Hi,

Forgive me if this post in redundant or in the wrong section...

I got an email from pokerstars that informed me of 2 players that were working together.

Pokerstars stated that the credit will be shown on my history when i logged in.

They also wrote that they will not reveal how this credit was calculated.
Nor did they provide any information on the players involved. I can understand the hush hush on the latter.

I don't understand why they do not inform me of :

A) How many games I registered for that were involved, and the accumulated buy-in amount in dollars too
B) How the credit was calculated

Just curious to see if they have legitimate reasoning for keeping this info away or if I am correct to thinking that this is not right on their part.

your truly,

Slub

[x] got it back
[x] standard
[ ] told us how much you got; which you probably wouldnt have gotten back at all on other sites.


*it b/c explaing it to you, what games, etc would require lots of work and they dont want you raising the Q if you got ENOUGH back or not.

FWIW, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes me Stars.

Some people hear this and it makes them worry about the integrity of online poker, or they start fretting over irrelevant minutiae of the refund. Me, I hear this and know that at least one poker site is aggressively doing their ****ing job and it makes me feel much, much more at ease playing there.

What's that old saying about integrity being what you do when no one is looking? This is the sort of thing that Stars could quietly sweep under the rug and just "absorb" the money, but instead, they go out of their way to do the right thing even though they could get away with the opposite.

Five stars to them.

but shouldn't such internal policies be made public? If we knew how the calculations were derived, and if they are undertaken in a mathematically appropriate way, we wouldn't need to ask in the first place!

And I agree, I love pokerstars for various factors including their Customer service , however they did do the "right thing" and I'd expect nothing less from them to begin with.

I got the same email. They also said collusion would not be tolerated and the players colluding were banned from stars.

I just played enough 6.50s last month to get silverstar, and I haven't played any sngs on stars this month. I got 7.90 back.

This makes me want to play primarily at stars instead of ftp, but I don't play high enough stakes yet where the fpps would make up for the rb on ftp. I think I'm just gonna play sngs exclusively on stars from now on at least.

dude the fpps are better than the rb in most cases.

I hope this doesn't lead to 100000 e-mails to Stars support with claims of collusion.

Actually, that probably already happens n/m

Why would this thread invite 1000000 emails to stars? they detected it, I didn't.

This is one of the many things that makes Stars awesome, them

Just out of curiosity, what do you guys use your FPP's for?

i use them for futureshop $250 gift cards (it's like a bestbuy).. cost 17500...

but i doubt this is the best way to use them - prbly best off using them for buy ins to qualifiers, satelites etc..stuff like that.

off topic, but I do laud them for offering Canadians gift cards for Canadian stores, oh yeah, and the collusion busting too.

imagine being the poor bastard that has to sift through support emails about 'collusion' -- because someone won with Q high. It makes it that much hard for people to complain who were actually cheated.

jc

he thinks some ppl claim collusion to Stars when they do bad to get money back this doesn't work of course inless it is truly collusion.

This is not correct. "Most cases" are lower stakes and lower volume players because that's what a majority of players play.
27% on FT is way better than FPP's on Stars.

This particular player is low-stakes SNG's and barely made it to Silverstar. He definitely makes more rakeback at Fulltilt.

I would roughly estimate his rakeback on Stars via FPP's to be in about the 11% range now that he is Silverstar. If he was still Bronze it would be even less.


Higher stakes players at a medium-high volume [at least Supernova] can do pretty much the same on Stars as they do at FT roughly.
If you are a really high volume player at high enough stakes then you can do much better on Stars.

ya i guess it does prove that if there is collusion you'll get credited... and surely can encourage the crowd that constantly seek to profit for nothing.

**Plz do not start flooding Pokerstars email support with bogus claims of collusion..i'm sure stars is reading this thread, and if i get traced, the last thing i want them to do is load me up with bad-luck juice.**

Received an email response to the above questions , A & B:



A)"we do not release specific information for privacy reasons.
Having said that, you are not asking for specific details, so we feel
comfortable releasing very limited information to you. There were two
players involved in the collusive activity, and you faced them only once.

B)Your credit was calculated based on your exposure to possible harm, as
was the credits received by your fellow victims....the funds in their accounts have been redistributed to those they harmed."

I believe it was a 6 player $72 + $6 that I played , and my credit was $114... So if the 2 scammers had won 1st and 2nd, my math gives me a credit of $108, $6 less than I received ($72*6/4=$108).... but hey, no complaints.

Pokerstars = class and professionalism = my 2nd

Slub

I wonder if the only way they investigate is when a player complains?

If they had it automated in the software they would discover 10 times the amount of collusion compared to what the players notice. It would be so easy to implement but they probably ignore it since everything about cheating that gets public is bad for their reputation.

This.

Especially to the point that it would require lots of work, not so much of the point that they have to answer your question about the amount. The fact that they would set a precedence and have to answer potentially 100,000+ questions from every other player/incident/suspicious activity about any such amount is calculated would obv. make their support/integrity related activities less efficient. So just be happy ya got it!

no indication on how the collusion was detected, but if software can detect the ton of collusion that you are claiming, then of course they would use it despite the bad attention it may bring.. why?

beacause such software would end up in the hands of normal ppl, and if "we " find it in such high numbers (not isolated instances), and not stars... holy **** that would look really bad on there end.