Ultimate Bet Owes Me 20k

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would a business turn away a profitable customer for any reason?

Perhaps, if your cheating is flagrant enough that other players have noticed and complained, then they will ban you. But at that point, you aren't an EV+ customer as your rake generation < rake generated by all the others that are leaving due to your actions.

If you generate $20k in rake per month and have a friend dump ~$1k per month to you from fraudulent credit cards, what is the sites motivation to ban you?

[/ QUOTE ]

They barred ZeeJustin, they barred JJProdigy, and they've barred many others. The integrity of the games and the site has more value than the simple EV proposition that you proposed.

[/ QUOTE ] ZJ and JJProd did not get banned without other players having noticed and complained, IIRC.

[Melchiades]

[ QUOTE ]
If I had been given a simple heads up about what was going on, I would have been a lot less scared and pissed.

[/ QUOTE ]
QFT

[Statutory]

Whats the best email to contract UB?

Once my withdraw clears I would like to email them telling them why I am done with their site, HH's and Good2cu.

I don't ever get a reply from their message system.

Thanks

[dtan05]

glad you got your money back g2cu.

i'd be scared shitless if this happened to me, good thing three wasn't more money in there.

[suzzer99]

Glad you got your $$ back dude. SPOOKY STUFF. I have a couple thoughts on this.

1) It seems that every site other than PS has a shoot first and ask questions later when it comes to fraud. Basically if they have any suspicion they close your acct, take your money, with little or no explanation. If you complain loud enough AND turn out to look like a reputable player AND they take their sweetass time looking into it and find out it looks like you are innocent, THEN you get your money back. FTPDoug almost admitted as much when he described how the process usually works on FTP and how the fraudster then usually just crawls back under the rock they came out of. This just is not an acceptable way to do business in any arena. The sites have got to know this is going to scare off some of their highest $$, highest volume players. Which leads me to my 2nd thought:

2) Could it be there's some incentive for a site like UB to scare off a player like good2cu, and all his buddies? Would a site that all the 2p2 pros shun have a better chance of survival long term? Anyway I know this is the age-old question and all the sites have to walk the tightrope between keeping pros happy and keeping games viable for casual players. I don't intend to delve into that whole debate. I'm just wondering if this incident makes it seem to anyone else like UB has come down on the side of making a pro-unfriendly site? Sounds like the VIP guy cares, but I wonder about the site as a whole.

I sent this thread to everyone in my home game btw, several of whom are casual players on UB. I suggest everyone else do the same.

[5thStreetHog]

Could you explain to me what a site would gain by chasing away the people who they are making the most money from?And also how this would make it more viable for casual players? I can understand a sorta trickle down theory making lower stake games tougher for casual players on a site with a large numbers of pros.But the publicity from having the best players playing on your site whether its from internet pros here and on other forums,or tv pros on FT,will be noticed by a casual player much more ofton than the previous effect would.

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
Could you explain to me what a site would gain by chasing away the people who they are making the most money from?And also how this would make it more viable for casual players? I can understand a sorta trickle down theory making lower stake games tougher for casual players on a site with a large numbers of pros.But the publicity from having the best players playing on your site whether its from internet pros here and on other forums,or tv pros on FT,will be noticed by a casual player much more ofton than the previous effect would.

[/ QUOTE ]

The explanantion is the "Shark effect"... it has been well documented/analyzed (as a concern) by the financial analyst community.

Think of it this way, if only fish played, eventually all the money would go to the house. Any player that wins and withdraws money is taking money away from the site.

A player whose Win$ + Affiliate cost$ + other direct costs$ > Rake Paid$ is actually the worst.

Not saying any of the sites look at it this way... just noting that the analysts have [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
Think of it this way, if only fish played, eventually all the money would go to the house. Any player that wins and withdraws money is taking money away from the site.

[/ QUOTE ]
The problem is that who is a 'fish' is relative to the rest of the player pool. If all the sharks leave a site, then the players who were once marginal winners become big winners that will be cashing out money. Except now the site has a smaller player base and more importantly less rake is being generated.

Do the analysts comment on this at all? I'd also be interested in some links to these types of studies if you had any.

[nation]

zeejustin got all his money back from party...

[ShakeZula06]

nation,

Was that a reply to me or were you just using quick reply? Because it really doesn't exactly defeat my argument but I don't know who else you'd be responding to.

Well if you were then the answer is party poker valued ZJ's $100K plus the money they make off of appearing hard on multi-accounters more then not doing anything. There's obviously a value to players to have trust that a site isn't allowing people to cheat. It's also very possible they knew what was going on the whole time but ignored it because it generated more rake in entry fees, but when it's so obvious that people are emailing PP about it they decided it was +EV to freeze his account.