I agree with you, but what stars head of pr said was:

They then sent him to a regulator who couldn't handle his case, so I presume the rules that they quoted applied to that regulator. Given that they want to be transparent and explain the decisions maybe now they have no such bar?

In fact France is anyone with an EU bank account. Spain its anyone internationally. But of course PokerStars is not going to pay ~37% tax on gross gaming revenue (in France), or 25% (in Spain) - for everyone in Europe, when it's ~0.5% in Malta.

Basically Malta is the only "offshore" jurisdiction (i.e. low/no gaming revenue) that is in the EU, so PokerStars unfortunately doesn't have much choice if they want to offer tax-free games to Scandis.

I'd like to see PokerStars put more pressure in LGA though to clean up their act. But that's a different topic (in fact there's a thread in NVG on exactly this topic).

But none of this really pertains to this thread. I really don't see what OP is looking to get out of contacting the regulators. Whether IOM or LGA or ARJEL or anyone was dealing with your case - what is your hoped-for outcome? Online poker rooms have the right to refuse your custom without giving any reason whatsoever. A regulator is not going to force a licensee to take your bets. Can you point to a regulation that you believe Rational Group has broken? Do you expect compensation?

It's a crappy situation, and i can see why you are angry. But you have no legal or regulatory recourse here.

Not really. It's more like the only high speed ISP in your area refusing to give you internet service and not providing any reason for it.

Not really. It's more like a proctologist sticking his finger up your ass and then telling you he hasn't passed the bar exam yet.

Wow, that's got to be one of the worst analogies I've ever seen, which is quite an accomplishment on an Internet full of terrible analogies. Especially given that it was in response to what was a very solid one.

Wrong. OP has multiple other options. iPoker, microgaming, partypoker. The analogy I quoted implies rational has a monopoly which is ludicrous

From a business standpoint Pokerstars banning OP due to his large winrate and miniscule rake is a good financial move. (which would be discriminatory) I don't believe this to be the case or the reason for his ban.... but think of it from OP's perspective for a minute. He has begged stars to give him a reason... he was sent to the wrong regulatory body and the correct one (LGA) is well known by everyone (Stars included) as totally useless and doesn't even do it's most basic job functions as was demonstrated by some sites stealing players money and LGA doesn't even respond. Other sites have banned winning players so from his perspective that's perhaps a realistic assumption.

First analogy that comes to any logical mind. WP and I don't know why I lol'd.

Some people seem to consider Stars to be almost their only option, so I didn't think it was that bad, but otherwise I'd agree with you. So I'd take a minor to fix to it over your anal probing:

*best being subjective, of course.

any analogy that involves a proctolgist has an inherent comedy value

oh you.

Ivanhoe, I guess your only recourse right now is to go to your EC representative and get them to look at the case from a European law perspective. That is practically your only option, seeing as both regulators and PS are stonewalling you. Always remember - the buck has to stop somewhere. If you can get the EU to enforce its own legislation or make something happen at that level, you may just be able to get some law changed that would outright prevent this from happening altogether. To be frank with you, I think this whole thing has gone too far in and of its own right - if you can stop this, poker may just change forever.

Of course, you could sue them for criminal/civil charges (maybe false accusation via money laundering?) - which, whether you won or not, might get some media coverage that forces a rule change. That, or unemployment benefit - I see a variety of people talking about the "freelance" argument, that showing up for work for years implies a contract - severance of that contract would be unfair/constructive dismissal, giving rise to the above lawsuit as a result of the false accusation. Of course, you might not be able to get much from PS, because in gambling there is no way to precisely measure future winnings/losses - it would be down to speculation.

If that doesn't work, I'm sure you can find $10,000 to go play in the WSOP or something. I'm sure they will be very happy to take your money (seeing as live tournaments have never been so important IMO). You need to show these companies that there is zero chance of you backing down or them winning.

Of course, whatever happens, I have a couple of things to say:

1) I think that you are courageous for attempting to stick it to the man,

2) I wish you the absolute best of luck, and

3) whatever happens, trolls stay under bridges. (You ever seen a troll stalk you in real life? I haven't...)

No, he can't sue them on the ground of "false accusation via money laundering" since nobody accused him that.

Lol, nothing implies a freelance contract between a player and a casino site. There is no freelance contract between him and PokerStars nor will it ever be.

Lol again, PokerStars couldn't care less if he will play on WSOP or not.

I don't see anything courageous, he is just persistant in trying to retain his income. I understand that but it's nothing here to be seen as "courageous".

Nice level Ogels, 7/10.

So you're saying that, after years of daily morning patronage at my local Tim Horton's inevitably ending each visit by collecting and tossing my friend's empty coffee cups in the trash, if Tim's decides to ban me I can hand them a bill for cleaning?

Either they point you the fault for disclosure or bring a lawyer in the party and sue them.



A good lawyer will find a way to squeeze them to either open their hand, they will have to provide documents/ proof what you did wrong.If not he will find a way to make them pay to keep the matter in the darkness.

Your closed accounts are under differents gaming regulations, but they run the bizz under "one identity", i would be very surprised that they can monitor all the .net .eu .fr bizz with the exact same regulations which make me wonder how ligit is to ban all your accounts.

In the case they are running a bigger scale investigation concerning other/s players and cannot give away information, you are the victim and might have the right to ask $$ for compensation.

waste their time and their money untill you get your answers.this info black out is really bulls***t unless you have done something wrong.

Good luck.

Well they are, at this moment, getting just what they want - I'm about to back off and just accept the fact that companies offering online poker are just a bunch of crooks that can do whatever the **** they want without ever having to answer to anyone.

I mean, i'm not going to pay a lawyer to sue them or anything as I'm pretty sure I have no ground whatsoever to sue them on. Going to the LGA has no merit either. So yeah. What's left to do?

I just hope this topic has created some awareness as to how easily these kind of companies can block your ability to play online poker, without having to provide a reason, without having to accuse you of anything, without having to answer to any regulatory body, without even knowing their own legislation while blatantly lying to a costumer that has paid a lot of rake over the years.

This however suggests that you must have done something wrong, otherwise the decision would be -EV.

Also despite the horrendous track record of the LGA, not even trying to get in touch with them regardless of the slim odds is equally wrong.

it's probably just like a casino refusing your game because you're just too good. If you are maximizing your wins by bum hunting and paying little rake then they may just feel like its a negative Ev decision to take you on. Maybe you should have mixed it up a bit more into it a little more rake and other games. essentially cashing out big chunks taking money off the tables and giving little back in rake is a recipe for disaster ito.

Myself , without anything to reproch ? i would be a pain is the A.ss toward them, keeping them busy requesting audits, any kind of documents that i am allowed to request until i get my answers.

i would also take the funny lines-

" how can pstars" ensure there is no russian money laundering with the volume they generate hundreds thousands accounts.

" some other hacked issues" involve the liabilitie off pstars for account been hacked from third party differnet countries than account owner (security brech from pstar)

A the end, if you ve done nothing wrong, the cost for the to deal with the matter will be pretty much more expensive than to not answer to an harmless( if you are) baned player. just burn they ressources.

i would still also continous the LGA & others gambling Eu regulations, banks & customs money laundering path to force them answer to someone in a way or another. if you are clean, you are a victim not a threat, and then ensured to compensation.This would be illegal discrimination.

Gl or not what ever; if ur innocent go to the barricades , crime should not be unpunished

Michael Josem, pokerstars head of pr, wrote in this thread that;

Given that they sent you to the wrong regulator, you could ask him what or who's rules he was quoting.

It is the least he can do.

You also could send and explain the whole case to all 3 reg isle man, Arjel and malta, stipulating that you ve not receive any answer from Lga and asking them advice / opinion as a 3 rd partie how to proceed and make the things moving.

Free negative pub for stars in any cases

Why would he want to contact ARJEL when they have absolutely nothing to do with this and only regulate the .fr site?

because his .fr account is closed as well?