So when is OP sending in his "Final Statement" if it hasnt already happened and i missed it.

So, have FTP gotten back yet?

I am a tad curious about all this, since shortstacking is not against their rules.

This is the argument of the "Holy Inquisition": They seem to know what we don't, we cant argue about it!

He's written and posted a draft, looking for suggestions. He'll take those under advisement, and I'd like to take a thorough look at it as well. He'll post another draft later and probably send after an hour or two's worth of comments.

I haven't read the entire thread so forgive me if this has been posted before but it's the first time I have seen a straight answer on anything from Full Tilt re SpadeEye

Emphasis added.

I presume--though this may be presuming too far--that the SpadeEye folks will port the table selection functionality for Full Tilt over to Telescope so you can have table selection without the datamining in an approved package.

I seriously doubt that FT is seizing rolls solely based on stats or strategy. There are many bot-detection methods, most of which have been discussed in this thread or others, that are being used and there's no way they are booting very desirable customers unless they have to to protect the integrity of the games.

people like this guy are complete jerks, and feel like unless people have at least $50,000 in the bank, (enough to always be able to afford a full buyin at any limit--without jeopardizing their roll) they shouldnt be playing poker. i shortstack almost every time i playing live, and use the martingale system if i get stuck til im finally unstuck, or lose $200. $50 then $100, then $200 in the 1-2 nl games.

whats he thinking that everyone should be required to buy in for the exact same amount? that their shouldnt be a minimum and a maximum buyin? for if there is, hed accuse everyone who doesnt buy in for the maximum as shortstacking. some of us with low rolls just call that good money management.

i suppose he thinks if a guy walks into a casino with $143 in his pocket, and one casino has a $200 buyin min and max both in the $1-2 NL, and the casino next door the buyins $50-200, that the one casino is BAD for allowing shortstacking--instead of forcing everyone to buy in for the max. in which case no one could ever buyin for all they got in their pocket, it would always have to be in even $100 amounts. no casino in the world operates that way in their NL games. people like this guy must be incredibly wealthy and have no concept of how their fascist opinions affect those of us in the real world struggling to make ourselves a success as we grow in limits.

according to sounded simple, its buying in for anything less than the table maximum.

which means if he was in downtown vegas, playing at the golden nugget $100 min buyin and NO MAX $1-2 NL, anyone buying in for less than 100% of their roll would be shortstacking. this will show u how ludicrous his arguement is and why it makes me so mad.

some of us have very low roll, and we dont ever wanna buy in for more than the minimum til we have at least 30 full buyins. picture urself in the shoes of a local vegas pro whose worried about paying his rent and only plays poker, and has only about $500-1000 to work with left of his bankroll. thats why i said he must have alot of money and be unable to relate to ordinary folks struggling to provide for themselves

i wouldnt take people disliking shortstackers so personally, if it didnt affect my ability to survive so much. also ive never bought any computer software at all, not even pokertracker, never had a hud and never play more than 2-3 tables usually. so if i ever got banned for shortstacking damn right id be mad.

This is fairly disturbing, though I don't play on Full Tilt atm. I hope the OP gets his situation resolved.

A short term fix for FTP might be to create a "probation" status for users that would prevent them from joining 20-BB buyin tables, though they would be free to join 50-BB buyin and up tables. Thoughts?

Naturally I would prefer a longer-term solution - the ability for FTP to actually determine if a player is using prohibited software, instead of banning them based on their style of play.

I thought shortstacking was buying in for the minimum. What if you're at a B&M table w/ no max? Then what's considered shorstacking?

Ok guys, here's the email I just sent to Full Tilt:

I'll get to work on answering the questions that have been building up in this thread, as well as producing the stats Dire asked for. I'm also going to try and pare down this whole thread into an easy to digest format and post it on my blog.

If you're smart, you can find the blog right now (it's embarrassingly bare, but it'll be pretty much dedicated to this situation shortly). I'll make a more public unveiling when it's ready. I'd bet my inaccessible roll that Dire already found it.

It is with great admiration that I dis-like Dire is this thread. I, for one, am too trusting and want to believe in the good of people. So to conteract people like me,we need posters like Dire who seek the tough answers from people to keep us all from being scammed...

Amirite?

I think only slightly more of shortstackers than I do of rapists but neither deserve to be convicted by suspicion with no opportunity to make their case.

There have been a lot of threads about Tilt cutting people off at the knees at it always seemed there was some real wrongdoing at the heart of it. I cannot find any wrongdoing here.

It's a pain in the ass to move rolls from one site to another with no e-check withdrawals but I'm doing it. I'm moving to Stars because I no longer trust Full Tilt with my money.

this is not martingale. ducy?

Good job on the email sober.

Which is an entirely fruitless endeavor if FT won't reveal any meaningful info. All you have is blind faith. Blind faith in an offshore site that is quickly developing a rep for these seizures without explanation.

I think you've missed the point.

If the OP is honest, I hope he gets every penny back, and then some, together with an apology.

If he used banned software, I hope they take every penny and blacklist him to the ends of the earth.

What has struck a nerve here is the lack of timely response and the lack of disclosure. It appears to be a disregard for his money, and his rights, and by analogy, most of us here assume that they must have a disregard for our money and our rights.

Poker is a gamble. You might win, you might lose. But if you win, and you also have to face unfair seizures, then there simply is no reason to play at such a site.

I was booted (though my roll not taken) based as far as I can tell solely on stats. I've used no prohibited software (only PT3), but played a shortstack strategy, which seems to be tripping some stat filter.

good post EHG.

I'm going to reiterate that I have severe doubts about FTP's ability to identify running prohibited software.
Two mass suspend and then act threads where it's clear they were looking for something but couldn't be precise about it when the suspensions were handed down aren't just coincidence.

right now im martingaling double or nothing sngs. $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100. start back over when one wins.

actually what FTP and stars should ban to make it a much better and fairer game for recreational players and those of us doing the hard work without programs--is to cap it at 6 tables max u can sit at, and not allow any kind of HUD or tracking system, as ive never used one. but they never will, cause theyd lose too much in rake. but it would sure make the games LOOSER.

banning them would be way better than banning the poor guy with $20 who sits, doubles it to $40 then changes tables to rebuy $20 again.

It works so well when it comes to Blackjack, why not try it for poker, right?

Sent to Full Tilt today

please make a separate thread when you lose 7 in a row and you have your whole roll on a SnG trying to win 5 bucks