Sort of a long thread, but I'll add my own $0.02, corrections first.
To those who say HEK was banned for an equity chop which did not happen, you are forgetting that he did admit to getting paid $500 of the pot, just not right away, and not the whole agreed amount before he escalated the situation and it all hit the fan.
To those who say the ban was just to cover the floor's error, I do not personally believe the floor really made an error. The floor discouraged the chop, warned the players that the casino would ship the pot to the winning hand, would not enforce the chop if anything went awry, and that they were on their own to complete the deal away from the table. Basically, the deal the floor offered the players was: "no chopping, but we won't do anything to stop you, IF you successfully and quietly complete the deal on your own, away from the table, not violating table stakes, without making a commotion, etc."
Anyone playing 10-20NL professionally ought to know those implicit terms, and if they don't, then $2000 is not that unreasonable a price to pay to learn them. This incident should have cost HEK that $2000, less whatever he could recover from the player later through peer pressure, small claims court, or calmer heads prevailing with the passage of time.
The only reason the cost became $2000 plus a lifetime ban, is HEK's escalation into disruptive behavior, which brought the chop to the attention of security.
It used to be that there was discretion in the length of ban. Roman got a week for thowing his egg sandwich at the wall when playing 20-40 LHE, for instance. But now, it's either 1 day or lifetime. Fear not, I've seen one person come back after 3 or 4 lifetime bans.
Compose a letter. Apologize for being unruly, promise to be a model patron, and say you're getting therapy to deal with an inability to let go of old issues.
Consider this: you were already $500 better off than if you hadn't tried doing the chop; you made a bad decision to do an off-table deal; you made a bad decision to make a scene at your own table; you made a bad decision to make a scene at Frankie's table; your theatrics brought the rules violation to the attention of security; and you failed to let go of an old complaint and floor decision against you. No casino is going to let you disrupt a table you're not even playing at, over a situation at your own table. Nor will any casino let you slander a regular player, over an ancient unproven (even if plausible) allegation against that player.
The main reason to go to a B&M casino is to make sure that you get the chips you are entitled to. To give up that right by cutting an "away from the table, unenforceable by the casino" deal, with anyone less known/trusted than a close friend or family member, is downright stupid and unprofessional. And cutting a deal with such a close person, could be considered soft play or collusion. So
just don't do it in either case! I am not saying that deals imply collusion, at a casino where deals are enforceable...go ahead and have the casino run them twice or whatever. I am saying, play by the enforceable rules of the casino like everyone else...that is why you went there in the first place and paid them time or rake.
A discussion of the ancient hand which convinced you that Frankie is a cheater, should be in a separate thread. But like everyone else, I'll comment on that, too. I generally do not play in the same games as him, but I have spent a fair amount of time watching him play, both in tournaments and cash games. He is an unpredictable, tough player bordering on totally wild at times. I have seen him repeatedly make hugely aggressive raises and totally inexplicable calls, at tables of strong players who were verifiably not his friends. I would not rule out the possibility that he and his alleged friend were just seeing who could abuse the other one more, regardless of whether a player or two is "monkey in the middle" between them. I'm not surprised that in the hand in question, it was the friend who had to say uncle, regardless of what the cards were.
Furthermore, it is often good play to bet the same line that has been working for you at a table, until there is resistance. So what you see as a "pattern of collusive cheating", from his perspective is a "pattern of folding to my habitual reraises" until you stick the money in the pot with him and let the cards do the talking. Then if you catch him with a weak hand, he's playing exactly like Doyle Brunson advocates in Super System 2.
Technically, I'm sure that his bets often rely more upon fold equity than showdown equity. If you can't handle players like that, you might want to get a day job or drop down a notch or two.
Seeing as everyone's photo but your own was posted here, I'm not sure who you are....so I'm not sure if I know you, much less whether I'm rooting for you to be allowed back.
But if you can't act like a gentleman after the casino decides which chips are yours, and you hold grudges over resolved old incidents, I'd probably vote to keep you over at Mohegan to think it over for a good while.
Believe it or not, Foxwoods is a pretty special poker room, and part of the reason is that the poker shift managers are quite competent and not the slightest bit corrupt. There is not a more level playing field anywhere that I know of, probably largely due to the no-tipping policy for floors/managers.
The only favoritism I've seen a floor show is that when they see a chip on the carpet, they'll let a regular know where it is. They are not allowed to pick it up themselves, nor to have any chips on their person. I wish it were like that when I visit Vegas as "a tourist". Tipping is fine, but systematic bribery is not. Maybe that's why I don't eat well at Bellagio.