linked me to this page re: recent events with Lock Poker. All of this is already long past and I've admitted to all of my mistakes and have no problem doing so again, but regarding the Girah scandal, some of your facts are off.

First, there was no suspicion of chipdumping or anything after the Bluff Challenge. There were no suspicions of chipdumping posted either on 2p2, or raised by Lock. The thing that got Girah indicted was Jungleman's IP logging into Girah's account at one point to play a couple of sessions (logins from the USA). Lock's security team found this out and contacted Girah, and he told them it was his backer, which was true, and that's the story that went out.

So to get facts straight: Lock *did not know* that there was a chipdump. Jungle and I did not know that the Bluff Challenge was going on. We were not intending to try to cheat the Bluff Challenge (because if we were, we wouldn't have chosen such an obvious method with which to do it), we were just trying to give him stake money because the site wouldn't let us transfer more than 10k. Jose didn't stand to get much out of winning the Bluff Challenge, because he was too young to play the WSOP (it came with a WSOP seat). When I answered to 2p2 after the wake of the Girah scandal, I explained all of this, and as far as I know, this is what most high stakes players agree happened. Girah was the only person who actually knew the Bluff Challenge was going on. Neither Jungle nor I played on Lock Poker, or paid attention to its promotions.

Lock did not know there was a chipdump because good chipdumps (i.e., patient ones) are essentially impossible to detect. Chipdumps occur all the time between good players on sites that don't allow transfers and evade detection because it's impossible to ever really say "well, no one would ever play that hand that way." So the idea that the chipdump was "obvious" and that Lock "knew it all along" isn't quite right. The chipdump was never revealed until much, much later, during the couple weeks after the Girah scandal when 2p2 began combing over Girah's entire history. The the username that I used to deposit on Lock was one related to me and Jungleman--"SamChauhan," the name of a person who both Jungle and I knew. Again, if we were trying to secretly chipdump, it would be absolutely ridiculous to choose a username that could be directly tied back to both of us, not to mention the timing, visibility, etc.

Having spoken to Jose after all of this was over, though, I do know that Lock never actually pressed a lawsuit against him, they only made threats. Part of the reason why they never did anything may be because of the inter-jurisdictional problems with trying to sue an 18 year old kid in Portugal from (wherever Lock is).

The indictment of Lock, given recent events, is more than justified. As far as I could see from my limited interactions with them via Jose, Lock was not the tightest oiled ship, so it doesn't surprise me that they got to this point. But as much as lying to players and holding cashouts is unacceptable, it's also important to make sure your facts about them are straight. In the Girah scandal, most of the blame should really be on me, Jungle, and Girah. Lock was mostly caught in the crossfire.

Haseeb

Last edited by Mike Haven; 05-07-2013 at 02:56 PM.
HaseebQ is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 01:04 PM   #16
BABY$$
banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 112
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Thought u left 2u2 and the poker world?!
BABY$$ is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 01:25 PM   #17
Acesfullofgarbage
veteran
 
Acesfullofgarbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,701
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaseebQ View Post
This is probably a bad idea to reply to this, but somebody linked me to this page re: recent events with Lock Poker. All of this is already long past and I've admitted to all of my mistakes and have no problem doing so again, but regarding the Girah scandal, some of your facts are off.

First, there was no suspicion of chipdumping or anything after the Bluff Challenge. There were no suspicions of chipdumping posted either on 2p2, or raised by Lock. The thing that got Girah indicted was Jungleman's IP logging into Girah's account at one point to play a couple of sessions (logins from the USA). Lock's security team found this out and contacted Girah, and he told them it was his backer, which was true, and that's the story that went out.

So to get facts straight: Lock *did not know* that there was a chipdump. Jungle and I did not know that the Bluff Challenge was going on. We were not intending to try to cheat the Bluff Challenge (because if we were, we wouldn't have chosen such an obvious method with which to do it), we were just trying to give him stake money because the site wouldn't let us transfer more than 10k. Jose didn't stand to get much out of winning the Bluff Challenge, because he was too young to play the WSOP (it came with a WSOP seat). When I answered to 2p2 after the wake of the Girah scandal, I explained all of this, and as far as I know, this is what most high stakes players agree happened. Girah was the only person who actually knew the Bluff Challenge was going on. Neither Jungle nor I played on Lock Poker, or paid attention to its promotions.

Lock did not know there was a chipdump because good chipdumps (i.e., patient ones) are essentially impossible to detect. Chipdumps occur all the time between good players on sites that don't allow transfers and evade detection because it's impossible to ever really say "well, no one would ever play that hand that way." So the idea that the chipdump was "obvious" and that Lock "knew it all along" isn't quite right. The chipdump was never revealed until much, much later, during the couple weeks after the Girah scandal when 2p2 began combing over Girah's entire history. The the username that I used to deposit on Lock was one related to me and Jungleman--"SamChauhan," the name of a person who both Jungle and I knew. Again, if we were trying to secretly chipdump, it would be absolutely ridiculous to choose a username that could be directly tied back to both of us, not to mention the timing, visibility, etc.

Having spoken to Jose after all of this was over, though, I do know that Lock never actually pressed a lawsuit against him, they only made threats. Part of the reason why they never did anything may be because of the inter-jurisdictional problems with trying to sue an 18 year old kid in Portugal from (wherever Lock is).

The indictment of Lock, given recent events, is more than justified. As far as I could see from my limited interactions with them via Jose, Lock was not the tightest oiled ship, so it doesn't surprise me that they got to this point. But as much as lying to players and holding cashouts is unacceptable, it's also important to make sure your facts about them are straight. In the Girah scandal, most of the blame should really be on me, Jungle, and Girah. Lock was mostly caught in the crossfire.

Haseeb
goddamn dude seriously? you wanted to transfer him a large amount of money for a stake and it JUST HAPPENED to be the same day as the last day of a contest where the overall winner for the month on cash games on Lock would get a ME seat, bluff player profile, and whatever other bull**** they were giving away for the contest? You realize how ****ing ridiculous that sounds? Oh wait you're completely delusional and don't care

Fact is if Lock missed the fact that it was chip dump they are massively incompetent and if they knew about teh chip dump they are massively complicit. Either way dude, **** off and write some more F. Scott Fitzgerald blogs about how you are searching for some deep meaning in your life
Acesfullofgarbage is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 01:34 PM   #18
HaseebQ
journeyman
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: @hosseeb
Posts: 260
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acesfullofgarbage View Post
goddamn dude seriously? you wanted to transfer him a large amount of money for a stake and it JUST HAPPENED to be the same day as the last day of a contest where the overall winner for the month on cash games on Lock would get a ME seat, bluff player profile, and whatever other bull**** they were giving away for the contest? You realize how ****ing ridiculous that sounds? Oh wait you're completely delusional and don't care
Sorry, I didn't clarify well enough. It didn't *just happen* to be on the same day. Jose probably encouraged us to dump to him that day (we had been procrastinating on depositing and dumping to him, because we were quite lazy and dealing with post-BF fallout) because he knew the Bluff Challenge was going on and wanted to win it. I'm saying that Jungle and I didn't know about the Bluff Challenge. If we did, we wouldn't've created a username that was directly tied to us, done it on the last day, done it at high stakes, or, more likely, done it at all and risk losing that 100k. Nobody wants to dump 100k in front of a ton of scrutiny and risk getting it confiscated. Girah winning the cover of an issue of Bluff (remember, he was already getting a lot of media attention) was not worth nearly that amount of money to us. We're poker players, we weren't going to take a risk like that for such a small potential payoff.

And yes, good chip dumps are *very, very* hard to detect. Any high stakes player will tell you this. Sloppy chip dumps or chip dumps done by bad players are easy to detect. Good ones are nearly impossible. The circumstances made it fishy, but the *only* proof that after tons of scrutiny made it clear that it was a chipdump was the username.

And like I said before, Girah was ineligible for the ME seat because he was 18. The only thing on the line was a Bluff cover.

I understand you dislike me. I'm sorry. I'll try not to reply anymore than this.

Haseeb
HaseebQ is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 01:37 PM   #19
jalexand42
Hypothetical Ubermonkey
 
jalexand42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Open Shoving My Range
Posts: 5,244
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilowatt View Post
Second, the US DOJ has always held the position that they are not interested in seizing player money. In every case of seizure of poker site money (dating all the way back to the 2007 Neteller seizures), the US DOJ has refunded it to players (or allowed the company to do so) after learning that it was player money.
lol.
jalexand42 is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 01:40 PM   #20
Scoot961
newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 36
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

This is probably a bad idea to reply to this
^^^^^^^^^^
You're probably right. No matter if your information is good or bad, there's too many people with their minds made up and not willing to listen.

Everyone playing on line in the US is in a bad position with their on line dollars.. I have money on the old FTP, and have stopped playing on Lock since seeing all the information on 2+2.

Bovada was OK, but the table change turned me off..

Hopefully the US can get things in line to regulate on line poker, and get everyone back here playing. Never thought I'd be saying I wanted to the government to get something straightened out...
Scoot961 is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 02:02 PM   #21
TheG0ldenJ3w
journeyman
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 283
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Thanks Kill... Very well done
TheG0ldenJ3w is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 02:56 PM   #22
SGT RJ
Twitching
 
SGT RJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: @oldladygamer444
Posts: 48,193
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Guess that entire leaving the poker world for good was a lie. Also pretty sure everyone called that a year and a half ago.

Honestly, you cannot win here. Even if you are telling the truth, the way you all handled the entire scandal was so poor that you cannot be trusted. You lost that right, and you've done nothing to earn it back.

So you're right, you should probably not bother unless you intend to get back into poker seriously.
SGT RJ is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 03:41 PM   #23
Kilowatt
banned
 
Kilowatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,101
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by jalexand42 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilowatt
Second, the US DOJ has always held the position that they are not interested in seizing player money. In every case of seizure of poker site money (dating all the way back to the 2007 Neteller seizures), the US DOJ has refunded it to players (or allowed the company to do so) after learning that it was player money.
lol.
Really?

Name one poker site or e-wallet site where the DOJ seized funds, realized it was player money, and still kept it.

Don't say "Full Tilt" because there was almost no money to seize, and players are going to be paid back (albeit ridiculously slowly).
Kilowatt is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 03:52 PM   #24
vindictive27
journeyman
 
vindictive27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 283
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaseebQ View Post

I understand you dislike me. I'm sorry. I'll try not to reply anymore than this.

Haseeb
This. You will get nowhere here. Your involvement will standout far greater than anything you could possibly have to say. It must have also been coincidence that this was the day you and Jungle "finally" decided to chip dump right? Neither of you were too busy to do it that day and offered to get him the money the next day right? So when Girah asked you to definitely chip dump ON THAT EXACT DAY, neither of you thought it was weird at how URGENT it must have seemed? Whatever helps you fall asleep at night dude. Oh and Lock's ignorance means they're innocent right? Go suck on some nuts, you sound about as honest as Lock Poker right about now.
vindictive27 is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 03:58 PM   #25
Kilowatt
banned
 
Kilowatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,101
Re: Lock Shady Practices 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaseebQ View Post
This is probably a bad idea to reply to this, but somebody linked me to this page re: recent events with Lock Poker. All of this is already long past and I've admitted to all of my mistakes and have no problem doing so again, but regarding the Girah scandal, some of your facts are off.

First, there was no suspicion of chipdumping or anything after the Bluff Challenge. There were no suspicions of chipdumping posted either on 2p2, or raised by Lock. The thing that got Girah indicted was Jungleman's IP logging into Girah's account at one point to play a couple of sessions (logins from the USA). Lock's security team found this out and contacted Girah, and he told them it was his backer, which was true, and that's the story that went out.

So to get facts straight: Lock *did not know* that there was a chipdump. Jungle and I did not know that the Bluff Challenge was going on. We were not intending to try to cheat the Bluff Challenge (because if we were, we wouldn't have chosen such an obvious method with which to do it), we were just trying to give him stake money because the site wouldn't let us transfer more than 10k. Jose didn't stand to get much out of winning the Bluff Challenge, because he was too young to play the WSOP (it came with a WSOP seat). When I answered to 2p2 after the wake of the Girah scandal, I explained all of this, and as far as I know, this is what most high stakes players agree happened. Girah was the only person who actually knew the Bluff Challenge was going on. Neither Jungle nor I played on Lock Poker, or paid attention to its promotions.

Lock did not know there was a chipdump because good chipdumps (i.e., patient ones) are essentially impossible to detect. Chipdumps occur all the time between good players on sites that don't allow transfers and evade detection because it's impossible to ever really say "well, no one would ever play that hand that way." So the idea that the chipdump was "obvious" and that Lock "knew it all along" isn't quite right. The chipdump was never revealed until much, much later, during the couple weeks after the Girah scandal when 2p2 began combing over Girah's entire history. The the username that I used to deposit on Lock was one related to me and Jungleman--"SamChauhan," the name of a person who both Jungle and I knew. Again, if we were trying to secretly chipdump, it would be absolutely ridiculous to choose a username that could be directly tied back to both of us, not to mention the timing, visibility, etc.

Having spoken to Jose after all of this was over, though, I do know that Lock never actually pressed a lawsuit against him, they only made threats. Part of the reason why they never did anything may be because of the inter-jurisdictional problems with trying to sue an 18 year old kid in Portugal from (wherever Lock is).

The indictment of Lock, given recent events, is more than justified. As far as I could see from my limited interactions with them via Jose, Lock was not the tightest oiled ship, so it doesn't surprise me that they got to this point. But as much as lying to players and holding cashouts is unacceptable, it's also important to make sure your facts about them are straight. In the Girah scandal, most of the blame should really be on me, Jungle, and Girah. Lock was mostly caught in the crossfire.

Haseeb

This post is absolutely ludicrous for so many reasons.

Haseeb, you are undoubtedly a smart guy, but the problem with many smart guys (especially young ones) is that they believe that nobody else is nearly as smart as they are. You tried to fool everyone with your "Girah" puppet identity, and you got caught. Now you're back out here bragging about your oh-so-clever chip dump that couldn't have possibly drawn the attention of a competent security department:

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaseebQ
Lock did not know there was a chipdump because good chipdumps (i.e., patient ones) are essentially impossible to detect. Chipdumps occur all the time between good players on sites that don't allow transfers and evade detection because it's impossible to ever really say "well, no one would ever play that hand that way." So the idea that the chipdump was "obvious" and that Lock "knew it all along" isn't quite right.
You are so naive regarding what is indicative of a chipdump, it's actually comical.

Let me explain it to you.

A chip dump is obvious more by circumstance than by the actual hands played.

If a risk-averse grinder who multitables 5-10 NL for months suddenly sits at high-stakes, heads-up PLO with an otherwise unknown account, it's almost surely a chip dump. It doesn't matter if the hands themselves look convincing. When a player suddenly steps way outside his limits and usual game and wins a staggering sum of money -- especially from a new or inactive account -- it's almost always a chip dump.

When the above occurs on the final day of a contest to win the most money in a period of time, it's DEFINITELY a chip dump.

When the above occurs and the amount won just barely puts the player ahead of the current leader of the contest, it's DEFINITELY DEFINITELY a chip dump.

Only a complete moron would not realize exactly what happened here.

The fact that you are still patting yourself on the back for getting this by the crack Lock security team and "blaming yourselves" for this brilliant scheme, rather than also including Lock for being clearly complicit, is beyond laughable.

Furthermore, you claim that it was you logging into Girah's account that got you caught:

Quote:
Originally Posted by HassebQ
There were no suspicions of chipdumping posted either on 2p2, or raised by Lock. The thing that got Girah indicted was Jungleman's IP logging into Girah's account at one point to play a couple of sessions (logins from the USA). Lock's security team found this out and contacted Girah, and he told them it was his backer, which was true, and that's the story that went out.
Wrong. It was the immediate outrage from the online poker community -- both on here and my forum -- that got the ball rolling to shame Lock into disqualifying Girah. Lock announced Girah as the winner, an observant person cried foul, and it snowballed from there.

After the pressure became too much, Lock used the lame technicality you described above -- that you logged into his account and played a few hands -- to disqualify him. Read Jennifer's quote. She said that Girah won enough money "on his own IP", but that he was disqualified for letting someone else (you) play a little on the account.

That's not why he was disqualified. The disqualification only occurred after this obvious chipdump was discussed on several forums, and Lock realized that continuing to award Girah the prize would backfire at that point.

Haseeb, you are not nearly as clever as you think you are, and that was your downfall.

Apparently you haven't learned much in your supposed exit from poker/2+2 to find yourself.

Keep searching.
Kilowatt is offline  

 
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online