ZeeJustin the next to get caught multi accounting Party MTTs - Page 273

John Ho · #**2721** 03-01-2006, 05:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Just had a look at the zeejustin.com webpage. Oh boy, did the journal on the 23rd Feb make me laugh. Titled; Brutal downswing, beautiful recovery: in it he described how he went on a brutal downswing that day (2nd worse of his life) where he dropped $20k. Fortunately for him though he remembered he was one of the "best players in the world" and was only playing against mere "fish" so by the end of a gruelling 21 hour session he managed to turn it around to a break even session. Well done!

But if he thought that 20 buyin drop was bad he must have been sick when he woke up the next day to find out the whole lot, lock stock and barrel, had been conviscated. Wow, it was a good thing you made that 20buyin drop back wasn't it! Still no journal on that though ZJ? My God, that's more than a brutal downswing. The word stupid can only begin to describe what an idiot this boy is. ZJ, if you can take anything from this, you can take the fact you've put a massive smile on not only my face but many others as well.

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I was laughing my ass off reading that.

But I do kind of feel sorry for the kid. Playing in the same tournament with multiple accounts is totally wrong. No doubt about that.

But does anyone have some hand histories that show him making collusion-type plays with his multiple accounts? If so it would be nice if Party gave us some examples so we know they aren't selectively enforcing their rules. I doubt he's the only player with multiple accounts under fake names. Does Party aggressively target those people too? (as they should)

Or was ZeeJustin's large bankroll just too meaty for them to resist going after?

That being said...the kid is young. He behaved unethically and stupid - and hopefully learns his lesson. This isn't school. In the real world mistakes like this have consequences which may never go away.

parappa · #**2722** 03-01-2006, 05:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can we let this die?

[/ QUOTE ]

if we only let internet lawyers bitch at other internet lawyers for a few more days, we can easily beat myspace

so as far as I'm concerned, internet lawsuits ahoy

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but on purely aesthetic grounds, I'd hate to see the silly legal debate be the thing that pushes it past the myspace thread. I hope something better comes along soon.

Exsubmariner · #**2723** 03-01-2006, 05:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Lastly, they must be stringent at EVERY LEVEL of cheating. From chat-cheating ("Hey check it down, he's all in, let's try and bust him") which Stars is VERY lax on, to soft-playing, there are a number of "little white cheats" that the sites let people get away with. Start cracking down at every turn. Remove the slippery slopes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt that you will ever get rid of the implicit collusion aspect of poker. Any dummy is going to figure out once you have a stack who is all in at the tourney table, and there are two or three other stacks at the table who are in and cover, you check it down. It's the best way to get rid of that player. I see it all the time. Is it a prohibited strategy for the player who is the covered stack? No.

I am really suprised, though that Stars has taken the stance it has on the "soft play" form of collusion.

KotOD · #**2724** 03-01-2006, 05:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Lastly, they must be stringent at EVERY LEVEL of cheating. From chat-cheating ("Hey check it down, he's all in, let's try and bust him") which Stars is VERY lax on, to soft-playing, there are a number of "little white cheats" that the sites let people get away with. Start cracking down at every turn. Remove the slippery slopes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt that you will ever get rid of the implicit collusion aspect of poker. Any dummy is going to figure out once you have a stack who is all in at the tourney table, and there are two or three other stacks at the table who are in and cover, you check it down. It's the best way to get rid of that player. I see it all the time. Is it a prohibited strategy for the player who is the covered stack? No.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nono, don't misunderstand me. I'm not talking about people checking it down on their own. I'm talking about explicit instructions or directions in the chat that talk about checking it down to eliminate someone.

Party booted someone from the cruise for it within the last two years. Stars is notoriously soft on it - they let people off with an email warning not to do it.

Exsubmariner · #**2725** 03-01-2006, 05:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
A clear legal status in the U.S. would also help a great deal as it would allow poker sites to file claims against US citizens for fraud, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

This opens up a whole can of worms. I don't mean to go off, but I am thoroughly underwhelmed that my government has failed to do something simple and practical to protect my interest once again. Of course, the only alternative is to become a political activist on the matter and hoist up a big flag on top of your house that says "Hey IRS, I play poker, please come audit me." Is it really worth the headache?

jb9 · #**2726** 03-01-2006, 06:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A clear legal status in the U.S. would also help a great deal as it would allow poker sites to file claims against US citizens for fraud, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

This opens up a whole can of worms. I don't mean to go off, but I am thoroughly underwhelmed that my government has failed to do something simple and practical to protect my interest once again. Of course, the only alternative is to become a political activist on the matter and hoist up a big flag on top of your house that says "Hey IRS, I play poker, please come audit me." Is it really worth the headache?

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh yeah -- it would be nice if that clear legal status included a simple, sensible, and fair tax policy.

Nick-Zack · #**2727** 03-01-2006, 07:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]

A partial answer is requiring real verification of identity (drivers license, passport, etc. -- stuff you need to get a loan from a bank or to get on an international flight).

This wouldn't stop the dedicated cheaters, but it would really slow down the "hey if they didn't want people doing this they wouldn't make it so easy" crowd.

A clear legal status in the U.S. would also help a great deal as it would allow poker sites to file claims against US citizens for fraud, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Making it harder to play isn't going to help get the fish to the table. The dedicated people will jump through whatever hoops are in the way but the casual player is the one that I prefer to play against.

pace13 · #**2728** 03-01-2006, 07:29 PM

Can someone please post a quick bulleted list of highlights for this thread? My eyes are already burning from reading the first 50 pages of this brazillion page long thread.....PLEEEEEEEEEEEEASE [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

kthanksbye

gg all

heater · #**2729** 03-01-2006, 07:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I will make you my bitch.

[/ QUOTE ]

I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] this thread.

Wake up CALL · #**2730** 03-01-2006, 07:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone please post a quick bulleted list of highlights for this thread? My eyes are already burning from reading the first 50 pages of this brazillion page long thread.....PLEEEEEEEEEEEEASE [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

kthanksbye

gg all

[/ QUOTE ]

ZeeJustin cheated other players out of their money. Most here think it is wrong, a few feel sympathy towards him, even one guy applauds him, one scumbag wants to represent Zee in court and buy himself another vacation home.

That is all.