Stars vs. Party cheater-funds confiscation policy - Page 2

soah · #11 02-27-2006, 01:00 AM

So you are claiming that ZeeJustin did not have to pay anything to enter the tournaments in which he won that $5000? Or that if he had played in those tournaments without cheating, that he had zero chance to place in the money? Or that Stars refunded the entry fees that he paid in those tournaments? Because that is certainly not what Stars said.

betadecay · #12 02-27-2006, 01:00 AM

If the chance of getting caught is <100%, cheating is +EV. Simple.

nice post.

I voted party, yes, yes. Although the chance that your illicit gains will be confiscated(on top of being banned) is a deterrant, it is a very small one. I think punitive damages are very important in this scenario. I think the question that should be polled is

Where would you rather cheat?

Party or Stars

the answer is obvious.

betadecay · #13 02-27-2006, 01:03 AM

[ QUOTE ]
So you are claiming that ZeeJustin did not have to pay anything to enter the tournaments in which he won that $5000? Or that if he had played in those tournaments without cheating, that he had zero chance to place in the money? Or that Stars refunded the entry fees that he paid in those tournaments? Because that is certainly not what Stars said.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stars did nothing to punish ZJ besides retaining his buy in? That is ridiculous. This guy was cheating and all they did was take his buy in? whatever stars.

mbpoker · #14 02-27-2006, 01:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Stars did nothing to punish ZJ besides retaining his buy in?

[/ QUOTE ]

Where do you see Lee said this? He said the funds were confiscated that were gained by cheating. So obviously he cashed in some other tourney and his win was confiscated.

soah · #15 02-27-2006, 01:12 AM

I'm not arguing for or against either policy. I am simply pointing out a blatant error in logic which people are using to make their decisions.

fwiw, I can think of a number of times where Party has closed down players' accounts but allowed them to cash out their funds. Whether to confiscate all, part, or none of someone's funds when shutting them down is always handled case-by-case. It seems pretty clear that ZJ cheated far more on Party than he did on Stars, so it is hardly unreasonable for the sites to handle the situations differently.

EliotSpitzer · #16 02-27-2006, 01:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
So you are claiming that ZeeJustin did not have to pay anything to enter the tournaments in which he won that $5000? Or that if he had played in those tournaments without cheating, that he had zero chance to place in the money? Or that Stars refunded the entry fees that he paid in those tournaments? Because that is certainly not what Stars said.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you think ZJ should have all of his tourney entry fees refunded? I would say tourney entry fees are inconsequential and in any event honest players do not get them refunded so I don't see why a cheater should.

betadecay · #17 02-27-2006, 01:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Stars did nothing to punish ZJ besides retaining his buy in?

[/ QUOTE ]

Where do you see Lee said this? He said the funds were confiscated that were gained by cheating. So obviously he cashed in some other tourney and his win was confiscated.

[/ QUOTE ]

I say this because his winnings are a freeroll. If he keeps them, great, if he doesn't all he loses are the buy-in and time. The winnings were illicit and therefore did not belong to him. They confiscated 5k, but the only thing that is a punishment is the buy in.

soah · #18 02-27-2006, 01:28 AM

First of all, losing all your tourney buy-ins will drain your bankroll pretty quickly. It's hardly insignificant.

Secondly, he has an opportunity to win money in those tournaments without cheating. Using two accounts improves his EV mainly just through the fact that he can apply his edge two times. So by cheating he is risking not only his entry fees, but he is also risking $x which he could win legitimately. (I am ignorant as to what a good ROI is in MTTs so I will have to simply leave that as $x instead of guessing at a precise number.)

mbpoker · #19 02-27-2006, 01:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
but the only thing that is a punishment is the buy in.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you cash in a tournament it's usually not the first time you played there. So for example you had a horse and played 10 tournaments and cashed in one of them. Your win will be confiscated and you will be banned meaning you lost your 20 buy-ins, not one or two, and oare thrown out of the site and branded a cheat. That's serious -EV.

The only difference between supposedly Party's policy (not stated anywhere) is that if you had some other win in a cash game where you played honestly, that Party will confiscate this money too, if you didn't cashout before being caught (unlikely).

betadecay · #20 02-27-2006, 01:50 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but the only thing that is a punishment is the buy in.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you cash in a tournament it's usually not the first time you played there. So for example you had a horse and played 10 tournaments and cashed in one of them. Your win will be confiscated and you will be banned meaning you lost your 20 buy-ins, not one or two, and oare thrown out of the site and branded a cheat. That's serious -EV.

The only difference between supposedly Party's policy (not stated anywhere) is that if you had some other win in a cash game where you played honestly, that Party will confiscate this money too, if you didn't cashout before being caught (unlikely).

[/ QUOTE ]

I aggree with your posts, but it still stands that all Stars is doing to punush ZJ is take his 1 buy-in. He may have spent more money cheating but if it happened that money was not taken by stars.