Total Free Money Earned

Redeems: $280,439

BTC Rate: $98337.85

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #11
    Knight-Captain
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    367
    Quote Originally Posted by Assistanc3 View Post
    Sadly a poker site leaned on the side of the player who generates the most rake, I was utterly shocked when that is what I was told in a dispute I had with a poker site. They admitted it was collusion but said the player was a long time member who generates a lot of rake and was only going to give a warning.

    The site wouldn't even give me a satellite or a refund so they have lost my rake and support to promote their poker client.
    Man, that's sum BS! Not what u said, but what the site said. You should've made a copy of that e-mail and posted it on a bunch of these forums so everybody could see just how shady they were. What site was that!?!
    I think the whole disabled chat thing is about ppl not agreeing to call and then check down. I'm wondering if that is against tourney rules, cuz I could swear that I've seen it in live tourneys on TV before. Maybe it was online that I saw it, tho, back before chat was disabled during all-ins, and that's why it's now disabled in those situations. The whole thing this thread was about, tho, was the times when ppl were all-in cuz they had less chips than the blind and/or ante, and when all-in donks kept going all-in every hand, basically holding the chat hostage until they got knocked out or moved to another table. If agreeing to call and check down is against the rules, then they pretty much HAVE to disable the chat during all-ins, altho I do think that just punishing the ppl that do it is a better idea, I know this isn't a perfect world. Thanks a lot to all that responded, and good luck to u all.

  2. #12
    Master Sergeant Blakes84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by Assistanc3 View Post
    Sadly a poker site leaned on the side of the player who generates the most rake, I was utterly shocked when that is what I was told in a dispute I had with a poker site. They admitted it was collusion but said the player was a long time member who generates a lot of rake and was only going to give a warning.

    The site wouldn't even give me a satellite or a refund so they have lost my rake and support to promote their poker client.
    What site was this?

  3. #13
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    164
    it doesnt matter onre way or the other...

  4. #14
    -(^_^)- ProBlackbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,934
    Yeah me too, what's the problem with disabled the chat when you are allins? I think it's good that way. It's online and we don't play live. All right!
    PokerStars: ProBlackbird | Betsson: ProBlackbird | Party Poker: UnknownFlush

  5. #15
    Master Sergeant
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by gtrippp View Post
    Man, that's sum BS! Not what u said, but what the site said. You should've made a copy of that e-mail and posted it on a bunch of these forums so everybody could see just how shady they were.
    I was thinking of it but would be just a waste of my time, what would I gain from it? Not going to give out the poker clients name, I still do have the emails but that wouldn't prove anything. My word vs theirs.


    A simple solution, when an all-in bet is made players still left to act or involved in the hand chat is blocked. Anything is better then the system most sites have now.

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    253
    yeah i agree this can get extremely aggrivating we are grown ups

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •