Gazzy's a good guy and he's already cited an instance of a poker site incorrectly seizing a friend's funds for bogus reasons so he's more likely to be wary of a poker site seizing someone's funds.

If Party Poker game integrity team are happy to share details of a current (potentially legal) issue with you, I'm even more concerned with Party Poker. I imagine it would be a sackable offence for any of them to share any details with you.

might as well lock this one up, OP learned a costly lesson and it's a happy ending for everyone except gazzy

Thanks for wrapping up the thread! You really summed everything up so well. Mods do we lock it now that rep_lol has spoken?

Once again, can you show me anywhere in this thread where I said he was definitely innocent?

Can ya? Can ya? Didn't think so.

Whether the guy broke the rules or not, it would be nice if they took these types of things on a case by case basis. People make mistakes, two young friends playing on the same account not even knowing it's wrong. Every infraction shouldn't result in a permanent confiscation of funds and bans. Especially when you get into such big dollar amounts, a bit more thought should be put into it if their intent with "cheating" was actually malicious or an honest mistake.

Agreed, and I think they need to chime in with exactly what help they think he had. I don’t think that would necessarily divulge how they do their investigations.

The supposed friend of an investigator did not inspire confidence. There is no one man to a hand rule online, or at least I didn’t think there was

When they disqualify the winner of only online WPT, it is obviously going to wind up being discussed online. It might be better if Party made a statement indicating the grounds for disqualification, but not their evidence.

I thought 'ghosting; ' (is that the term?) when someone sits next to you while you play, while frowned upon, was not actually 'illegal' in poker.

For example if my brother sat next to me and said "id fold here" or "this is an all in for me" - but ultimately im the one with the mouse, im the one making all the decisions.

However I dont know what the rules are on say Viktor Blom being next to me and saying "id 3 bet here" so i 3 bet or "id shove here" so I shove or "this is a fold" so i fold.. But ultimately isnt that still just ghosting?

either way.. OP is clearly guilty imo. They wouldnt distribute the funds and seize 160k otherwise. And he conveniently says nothing about the poker player he lives with. While i dont want to falsely accuse someone LOL im putting it at least 99% that OP is guilty here

Well you go and play on GG poker then who DO have a shady history. Or how about 1 of these app,s in an off shore country LOL

Party and Stars imo are now the only 2 safe sites to play on. They, unlike GG, have already given the funds to all the other players. They literally have no reason to steal funds.

And Party will never say why, I imagine it would be a legal issue and a security issue. But i actually think having a site with strong security measures, that looks out for its players, can only be a good thing

This is silly, whether it’s your brother or Blom sitting next to you it’s the same exact thing

I think we also need to define guilty. We’ve been skating around this for awhile and no one has clarified. According to PP, is there a one man to a hand rule? If it depends, what does it depend on?

I was under the impression that if the account holder was hitting the buttons everything was on the table. If that’s not the case, would be helpful to know what crosses the line

I can think of 160,000 reasons.

No, they gave that money back to the players in the tournament. They did, however, keep the 16K he won in roulette.

Anyhow, can someone answer this question, is it against the TOS for OP to be sharing his screen and getting "help" from an outside party? I've watched poker training videos where this went on and I always assumed it was fine

There is no one man to a hand rule, only one man to an account. At least that's my interpretation.

I would assume this falls under RTA and would be against their rules.

To me RTA means software, and as I mentioned I've seen this done numerous times in training videos. Would like to get confirmation on something like this. I'm not a tech guy, in fact I know next to nothing but I think there's some potential for false positives here.

This guy has been labeled a cheater and perhaps he is, but it doesn't seem like there's a consensus on what the rules actually are. I've shared my screen with friends sometimes, but just for learning and entertainment purposes. I thought that was part of the accepted deal with playing online.

Just seems chitty and dangerous that it all happened so fast, what's the immediate rush in sending out the 160K to other players? Maybe there can be a third party set up so some type of review can happen which would keep details of the investigation private.

RTA stands for real time assistance and not just computer software. Someone telling you what to do is real time assistance.

Yes I know what it stands for but again I always thought that there was not a one man to a hand rule. I’m not the only person in this thread to believe that.

https://www.pokerstars.com/en/blog/2...ee-031023.html

"Lee: Exactly. And the key question here is: "How many poker hands are involved?" If three people are discussing *one* poker hand, then we permit it. "

Thanks and I remember reading that interview many years ago

So I’m just wondering though if things have changed and if so is it when you allow someone not in your location to view your screen

Agreed, that a player got DQ'd is certainly worthy of online discussion. No one disputes that part. However, that's not what piqued my or SmallBallCall's interest.

Based on everything I've seen in the thread, PartyPoker did not reveal the details to anyone – including (allegedly) the OP. Then user "ImStoic" comes along, claiming the following:

Is ImStoic part of that team and/or a Party employee who has seen first-hand the proof of wrongdoing? If so, then he didn't reveal anything more than what's already public in that statement. Alternatively, is he friends/acquaintances of a member of the PP investigative team, but not an actual PP employee? This is where SBC takes issue, as it would speak to the site's overall institutional control.

Of course, it's also quite possible that ImStoic is just full of ****. Something something Occam's Razor, etc.

This post about PS was made by Josem in Dec 2018:

And, from https://www.pokernews.com/news/2019/...oker-34900.htm, about Rob Young in 2019:

'Rob Yong has set his sights on eradicating cheating in poker by having his casino and partypoker become the founding members of the FairPlay initiative.

The owner of Dusk Till Dawn casino in the United Kingdom and a key partner of GVC Holdings, owners of the partypoker brand, revealed his vision for FairPlay to Poker Industry Pro ($).

Yong is quoted as saying, “I founded FairPlay to encourage online poker sites, live poker tours, and casino card rooms to collaborate by sharing information on customers that they have caught cheating. For example, using bots, collusion, multi-accounting, or ghosting.”'

I would love to know what really happened here. Safe to say that nobody looks good in this.

If a player screen shares their computer while playing poker, certainly that would violate ToS right?

I thought the only exception to one player per hand was having a live friend (or coach) literally standing over your shoulder in the room with you. This seemed to me to be allowed since it is basically unenforceable otherwise.

If anyone is sharing a screen over the internets, you are risking a big score in my opinion.

Unenforceable as long as no one talks about it? Yes. "Allowed?" No.

Not sure where you got your law degree, but you may want to demand a refund.