I've played about 7000 $52-$108 dons in the first 6 weeks of 2010. I kind of felt like something was up, but I assumed I was a losing player and just gave up. If true, this makes me pretty sick as they have not only just stolen money from me, but they have taken away future earning power from me. I was on a pretty nice pace to hit SNE. I've played >$600,000 in buyins during this time and only received a refund of ~$400.

Okay. Got it. 100 eyewitnesses is evidence enough, but a guy that helped uncover the UB cheating scandal and was on 60 minutes to talk about his findings about online poker cheating doesn't qualify as evidence once he closes the accounts he deems are colluding?

Remember there are different types of evidence (fingerprints vs eyewitnesses). Josem closing the accounts is better evidence of cheating than some donkey hand histories, BUT THAT'S JUST ME, lol.

sick..

simplicity - did you play against these names a lot? What type of compensation do you think you should have received?

Not that it's going to help you feel better but it's pretty premature to conclude that you still wouldn't have been a losing player (and/or running cold or whatever) at these things regardless.

Ok, this is ****ing irritating.

I do believe that in all likelihood they colluded and PS banning them is a big indication. But OTOH, we can't treat PS as the all knowing all benevolent, all righteous organization, because no such thing or human exists. Trust, but verify as they say.

So it would be far more preferable if we had additional confirmation of our suspicions and it ain't gonna kill you or anyone else sharing those allegations, providing us with a HH.

Microbob and others are making a very reasonable argument and you re just repeating horse****.

Like I've stated dozens of times in this thread, if you don't trust 100% that they have the ability to correctly identify collusion after reviewing hand histories, then no, the account closures prove nothing. I think Josem does, though.

wow 3 page thread in less than 8 hours

going to read now, but lol @ quoting multiple emails from multiple accounts

In reality these colluders are all fake and this is the best ever advertising level invented by Stars security/marketing collaboration so they can brag about being tight on cheaters.

WP Stars

(kidding obv)

O RLY? Guess why it's repetitive? Because people like you keep requesting HH after it's been explained it's impossible

Either read the entire thread or dont post. This thread is a train wreck because of posts like this.

Instead of agreeing to disagree you continue to attempt to mock or belittle my opinion. We differ on a semantical issue. That's all.

No, I don't think Josem's decision on the collusion qualifies as "evidence." It was his conclusion. His giant plot-graph stuff in the UB/AP thing is evidence.

Josem's determination on this to me is easily more persuasive than any HH's I could attempt to see on here and your attempt to mock me with the inference that I would think otherwise is insulting

Anyway, here is the dictionary definition of "evidence". Note that it doesn't include a jury's or arbiter's findings or ultimate conclusion as qualifying as evidence.

evidence: data presented to a court or jury in proof of the facts in issue and which may include the testimony of witnesses, records, documents, or objects.

microbob and mitch, you're both now just arguing symantics/derailing the thread.

agree to disagree on what your opinion of evidence means ffs b/c no one else cares

I'm not. They are both evidence. He disagrees with that despite agreeing with it in other scenarios.

No, it's because of your posts. How about laying off the sauce when posting?

No, I don't trust them 100%. I trust them a lot, but I don't trust them 100%. Nor should you or anyone.

If I told you that every judgment PS has issued in the past and in the future is and will be correct, would you agree? Of course, not.

I also need to say that at some point, I do feel uncomfortable. It's dangerous to place 100% trust on any organization. Let's say that some player is indeed wrongfully accused or banned. What would be his recourse if PS is the DA, judge and jury and the community blindly trusts it without independently verifying evidence?

Last, but not least, it's important to see the evidence, to inform people of what they should be looking for.

But again, just to emphasize, with or without HH, it does look like highly likely that there was indeed collusion which was rightfully punished.

I am enjoying this thread I wish OP would post more.

Mitch - I'm sorry that you feel my definition or perception of "evidence" is incorrect.

Please just substitute my use of that term to mean "hand histories" where applicable.

I would consider Josem a witness here (on our behalf). The HH are records and documents. That's all I've ever been saying, I haven't been "mocking you by trying to infer otherwise".

It's not incorrect; it's just too narrow. Whatever...

I find this post kind of weird. For one I wasnt even posting or arguing for the past few hours. Its been other posters. So Im not too sure why you would jump right to me. And bounce right over to bobs rescue. Is this a gimmick account? Has to be because it surely doesnt make sense.

So you're asking for HH even though I have stated numerous times my situation and then you blame me for drinking? Well if you read anything it would be pretty damn clear my answer and you wouldnt even bring this subject up..again...

highly likely? Do you people think it's just some idiot in a chair skimming hands and coming to a half assed conclusion? Its a security team that works together and replays thousands of hands. And after a 4 month investigation I think its pretty clear what was going on. It's not that hard to spot cheating, let alone if you can use replay and other techniques.

I feel you, man. However, if several regs suspect cheating and Stars determines they are guilty, I trust that 100%. Without the regs' suspicions, then no, not 100% at all.

FYP

Nobody thinks that. Everyone here (except Jane) agrees that Stars' decision is either 100% correct or very near 100% correct.

OP posting emails from 3 different accounts is evidence that he has multiple accounts.

Why do you guys need evidence when:

OP left the thread (and while he was active he dodged pretty much everything and his argument was that PS didnt show enough evidence to ban him, not that he was innocent)

Several people were scammed by OP

the WoW as background

A guy said he was offered into these scams

SS stats retrieved

And please knock it off with your argument of evidence/not evidence, dont derail the thread, and Im sorry for PS players since I think that they took a while to ban OP´s crew

What are you talking about everyone for (MicroBob)? There have been a couple of people who have asked for evidence, I think I remember one being a sarcastic remark about pokerstars not providing any evidence and basically saying thats not good enough in their eyes. And another telling me not to call the op a scum bag unless I had evidence. LOL even though I was the one sitting at the tables watching it happen with other regs and getting scammed.

I ve read the whole thread very carefully. I ve watched you say you don't have HHs and I found extremely irritating the repeated assertion that just because PS banned them, that's all the evidence we need.

Obviously, since you are not the only person affected by this, someone else can come up with a HH, though a lesson for the future is to learn the simple step of saving all of your PS hhs as most people here do. Equally obviously, PS banishment of these people is at best strong circumstantial evidence, but it's not evidence of wrong doing per se.

Your witness account is more of an evidence. And it would be great if we could see some hhs too. It's not unreasonable. If anything out of curiosity.

Derail the thread...? GTFO - this is the thread. There's nothing to see here. Everyone knows ("evidence" or not) that this dude is a pos.