ZeeJustin the next to get caught multi accounting Party MTTs

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
I meant to write that he thinks he was trying to be honest

[/ QUOTE ]

It's unfathomable to me that you could believe this either.

[La Brujita]

Clark,

I know I have said it before but you are one of the two or three best posters on this site.

Come back and post strategy.

And as a general comment for the everyone is doing it camp. I play for a job. I have other friends that do as well, and none of us has ever cheated in any way. We knew it was available, we just chose never to do it.

That is the simple response to the everyone is doing it so it can't be that wrong.

You know its not right so you don't do it.

[Clarkmeister]

Thanks. I still post about a dozen comments a week in medium and small stakes. Not much, but it is there.

[suzzer99]

[ QUOTE ]
You guys never considered that this could lead to cheating? You didnt think to create a thread on 2+2 and not allow it to die until Party did something to fix this flaw in their software?

I read 2+2 daily and Ive never heard about this trick before until now.

BTW, why do have multiple Party accounts?

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh I'm sure Party would have been all over that. They're nothing if not proactive about potential bugs that can't really be proven to do any massive harm. Do I really need to paste a form letter below?

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
sometimes even with a lawyer (which the state seems to think is pretty important, it being unconstitutional and all for them to take things from you without providing one).

[/ QUOTE ]
Dude, that's what called a civil case. You certainly aren't entitled to an attorney.

[/ QUOTE ]
You aren't even necessarily entitled to one in a criminal case, if the offense you are being charged which does not carry the possibility of jail time.

[/ QUOTE ]

The state can seize all of your assets if you are suspected [before indictment even] of money laundering or drug running. Look it up.

And in a grand jury, you are not even entitled to take the Fifth. Poker players gots lots to learn about the law, it seems.

Naj

[sweetjazz]

[ QUOTE ]
Multi accounting hurts the other players but not the poker sites (except through any lost business if word of the cheating spreads) and rakeback does not hurt other players but hurts the poker sites.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is quite true. When some players have rakeback deals and others don't, those who don't have the deals are paying a higher effective rake. Without the rakeback deals, market forces would tend to cause Party or whatever relevant site to collect the same amount of total rake, so players without rakeback would see a drop in the rake they pay while those with rakeback deals would see their effective rake increase if those deals didn't exist.

While I don't think those who are involved in rakeback deals on sites like Party are cheaters or people who deserve to be ostracized, I'd prefer that Party put a stop to any rakeback deals that exist through affiliates and make it -EV to get a rakeback deal. That would benefit me in the long term by keeping the rake down below the level it would be when these deals still exist.

[Vavavoom]

[ QUOTE ]
Vava,
[ QUOTE ]
However, If you think these are the only 2 people are doing it, then you need to take a look around. Why is my post sad, I made my points like everyone else in this thread...and some of my points are valid..

I said a lot more people are doing it then people think...And thats obvious...

Vava

[/ QUOTE ]

We DON'T think they are the only two players doing it. If you read the whole thread, it is plain to see. Those of us who are honest are pissed. We're pissed people cheated. We're pissed the sites didn't have better detection software. We're pissed because we can now see that this is a widespread practice among a certain populace of MTT players. We're pissed that many people apparently have friends who cheat, but they don't think it is their place to say anything about it, out them, or turn them in. They seem to think it's fine they are cheating honest players since it doesn't affect 'them'.

I must say that your first post also made me unhappy when you said
"I personally feel sorry for Zee & JJ... They were both good players and I think they have been unfortunate in having money taken away..."

I wish you had the same sympathy for the people who they cheated out of tens of thousands of dollars.

IMHO your sympathy is very misplaced.

[/ QUOTE ]

My sympathy is not misplaced...They cheated and they got caught. I have no sympathy for them. I'm an honest person and the integrity of the game has been compromised.

I still do feel sorry for them. They were young and immature and its cost them their reputations forever. People won't forget in the same way the "Dutch Boyd" legacy lives on... I don't sympathise with them because of the money being taken away, as it was ill-gotten gains.

When typing I don't proof-read my posts especially when typing at work. I was just voicing my opinions.

This thread has turned into posters criticising other peoples posts, when really it should be about working together to make sure Poker Sites are better run and don't jeopardise everyone's earning potential...

[hencole]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Multi accounting hurts the other players but not the poker sites (except through any lost business if word of the cheating spreads) and rakeback does not hurt other players but hurts the poker sites.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is quite true. When some players have rakeback deals and others don't, those who don't have the deals are paying a higher effective rake. Without the rakeback deals, market forces would tend to cause Party or whatever relevant site to collect the same amount of total rake, so players without rakeback would see a drop in the rake they pay while those with rakeback deals would see their effective rake increase if those deals didn't exist.

While I don't think those who are involved in rakeback deals on sites like Party are cheaters or people who deserve to be ostracized, I'd prefer that Party put a stop to any rakeback deals that exist through affiliates and make it -EV to get a rakeback deal. That would benefit me in the long term by keeping the rake down below the level it would be when these deals still exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Completely agree. They should reduce rake across the board or not at all.

[Vavavoom]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Multi accounting hurts the other players but not the poker sites (except through any lost business if word of the cheating spreads) and rakeback does not hurt other players but hurts the poker sites.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is quite true. When some players have rakeback deals and others don't, those who don't have the deals are paying a higher effective rake. Without the rakeback deals, market forces would tend to cause Party or whatever relevant site to collect the same amount of total rake, so players without rakeback would see a drop in the rake they pay while those with rakeback deals would see their effective rake increase if those deals didn't exist.

While I don't think those who are involved in rakeback deals on sites like Party are cheaters or people who deserve to be ostracized, I'd prefer that Party put a stop to any rakeback deals that exist through affiliates and make it -EV to get a rakeback deal. That would benefit me in the long term by keeping the rake down below the level it would be when these deals still exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Completely agree. They should reduce rake across the board or not at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Should they make Pokertracker mandatory for everybody as well !?

**EDITED**
This isn't going to happen...and neither will getting rid of rakeback...Affiliates will then just go underground to entice players...

[DMBFan23]

good point sweetjazz, but I wonder about some things:

have they decided that affiliate deals are +EV for them? That is, does the increased rake they collect through extra signups and the decreased business from the larger rake they have to collect compensate for the % they have to pay the affiliates?

If so, one could look at a rakeback deal as a sunk cost to a player - the poker sites are going to have affiliates either way. In that case the players are just taking a chunk back, hurting nobody. It wouldnt be the case that party was going to charge less rake without rakeback deals, because they'd still have affiliates