the whole thing is just odd

y not just study and win money at poker??? its not that hard

seems like al this colluding/planning/trading $

is a lot more work than its worth

idk... glad I chose to study and learn how to win

OP used to be logged in on 2+2 all the time reading the WPN section but vanished from doing that too. If had to guess that only means he is viewing the thread as a guest now.

saw maxsimpson10 playing still...he's the guy that did the most obvious collusion we've seen yet (both jimmy and i posted several hands from them and i sent support an email with each individual HH#) if they can't stop can't stop these guys we should all just give up and accept cheating as part of the site.

A few days ago I was playing a DON on another site. I was on the bubble in the small blind with only about 600 chips. The button raised enough to put me all-in. I called. Then the Big Blind who only had a little over 2000 chips went all in forcing the button to fold. The BB only had J7o. I tripled up and ended up winning.

From your perspective that would be an indisputable act of collusion. And if the site didn't do anything about that they would be permitting collusion. The problem is, is that I wasn't colluding. That hand was just one of the many many crazy hands that I've seen players play in DONs. DONs attract really bad players. That's why we love them.

It takes more than individual examples of what you see as collusion to prove collusion.

Maxsimpson seems to be a horrible player. Posting a few bizarre hands that a terrible player has played doesn't prove much of anything. You've clearly made up your mind about maxsimpson just as you've made up your mind that if WPN doesn't see it your way that they are accepting collusion. WPN has a lot more info on these players than do you; I think that you just need to trust WPN's judgement, whatever that judgement is.

The most obvious collusion we've seen yet? don't put words in our mouths, the hands posted in this thread are pretty meh as far as evidence.

Just so your memory is refreshed so you can see the blatant collusion you're defending. If you read these HH's and believe everything is 100% on the level there is no hope and I might as well be talking to walls. If using the hands people play to determine collusion is not enough could you please provide me with a real world example of what collusion is and how you determined it was collusion? By the standards you are setting I might as well start cheating since it's obviously more profitable and there are zero consequence and a train of guys willing to go to bat for me even when I'm caught.

Seriously? No semi intelligent person can look at those hands and say they arent working together. It isnt a few hands, its 13 hands. And its 13 hands from only two players. For you two to honesntly claim these hands dont prove anything, means one of three things is going on here. Either:

1. You guys have no idea what cheating and collusion are.

or

2. You guys are in on it and are passively trying to defend it.

or

3. You guys are just trolling

Ill give you guys the benefit of the doubt and say you are just trolling, so I say job well done!

That's not really a fair comment to make. While I agree that it seems something is going on, all the other guys are saying is that someone should be looking into the complete hh to make a better informed decision. What is definitely unacceptable though is to have nobody from WPN responding to these accusations. Would be nice to know that it is at least being looked into.

Maybe the comment was a bit harsh, but those two guys are saying a lot more than that. They are saying it's just a few hands and there is no real evidence. I think 13 hands from just two players over just a few games is pretty good evidence. Now I have only been playing here for about a week, so take that for what you will, but I don't think these two guys have been playing together much of at all since this came up. If I'm wrong I apologize, but that is some coincidence, isn't it?

I do agree with your assessment of the situation. However I am still willing to give management a bit more time. We don't know what is going on behind the scenes so I will reserve judgement

Take it easy silly. And don't accuse me of being in on anything please. I play a lot of these DONs, and people are so freaking bad that it CONSTANTLY looks like people are cheating. All I was asking was for words not to be put in my mouth.

Evidence is hard to come by, and my definition of evidence is going to be different than others. I'm all for helping catch cheaters. I have databases with lots of hands, if WPN asked me for some proof or help, I'd oblige. Most of the posts in this thread are going to do nothing. What you need is sharkscope/database proof that they are playing too high % of games together, playing ranges of hands way differently against each other and stuff like that.

These individual hands that are being posted (and you say ITS 13 ITS 13!!!! that is extra stupid, lets see 13,000 hands of these guys playing together and see what we can piece together, 13 is as good as 1 or 0 as far as I'm concerned) I see this garbage all day everyday, seriously.

If you wanna get folks in trouble, go about it in a more serious fashion. "looky looky at this hand" is not going to cut it.

Also, in your list of why I don't care so much about these issues

4. Colluders suck and are easy to beat

5. I'm trying to help but would rather just play

I have 1000s of hands on many many many pairs of players that have played weird in DONs. In poker I wouldn't call tiny patterns coincidences, no.

It's absolutely laughable that some of those hands are considered collusion. Someone goes to the river with Ace high on a dry flop where the board doubles and that's considered collusion? That happens every day. In a cash game it would be something I would do against a loose aggressive opponent every day of the week.

Jim goes all-in with Ace-rag preflop after a raise has already been made and loses the hand against a calling station and that is somehow considered collusion. Brando's suited connecter was a coin-flip against the Ace-rag offsuit; did you even know that? In a regular sitngo that would have been an insta-call considering the pot odds. Jim refers to brando calling him all-in preflop with a suited connector as, "calls me down with garbage". Since when is a suited connecter garbage? If someone calls my pocket Aces shove, the last thing that I want to see is someone flip over a suited connector. And since when is calling an all-in preflop considered calling someone down? Jim's play in this hand could also be considered suspicious. What DON player in his right might shoves all-in with Ace-rag when a loose player has already raised before him and that player is almost pot committed?

Each one of those hands comes with simplistic annotation on what it is we are supposed to see. Forgive me for not taking those absurd annotations seriously.

As I've already said in a previous post, you can't prove collusion by randomly selecting hands that weren't played the way you would play them. What about the thousands of hands that we aren't shown that very well might show other than what you want to prove? You don't seem to have any clue how to prove collusion. But you aren't shy about naming players as cheaters in an open forum.

You're doing WPN a real disservice by creating the false impression that the games are infested with cheaters when they aren't. You are discouraging players from joining the network and encouraging cheating by convincing players that the only way they can compete is by cheating themselves (ie. Cyal8loser).

Welcome to 2+2. I think your experience here will be much better if you don't act like an ass.

I've played DONs since the day they came out years ago. If you are going to start labeling members here as cheaters or trolls due to your own inexperience, you're going to find that posters here are going to be handing you your head on a platter.

I never said that you guys were in on it. I gave reasons why you would just shoot everyone's posts down dismissively. I personally think it is because you guys are enjoying trolling a little, if Im wrong then so be it, but I do think this small sample definitely should make management take a look further. They have the ability to look at all of the games these two have played together and see what is what. Again i will say that its a pretty big coincidence that once these posts were made, they really havent been seen at the same table. At least that anyone here has seen

The hands are posted together to show the pattern of their collusion. You can't just pick out one hand and say it's laughable that it could be called collusion, but when you put all of the hands together and look at what they are doing as a whole it is very obviously collusion. The same goes for golden/acai & imahustla/cyal8r, when you look at all of the evidence as a whole it is obvious something is going on between those accounts. You can continue to try to defend the guilty that is your right, but I will also continue to provide evidence against those that I feel are not playing fairly in hopes that others can make informed decisions on who they play with their money. I have played over 50k DONs in the past few years, I'm not just screaming collusion at every strange hand, I've only posted when something is EXTREMELY suspect and NEEDS investigating.

I have nothing left to say, I've made my case (quite well I might add), but you are not going to be convinced. From my understanding of your understanding no one is ever colluding because people are stupid and don's are weird.... Like I said in my previous post, provide me a real world example of someone/s colluding and how it was determined it was collusion (amount of suspicious HH's, the boldness of the cheating etc.. I'm curious as to what the arbitrary amount of suspicious hands one must play in order to actually be a colluder is). Please, I'd really like to see what it takes in your mind to be considered a colluder.

We're the wrong people to convince clearly. Convincing me that someone is a colluder would do very little for your cause, I just play and post on 2p2 What sorts of comprehensive emails are you sending support?

LMAO--nice

How can you possibly convince yourself that you are showing a pattern of collusion by selecting out just a few hands from thousands? Cherry-picking a few hands doesn't prove squat. And as I've already pointed out, it is absolutely absurd to consider some of those hands as collusion. You're just seeing images in clouds floating by.

That post was directed towards santa...I know you know what's up and are just playing the antagonist here because you can (just keep spite calling me when we play if you want to get at me, I'm actually trying to be helpful to the community by stopping cheating) I seriously want to know what santa needs to see to believe something is collusion...what's the point of even trying to police oneself if you never believe anything is awry? (i.e. why is he even in this thread, unless his agenda is to relentlessly defend the guilty, err, troll?)

Thousands... that's my entire database on them both, the only new hands would be from 1 game with max recently. I posted every suspect hand that I encountered, the rest are not relevant. I asked you if I should post the whole game and you deflected the question saying I'd kill the thread. What more do you need.... All the hands I posted were from late game, that was 5 hands out of like 20, that's a lot imo.

Not much to add and this has likely been said repeatedly, but anyone with a hand they deem suspicious enough to post here (with names exposed) should also be sending them to WPN security. Really, that should probably be the first move.

You're database is a ridiculously small sample to prove collusion. I've already stated that you need to leave it to the network to see if someone is colluding. They have a much larger sample size, they can see all of the whole cards and probably most importantly, they can analyze the player types much better (something you haven't considered whatsoever).

If you start posting a large number of hands in the thread, it certainly will kill the thread. Which is why threads like this are so useless. If you think that someone is colluding then send an email to support. They are much better equiped to determine whether someone is colluding than you are. If you don't agree with their results, I don't think that it is up to you to resort to vigilantism and label those players as cheaters. You are trying to act like judge, jury and executioner.

And frankly I think that the posters here who have been railing the games and calling certain players cheaters should suffer consequences for what they are doing. In a casino if a railbird started calling players cheaters, he'd be thrown out of the casino. I don't think that online poker should be handled any differently.

Its not like there was ever a cheating scandal exposed by the players 2+2 before. Now let me state that I am in no way comparing this to the UB scandal. Its obviously not even remotely close and Im sure the management has nothing to do with it, but my point is that players should be able to discuss things like this publicly. If its obvious they are wrong about it, that will come out and be debunked like it was in the beginning of this thread, but when something has merit which the majority of the people posting do, I think it is ok to discuss it.

The first thing I did was email support with each HH# of the suspicious hands so they were aware within minutes of the game ending.

It's a ridiculously small sample because I try to avoid players that are cheating. Over my ridiculously small sample there is a ridiculously high number of suspicious plays and in my opinion (and many other's) this is blatant collusion. You are saying I should trust the judgement of the site, but when have we ever been shown it's a good idea to trust the judgement of an off shore, practically unregulated poker site? My concern at this point is that, in my opinion, the site is not doing their due diligence. There is no doubt in my mind that those guy were colluding and when I see that someone is allowed to continue playing after blatantly colluding it is very concerning and eyebrows should be raised. I just want the players here to have a fair environment to play in and at this point I cannot be confident that appropriate measures are being taken to ensure that. If the obvious collusion can't be stopped how will anyone well versed in poker/colluding ever get caught? The players on this site have the right see the evidence I've posted and draw their own assumptions from it.

You have still yet to provide me with an example of real world collusion and how/why it can/was determined to be collusion. Please tell me what is needed for a player to police the games himself (other than hole cards I cannot obtain is there anything that can satisfy your ultra stringent requirements?) We should not be required to trust the site/network and should be able to atleast attempt to protect ourselves. If what I experienced is not considered collusion by WPN there is no reason for me to not start doing the same...

Discussing it is what some of us have been trying to do. While others are calling some of us cheaters and trolls for discussing it.

The UB scandal was uncovered with the type of legitimate investigation that I advocate. Picking out a few hands and concluding that it is collusion is nonsense.

That some poster took on a false identity of one of the accused and used it to not only admit to collusion but to implicate WPN, is inexcusable.


When a site doesn't act on collusion, it's time for you to consider that maybe you are wrong. You're not the final word on who can or can't play on WPN. By the way, are you the poster who faked the thread supposedly started by "Acaibowl"?

If you want an example of good research just look at Banned4lyfe's post showing that cyal8rloser probably cheated on Party. All you are trying to do is prove your case in the court of public opinion.

It seems the alleged colluders in discussion have taken a break from the games at least for the moment.

Santa Cruz - It's true people scream collusion way too soon at times and also true that the sample size might be too small for some cases here but at the same time some of these hands are very suspicious.

Bad players do silly things as all of us see it time and time again but from some examples where it's the same members in the same games doing the same soft play or chip dumping techniques with their buddy in multiple hand examples while not doing anything crazy with others at the table then it's something that should be looked into.

Sometimes sites just don't have the ability, man power, or care to look into collusion which is why multiple people need to send in details of potential colluders that when they get 10 complaints about the same people they are forced to care about it.

How is iBooBoo still allowed to play on WPN? I was going to donk around in some DONs this evening and saw MyWeeWeeIsGreen (iBooBoo) sitting and obv decided not to based on not wanting to be cheated. Kick this POS off the network already, ffs. DON regs sorry I couldn't provide you some dead money.