There was a bug where the "flop QJT" Challenge was meant to require 3 steps but accidentally required 10. It wasn't paying out the right number of points.

We changed all the existing ones to require x3 instead, we forced every one with 3+ steps to complete, then we refunded those players plus all the players who had already completed the whole thing.

I'm not sure if this is the kind of thing we should mail players about or not - thoughts?

I had that challenge idd with 4/10. When I opened the client it feld weird as the first thought was maybe someone broke into my account and played on it but balance was unchanged. Went to the site but nothin in the mailbox of some sort of promo that your major challenge went complete. Not everyone has the 3th channel of you on 2+2.

OK, you've convinced me.

Yeey almost february i cant start playing again without all the rakebackhunters

Yet these graphs were not constructed by the fraud team at Stars; they were the result of high-stakes players in the game examining the playing style of these players at a level the fraud team is unaware of (since they came out and said 100% they were not colluding after weeks (IIRC) of investigation).

And those graphs prove nothing; you can't ban someone because they play together more than with others. You have to inspect their play for tendencies, and Stars missed completely.

If you hire Noah, then sure, you've got a great fraud team, but he's probably not cost effective as a whole.

They were playing with the understanding that the sites can see all cards and choosing the plays with the highest EV with the lowest risk of detection. These are not best hand plays or whipsawing; these are players mitigating variance by playing together optimally. There was no "large deviation" of normal play, which is exactly why Stars couldn't spot it after reviewing their play.

Anyway, whatever, I'm from the states and can't play online at all so I have no horse in this race, but it's absurd that a site would not allow players to have the ability to review their own play or take notes on other players.

This reminds me of PlanetPoker back in the day when I also had to send a cashier's check to Costa Rica because they weren't even set up for electronic funding and had to keep flashcards with notes on regs next to my computer.

UA,

Thank you for you detailed reply re security. In fairness, I should comeback so your users posting here can see the debate.

As a businessman myself, I find this argument very compelling

I went off and did some due diligence on Unibet's accounts and it all seems to stack up as you say...so I have no issues whatosever. Nice one.

Of course that does not mean you're watertight, nobody is...but as far as caveat emptor goes, I'd try out your site with no qualms, despite my former misgivings.

I've had a little dabble - a big deal for me (in view of Black Friday) is the ease and cost of getting money off and on site. Pokerstars is great for this which means I can keep my roll off their site. I would only play on any site seriously that offers the same facility. Haven't checked your withdrawal facility out yet (and it will probably be months/years before I would have anything to withdraw ) so can you say anything about withdrawal facilities, or provide a link?

As to some of the other issues regarding playing conditions - well that's a different story. I see what you are trying to do and why. Not sure it appeals to me relative to my usual sites, but it has its attractions.

10 and 4 sngs

rivertam

Andrew, I just wanted to say: ****ing great job you are doing here man. Really, keep up the good work.

Yes, but like I said - once these things exist once, we can look for them in the future. It's MUCH easier to make those graphs for site than it is for players. These graphs were generated with the help of PTR, a site that now doesn't cover PokerStars (or of course us).

When you decide if someone is colluding you are almost never 100% sure. You look at a vast array of factors and you come to a judgement based on the balance of possibilities. One of these factors is going to be "is this behaviour similar to what someone has done before?" If Stars spent ages before responding on this, it's because the balance of probabilities was really close and lots of people had to look into it. Now that they (and we) are better informed, the balance of probabilities will never fall that way again.

I don't think you should assume that PS fraud detection is perfect, and I definitely think you shouldn't assume player-detected fraud is perfect. The former is much better than the latter in almost every case. Novel cases are going to be hard for both to find, but once it's out there it'll be much easier to catch.

There clearly was a large deviation in play, just as there was in the DON ring. That's what I posted links to graphs of. You don't have to spot it by one player playing one hand one way. There are several other ways of spotting this kind of thing, but it isn't available to players. It is to us. There's lots of stuff that's possible with PTR but not without - by PTR not offering PS coverage any more, it's an invalid comparison now. Yet that information is still available to us.

PokerStars fraud detection practices at the time weren't capable of spotting this stuff - what does that have to do with our fraud detection practices at this time?

How do players make money by colluding if it isn't by variations in play? How are those variations large enough to be worth the risk but not large enough to be observable? Of course it's possible that one time you softplayed a friend and that cost opponents a bit. If it's literally one time and there're no other flags then there's no chance that anyone can spot it, players, site, or omniscient being. But the sites have access to a lot more data than players do, and they can spot all of those other flags and the players cannot.

Taking notes has nothing to do with catching fraud. By not having hand histories and not having notes, we allow new players to stay alive for longer, which allows us to grow while (almost) every other site is in decline. That isn't absurd.

Now you're just trolling - PlanetPoker's payments system has literally zero to do with this.

I agree: I have fairly wide access and the fraud department do too, but perhaps someone internally is capable of hiding something, for example. I have no idea what it looked like internally at UB except that at the end, support definitely knew what was going on before it was public.

I'm afraid that this is site-wide so I don't know a lot about it. You'd be better off talking to general support on that.

Sure, and that's fine. I guess a long-term vision is that one day sites will be trying to do things the PokerStars way and one day they'll be trying to do things the Unibet way.

Thanks, done.

Cheers.

I read all of Noah's posts at the time he made them. Yes, these graphs would be monumentally simple for sites to make since they have all the data; the problem is, they don't know which graphs to make because they don't have the knowledge to make them. You can't find what you're not looking for.

Again, it was the inspection of hand histories that players examined that they concluded that the site should investigate the players to piece together any missing data. If the players didn't have access to these hand histories, they'd still be colluding today.

I did not say there wasn't any variation in play. I'm saying the variation is too subtle to be conclusive, unless you have both poker and math experts at the site, and by experts, I mean guys that could do very well in either field on their own.

If one can't beat an online 5/10NL game, then one can't inspect the play of winning players to find something amiss because they are not going to cheat the way a micro player is going to.

I know you disagree with that, but didn't the Stars employee compile all of the UB data for a 60 Minutes segment with graphs, yet he couldn't spot which methods they were using to collude when informed by the players that stox was cheating? That's because he works in security and doesn't play 5/10 for a living. He's also a very smart guy, too.

Isn't this all moot, anyway? Does your site even have any biggish games? I couldn't see anyone wanting to play for serious money with no hand histories or notes and nearly all colluders are simple to catch, so what are we debating here?

It is absurd. You are not allowing hand histories and note taking in order to preserve your fish so you can rake and rerake them to maximize the site's profits. I get it, but that's overstepping the bounds for a site. A site should spread a game, not interfere with the EV of its players. But I'll agree that I'd certainly see it your way if I worked at a site or was a weak player.



I'm not trolling. It was simply a way of illustrating that no notes and no histories is archaic, because the last time I played on a site like that was back when they only took checks.

Hello why can't i login to unibet poker?
I can login to sportbetting.

I've said a few times now. We do know what we're looking for. Stox was 5 years ago.

It clearly isn't too subtle. Look at the graphs.

NL and PLO400 run every day. We're going to do NL1k one day a week starting from Jan 30th to Feb 27th.

As to the snide point about serious money - well, our biggest rakers are as big as they were when we were on MPN.

We have a higher proportion of winners than other sites do (according to public data from PTR of a few years ago), and that's because we keep new players alive for longer. Do you see people complaining in this thread that the games are too tough now or that nobody can win on Unibet any more?

No, you don't.

Doesn't look like trolling to me! Have you played the site? Choosing not to have a feature that you happen to like is a design decision.

Sorry, I can't tell without your alias or username - but you will be better off talking to support about this as they know more about site-wide things than I do.

Hi Andrew,

Can you please exchange my €4 daily 4 ticket into a €4 MTT?
Username: Tommilio

Thanks.

Sure, done.

You know, this is the second time you've called me a troll and now snide, and I've been nothing but civil with you. Like I said, I'm American, so you don't need to try and sway me. I only came in here because you dragged me from another thread by answering my question in here instead of in the rake thread, so don't drag people into your thread and then call them trolls, please.

Just leave, unibet is the best pokersite there is atm. They have a different strategy than all other pokersites and i love the no HUDS and HH. Look at pokerstars atm even stakes as low as 5NL are nit and reg infested and on 10-25 nl you find rakebackgrinders that 24 table because they suck the player higher so they destroy these games aswell with slowing games now and demotivating recreational players because they get crushed.

If you dont like unibet fine dont play on the site But their vision on poker is a fresh breath in the industry that now seems to be more of a rakebackgrinding 24 tables and dont move up kinda thing. If it wasnt for the new unibet I would probably already have quit poker because im really tired of all the Hudsregs rakebackgrinders and nits that infest microstakes

You wanted to talk about something offtopic in another thread, so I pointed you towards a thread where it would be ontopic. That's how this site works. You don't have to post in this thread if you don't want to.

I also pointed out where you were trolling and where you were snide. You don't have to troll or be snide either, but if you are, sometimes people tell you about it. That's also how this site works.

Thanks for explaining how the site works; I've only been here since 1998 or 1997 before the implementation of the ubb software. If someone wants to call me a troll, that's fine, but I'd expect different from a representative of a site, who presumably is trying to obtain more players to his site and realizes that his forum demeanor plays a role in that.

Yes: I think that by addressing the arguments and by acting like a normal player and a normal poster, I can make this a much more productive thread for us all than if I posted corporate-speak or support-speak.

If u don't like Unibet, don't play. You can't from America anyway...
I really can't see why this topic has such a spot in your heart that you feel the need to reply with snide comments to someone trying to do their job, a good job, by addressing why the site is the way it is.
If u want to play on reg infested sites sure, do so, there's plenty out there. (Although options are limited to you in the US).

Can you exchange all my tourney tickets into a NL25 ticket? Login is itsjustabuyinlol.

Thanks.

Don't think it's fair to say 'if you don't like Unibet then don't play' when someone is bringing up ways the site might be susceptible to cheating. Not saying I agree with Land O Lakes, but I don't think he's been out of line. Just my two cents.

Anyway, just got the UO Package Freeroll Ticket for 100k points. Is it right that there isn't a freeroll until April? If so, is there any other value you can get instead of the ticket? I don't even know if I'll still play poker in April

Hi Andrew, could you please convert my tickets into 1x50NL ticket and 2x1€SNG tickets? thanks

username: R4iseItUp

Sorry, guess it was mentioned already in the thread. But is there a deposit/withdrawal fee at unibet? And are players form Germany allowed to play at the site?

Comedic gold.