Players got refunds yesterday on pokerstars, after someone recently been banned for botting or so.

Names that comes to guess have been captaincube, mariosy or someone like happyhammy.

Anyone got this?

Atleast 6 people got refunded yesterday, including guys like Isildur1 and spidey etc.

What kind of games did you get refunds for?

Players who has received refunds has mainly played Limit Triple Draw and such limit games.

Refunds has been fairly small, like $12K to one player and $13K to another, I have received this information myself, and I have also seen spidey chatting about it earlier this evening on a table.

In fact, spidey is the one who guessed on the players above, and he guessed that Isildur1 had also received a small refund, before he confirmed it himself, and they both received their refunds at the same time, not sure how PokerStars handles these refund things but the payouts were paid out same day, but they don't reveal who the player is.

interesting

brian hastings

I could have most likely resulted in a poker lawsuit that did not yet happen

wtf. $12k and $13k compensation is "fairly small"???

They sound positively huge by comparison to anything else that has been published on 2p2 that I've read.

Good to see PokerStars apparently identifying misbehaviour, taking action, and providing compensation to players.

Fake BenSulsky

Game described seems to be 1k/2k so yeah, then 12k is only 6 big bets.

Inside information from a stars representative, this screen name got banned : anglingalec

from ownage4u over skype :

They're small refunds, these players likely lost more against the banned cheaters given the stakes they play.

Lol anglingalec

I'm curious what the OP meant by 'botting'?
Do they really mean someone had a Triple Draw bot that could defeat the highest stakes players?
(seems unlikely to me, if they had the skills to make a bot with such strategies, wouldn't it be easier just to play those strategies? Arn't bots more for auto playing multitables or something?) Or when they say 'botting' did they really mean some sort of collusion? Although, I had observed some of the alleged banned players playing HU for lengthy periods.

If anyone has any idea or can shed some light it, that would be interesting. Thanks.

As to which stakes, I imagine it's from a mix of stakes, 50/100 and higher (I'm guessing it's not all 1k/2k). As I've watched these players at a variety of such stakes, they move around a bit.

A lot "bots" aren't bots they are computer programs that tell you what to do in real time and you click the buttons, see HU Hyper regs who "retired" from poker when required to post a video. "BUT MY PRIVACY!!!!!" AKA you're cheating and can't replicate your play without your automated charts.

Glad to see Stars catching people, though. Can only imagine how much goes undetected on just about every other site in the world.

Bots at these stakes, while, I guess, possible, seems awfully unlikely compared to multi-accounting.

Fortunately the details of the refund, how the refunds were calculated and the reason for refunds and account closure will have to have been disclosed to the UKGC.

The longer this reporting requirement goes on the better the understanding of the regulator of the issues. The greater the pressure for more resource dedicated to poker cheating, the greater the pressure for prosecutions and the more likely some level of reporting from the regulator on total funds seized, the total estimated loss to legitimate players (a different calculation to the compensation).

Finally we have a regulator that does get the details of who is caught cheating, how many players are affected, what the shortfall is between cheated losses and any compensation. A regulator that demands global figures and has the power to prosecute if motivated to do so.

FreshThyme, Josem, thanks for the replies guys.

Josem, I think you are right. Bots are extremely unlikely in this instance. Must be multi-accounting.
Was confused by both OP & Spidey both saying the word 'botting'. I looked up the old multi-accounting scandal, it must be this, there's a whole bunch of related bannable offences that a multi-acount might likely do.
Thanks for pointing me in the right direction and clearing up that confusion.

MA+VPN is probably pretty close to the truth

I still haven't read about a case where a pokersite has put forth the names and collusion details to this authority.

But, how is kp... , i mean gofish7 still out there active?

I emailed the UKGC about a different case earlier in 2017, asking a few questions, including whether the operator had notified the UKGC of cheating in that particular situation.

They confirmed that operators are required to report any suspicion of offences under the Gambling Act 2005, but the UKGC said that they cannot comment on individual cases.

yes think it was brian hatesthings

They are obliged to do it under the Remote Technical standards. This is the 38 page PDF: http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk...-standards.pdf If you want to find the relevant bits I suggest a search on the word "cheat".

FYI the wording is a bit odd, it shifts between information that must be made available to customers and information to the regulator in a potentially confusing way. There were some guidelines on the information required in the consultation for the changes (shown in green). They also promised further guidelines but I have not chased them up seen them.

The information provided to the regulator is treated as commercially sensitive and not released directly OR it is seen as relevant to a criminal investigation and so again not released. Both are valid reasons to refuse FOI requests too so it is no surprise that these reports are not "news" - they are confidential reports required by the regulator.

I am still giving them some time to get a picture of what info they are getting before engaging with them again about how consolidated information can be made available to the consumer, as they do with other gambling data.

My hope is that a routine report of totals will become available one day and that the sheer scale and value of the reports helps the UKGC realise that action including prosecution is required...but no it is not news, it is a reporting requirement for UK licenced poker sites (all the decent ones).

richas, i dont understand who you think will be prosecuted or how they will be prosecuted?