ZeeJustin the next to get caught multi accounting Party MTTs

[JackOfSpeed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dear Justin,
We hereby give you notice that we are terminating our Standard Affiliate Agreement (the “Agreement”) with you. Clause 5.3 of the Agreement states that we are entitled to terminate our Agreement without cause immediately upon this written notice to you. We will also be exercising our right under clause 5.3 to terminate all trackers that you have with us.
We ask that you familiarize yourself with clause 5.5 of the Agreement which sets out the effects of termination. We require you to stop promoting our Site and you are no longer entitled to use our Marketing Materials. We also remind you that the obligation of confidentiality and non-disclosure shall, amongst other things, survive the termination of the Agreement.
Yours sincerely
PartyGaming
Sarah Hunter
Affiliate Relations
PartyGaming Marketing (UK)
Email: [email protected]
London Office +44 (0) 20 7337 0100
18 King William Street, London, EC4N 7BP
www.partygaming.com
This email is sent by PartyGaming Marketing (UK), a provider of services to PartyGaming Marketing (Gibraltar). The contents of this email may be subject to approval by an authorized representative of PartyGaming Marketing (Gibraltar).
The information contained in this email, and any attachments hereto, is strictly confidential and solely intended for use by the individual(s) and/or entity(s) to which it is addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the System Manager at [email protected] as soon as possible


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. Another brilliant move. He might have just gotten himself slapped with a million dollar civil suit from posting that email, if Party is so inclined.

[jcm4ccc]

OK, here's the math on playing 6 accounts in the same tournament, and the chances that two of them will end up on the same table.

Let's say that the tournament has 2500 people and that ZeeJustin plays against, on average, 50 people for one tournament entry. In other words, for one account and one entry, he plays against 2% of the entire field. 98% he doesn't play against. Does that sound about right?

Let's name his accounts A, B, C, D, E, F. The chances that A and B do NOT play on the same table are 98%. The chances that A and C do not play on the same table are 98%. The chances that both of the events are true is 96% (98% * 98%).

so how many different possibilities are there?
A vs. B
A vs. C
A vs. D
A vs. E
A vs. F
B vs. C
B vs. D
B vs. E
B vs. F
C vs. D
C vs. E
C vs. F
D vs. E
D vs. F
E vs. F

15 different possibilities. Each possibility has a 2% chance of happening, and a 98% chance of not happening. .98 ^ 15 = .74. So there is a 74% chance that this will not happen, and a 26% chance that two of his accounts will end up playing against each other at some point.

This is all assuming that ZeeJustin would play against 2% of the field, on average. He may be better than that.

[P.Dirty]

[ QUOTE ]
In other news, February 24th has set an all time record for most cashouts in one day.

[/ QUOTE ]

[NinjaMan]

It's sad that JJ handled his idiocy better than Justin.

[Meeler09]

[ QUOTE ]
It's sad that JJ handled his idiocy better than Justin.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah and he's like 15...

[P.Dirty]

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, almost all of you have broken the rules at some point. How many of you have created a second account for rakeback? Neither creating a second account nor receiving rakeback is allowed. Both are expressly forbidden. Maybe you’ll see things my way once all your money is seized for doing that. If I’m a cheater, so are you.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
PS: Party will never seize any of my money because I don't cheat. Sweet how that works.

[/ QUOTE ]

Has anyone else not signed up for a rakeback deal because they knew it violated the T&C (even though they realized how much money they were losing by not doing rakeback)? I don't think rakeback is cheating or unethical; but I was concerned about the T&C violation and the obvious consequences that could arise (as Zee points out).

- DVaut1 (1 account, no rakeback, overly-self righteous, probably a complete moron for not having rakeback...but sleeping easy tonight).

[NinjaMan]

[ QUOTE ]
OK, here's the math on playing 6 accounts in the same tournament, and the chances that two of them will end up on the same table.

Let's say that the tournament has 2500 people and that ZeeJustin plays against, on average, 50 people for one tournament entry. In other words, for one account and one entry, he plays against 2% of the entire field. 98% he doesn't play against. Does that sound about right?

Let's name his accounts A, B, C, D, E, F. The chances that A and B do NOT play on the same table are 98%. The chances that A and C do not play on the same table are 98%. The chances that both of the events are true is 96% (98% * 98%).

so how many different possibilities are there?
A vs. B
A vs. C
A vs. D
A vs. E
A vs. F
B vs. C
B vs. D
B vs. E
B vs. F
C vs. D
C vs. E
C vs. F
D vs. E
D vs. F
E vs. F

15 different possibilities. Each possibility has a 2% chance of happening, and a 98% chance of not happening. .98 ^ 15 = .74. So there is a 74% chance that this will not happen, and a 26% chance that two of his accounts will end up playing against each other at some point.

This is all assuming that ZeeJustin would play against 2% of the field, on average. He may be better than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because I suck, what would then be the odds of him seeing himself over the course of 10 MTTs? How likely?

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]
To further show how corrupt PartyPoker is

[/ QUOTE ]

You were pimping this company until yesterday. I guess it didn't matter to you how corrupt they were until you could no longer make a buck from them.