+1 LOL

If they were shills checking it down would be the worst thing they could do as the site would get to keep almost all of the money in the BBJ as the largest shares would be kept by them. Just fools I believe. Grammar police can stay home too as I realize that is a run-on sentence.

And people wonder why rigtards and conspiracy nuts get dismissed generally. I think even routine conspiracy nuts would back away slowly from this whopper.

BTW my post was obviously a level.... I thought you guys were smarter than bbv :P

Actually I have read some of your posts there, hence my level of your level. Plus I was one of the few not doing all the leveling game discussing the hand, so figure may as well join the party with a player on a level playing field since that M.A.S.H guy who was genuinely frustrated talking about the hand was not leveling at all :O

Pun was just a bonus.

All the best.

I've had over 40 royals on-line.
I definitely remember checking one down at micros just to show it off...


Rainbow...

FYP I knew you would show up sooner or later

I agree with this analysis.

What about the guy who played 102o from MP? Can we get some insights into that?

Funniest post I read was in bbv, something along the lines of:

"this must be confederate's UB account"

I vote for a double mis-click

If you would read the hand history you wouldn't need insights into that.
The guy is acctually a girl and is the OP.
I folded T2, but of course in the screenshot it shows my folded hand.

Maybe, before you post, check what is going on.

quality work

monteroy and alobar are correct and pretty obviously so.

First guy was slow-playing. Second was slow-playing too and trying to induce a bet and by the time he got to the end he just wanted to show his royal since he has no reason to think his opponent has any kind of worthwhile hand whatsoever.

Only possible alternative theory is that one or the other simply think it's correct strategy to somehow ALWAYS check all the way down any time you catch a jackpot hand 'just in case' the other guy has one too. It's pretty ridiculous since those times when the other guy has one he will certainly be calling anyway. But some people could conceivably think like that. I have to think the first theory is far more likely though.

At first I didn't think the above was plausible but I guess it's at least possible.

I think it's most likely collusion without the knowledge of the BBJ minimum. By collusion I mean msn/aim friends at the same table.

lmfao.


Man.. I'm speechless of what to say. Lol Jackpotaments.

The more I think about this the more I tend to think this theory is the most likely. When you don't play much poker getting a royal flush is a big thing and he prolly just wanted to show everybody assuming the other guy had nothing and would fold to any bet.

Juk

colluding bots

does they still have dumbot playing there? was that thing beatable?

ya, you know thats possible i guess. there are some players on those tables who are seriously only playing for that minute chance of hitting the bbj. constantly talking about it, and berating certain plays because they would force out someone who might have the losing hand to qualify for bbj. any player who actually plays with the bbj in mind is an obv donktard imo, so who knows what play they might be capable of making?

Have these two players spoken publicly about the incident yet?

Not that I have seen. You can rail Danielmario at the .05/.10 NL table however.

this is really a very sad situation. .05/.10aments instead of his share of $350k.

As Bill Fillmaff would say: "I value check my nuts!"