CEREUS was a scam
FTP was a scam
Ipoker has issues
PS rapes you with their new rake structure.

There are everywhere problems....Ladbrokes is a fine solution if you want to play on microgaming. It's your own choice damn.

someone should bring justice to all these ****ing scum thieves in the poker world starting from Microgaming to Absolute Poker and Full Tilt!

life is not endless!

Please do elaborate.

Those are not the same.

First, PS aren't changing their rake structure much at all now.

Second, iPoker certainly has issues but not like CEREUS. FTP also didn't go out to actively cheat their players like CEREUS did.

They didn't?

No, they were just optimistic followed by stupid (and possibly criminal). Deciding "oh, we'll figure payments out before this becomes a problem" isn't the same as Scott Tom saying "aha, I'll use this super user account we coded in so that I can cheat my own players for millions"

At the time Stan James had seperate accounts for sportsbook and poker. To withdraw you had to transfer from poker to sportsbook at whatever exchange rate they had that week and then to your bank.

For a couple of years I took losses during this process but at the end I had a large ammount on the poker account and when transfered it gave me a decent "sterling gain".

Of course they didn't like this so they refused to pay out in full. We went back and forth for a while and eventually the Gibralta Gaming Commission got involved.

Whilst all this was going on I was highlighting various aspects in their T+C which were contrary to their reasons for refusal. Every one I mentioned was subsequently changed by them.

The gaming commission ruled in their favour and rather than take a David and Golliath case on in court I reluctantly moved on with my life.

Did they only steal the exchange profit or the whole balance?

Also, it would seem pretty natural for these gaming commissions to be in bed with online gaming entities. Who can stop them from taking bribes?

This is what god invented forums for. You could've hurt these guys by posting everywhere. You have to make it less profitable for them to **** you than to let you cash out. Assuming you were completely in the right anyway, I have no idea what happened in your case. This is why we need to hurt Microgaming with this kind of thread. And this is why I find it annoying when people say it's no big deal.

We've seen in the Full Tilt case that offering these licenses is a pretty lucrative business. I can see how they don't like to bite the hand that feeds.

They only kept the exchange profit. Without going into massive detail (this went on for months with masses of paperwork)

It led to a situation where If I lost $100k to another Stan James player they could withdraw at the current exchange rate (if they had transfered that day)... If I won I would have to withdraw at an exchange rate from months ago when I originally deposited.

A dollar was not actually a dollar....its value depended on which account won the dollar and at what exchange rate they could cash out. I have never thought that Stan James had any influence over the winners and losers on the site but you can see how situations like this could encourage other shady goings on...

I don't remember if I sent my stuff for this, is there a way to know if we did?

thats ridiculous.

write up your full story and make a new thread please.

This.

There's a ton of people on 2+2 that might be able to help resolve something like this, plus companies hate bad publicity. Why haven't you done it before, did you only just discover 2+2?

To be honest, I'm not sure poker needs another scandal on the front page of 2+2 so I'd rather keep it here.

This is about as much detail as I can remember (was well over 3 years ago now) and at the time I was doing well enough that spending months pursueing it would have actually cost me money.

Anyway I was a regular 25/50 and higher for a few years at SJ (and many other sites). It would appear that HSDB caught the end of my action:
http://www.highstakesdb.com/profiles...show=all#graph

You will all hate me for this but I'd class myself as bumhunter extrordinaire... I had built up a reasonable roll on SJ which lived in the 'Poker balance'. I also played on the other major euro sites at the time and there were a couple of regular big fish around (mostly Betfair). Now for a variety of reasons after the disappearance of 1 of the biggest fist I felt strongly they would next resurface on Microgaming)....No I won't give a name!

Anyways, this player had lost big chunks (7 figures) on the other sites and played the biggest games, which my SJ roll was a little low for so I approximately doubled it by depositing more sterling.

My sterling had to be deposited to the sportsbook but I then transfered it to the poker room. After a couple of days support called me and asked why I had put this money into the pokerroom and I explained I was waiting for a certain game, if they didn't show in the next few days I would withdraw.

The key point here is that I specifically told them they could put it into whichever account they wanted (sports or poker) since a transfer was click of a button for me. They chose poker room.

Long story short, the player never came and I went to withdraw the money and move to another site. Half the fresh deposit, half the built up roll.
That week there happened to be a currency change in my favour which they refused ON THE WHOLE ammount. Now to some extent I can see why they would refuse the fresh deposit's gain as it had seen no action. The rest, there was no reason for, it had been used in prob a $1m plus of gambling ie it had been played through...a term they liked to use.

Now whatever your opinion on the currency gain aspect of the story it still results in a situation where a dollar is not a dollar. If the fish had shown up, busted my account and withdrawn, how much would they pay him?

The biggest indicator as to who was in the right is the fact that the whole deposit, transfer, currency exchange system has been changed now so this cannot happen again.

To finish I will copy and paste an excerpt from the Gibraltar Regulatory Authority in the letter they sent to me:

"With regard to the new rule 19 itself, like IBAS, we too feel a little uncomfortable with the concept that if exchange rates go against you, you lose, but if they go for you, you do not gain..."

....but we will still rule against you and allow them to carry on.


I've been out of poker now for over 4years. Partly as I no longer enjoy it and partly as I no longer trust it.

RR

So all it was they just gave you a little less money back on the exchange?

Yes, but somewhere over $20k as previously stated. The point is not so much the money as the system. My fluctuation wasn't huge percentage wise but between oct 2007 and Jan 2009 the rate went from 2.09 to 1.37....these are massive changes to a balance and potential real world losses to a company if the "wrong player(s)" win(s).

You have to scale up from an individual level to appreciate how this would create an uneven playing field. It is feasible that if one group of players wins SJ pay out 35% less real money than if the other group wins. Again I am not suggesting this happened at all, I do not have reason to believe it did. I'm just pointing out a situation that shouldn't have existed.

Again as I have said before, they have completely changed their system now and for all I know they are running a tight ship. Personally I will never use the company again because of what happened to me but you can all make your own decisions based on current T+C.

I only came on to make sure noboddy assumed that a big reputable skin is inherently better than a small unknown, you have to do your own research.

I will probably leave it there now as I've moved on in my life

This isn't really a minor transgression, if that's what you're implying. It's pure one-sided shadiness on the part of the site (and commission), which sadly, is somewhat standard in this day and age in poker..

Good looking out. Thanks for the warning about the site.

Only seems to have happend something on the tusk front recently. No recent news on the eurolinx debacle I guess?

On the SJ currency issue, it's almost certainly because they learnt the lessons of this (which happened at Ladbrokes) and didn't want to get stung in the same way - story from The Camel's blog (http://camelpoker.blogspot.com)

Hey guys, our 4th birthday is looming - shall we have a party?

bump

Bump