You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Sky Poker forums will be temporarily unavailable from 11pm Wednesday July 25th.
Sky Poker Forums is upgrading its look! Stay tuned for the big reveal!

SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE

I am really sorry to say that sky poker has gone completely downhill since they have brought in the new software.. The whole playing this fun has gone out of the window. People say you should play sky poker for fun.. What they should really say is if you want BS then play on this new software.. Because this new software keep rewarding bad players all the time.. It does not reward the people that put in the hours and hours.. The regulars at all anymore..  Maybe if you have £10,000 in your bankroll, but if you got less that £50 in your bankroll the software does not reckonise you at all..

There is no way on this site you can now play with skill you won't get rewarded at all..
«1

Comments

  • edited March 2014
    You do realise you can still play on the old table skin if you prefer losing your money on that table skin? 
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    You do realise you can still play on the old table skin if you prefer losing your money on that table skin? 
    Posted by alex1229
    Not if you are playing sit and go.. You only get one option to play on the new software and that's it... 
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    You do realise you can still play on the old table skin if you prefer losing your money on that table skin? 
    Posted by alex1229

    And it's not a question of loosing your money...  It's how you loose your money that is in question here... 
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE : And it's not a question of loosing your money...  It's how you loose your money that is in question here... 
    Posted by dominon105
    How do you lose yours?
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE : How do you lose yours?
    Posted by DOHHHHHHH

    By bad players winning all the time.. lol...  How do I show a hand in here??  I moved all in.. Person never had the odds to call, but did anyway with king, 5.. And of course hits the 5.. That's just one of many..  The way it's going at the moment I might as well just close my account down....
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE : By bad players winning all the time.. lol...  How do I show a hand in here??  I moved all in.. Person never had the odds to call, but did anyway with king, 5.. And of course hits the 5.. That's just one of many..  The way it's going at the moment I might as well just close my account down....
    Posted by dominon105[/QUOTE

    All the sites the same m8 lots of unrealistic stuff happened dun go on pokerstars cos they will call with anything and u will have lot more bad beats on there
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE :
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE : By bad players winning all the time.. lol...  How do I show a hand in here??  I moved all in.. Person never had the odds to call, but did anyway with king, 5.. And of course hits the 5.. That's just one of many..  The way it's going at the moment I might as well just close my account down.... Posted by dominon105[/QUOTE All the sites the same m8 lots of unrealistic stuff happened dun go on pokerstars cos they will call with anything and u will have lot more bad beats on there
    Posted by daiw
    I don't mind the beats or even bad beats... It part and parcel of the game that class as variants.. What I don't accept is the BS that I am getting for this whole month.. I have been playing since 2008 and this is my worse month is history..  Nothing that I do is right.. And I am talking about Sit and Go, DYMS...  Where the odds are you are suppose to win one, and make a little money or even break even...  But no..  It's just getting to become a huge joke... Doesn't make how of a so called bad player you are suppose to win a little....  But no.. I am loosing more than I am winning, which is not real at all... 

    I wished I had the £500+ bankroll then the software will start to reckonise me... Even though I am a regular player and am putting in the hours.. I do not deserve this at all..

    Now I have only got a bankroll of £16.. So I should just close my account down permantely and never come back to SKY again..  There is no way I am going to turn that into £20, and then so on...  Not a chance... 

  • edited March 2014
    So if you have more than £500 in your account the software will RECOGNISE you?
    What does this even mean?
    So everyone that has beaten you in a pot has over £500 in their account?
    You think if you put in the hours you are the one who should put bad beats on people?
    This really is one of the most nonsensical posts I have read and believe me I read many on here.

    Why dont you save up £500, deposit it on here and if your theory is correct you can not lose. In a few weeks you will be able to withdraw the £500 , still have £500 in your account and you will never lose again.
    Wow I might have come up with something here. Dont tell anyone else though OK?
  • edited March 2014
    Post some hands, its not hard. lets see these BAD beats
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    So if you have more than £500 in your account the software will RECOGNISE you? What does this even mean? So everyone that has beaten you in a pot has over £500 in their account? You think if you put in the hours you are the one who should put bad beats on people? This really is one of the most nonsensicle posts I have read and believe me I read many on here. Why dont you save up £500, deposit it on here and if your theory is correct you can not lose. In a few weeks you will be able to withdraw the £500 , still have £500 in your account and you will never lose again. Wow I might have come up with something here. Dont tell anyone else though OK?
    Posted by jonjo75
    This seems pretty conclusive. Might withdraw down to £499, let Sky skrew me over then take them to the cleaners, legally. I think I'd have a case.
  • edited March 2014
    what a crock of the proverbial. Take a rest. Come back play better, WIN. Simples

  • edited March 2014
    I've been analysing sky for more than 10,000 hands (MMT) and over 7,000 hands (cash games) to establish whether the dealt hole cards and bad beats are correlated with the accepted statistics of both random draw (hole cards) and likely win odds for sklansky group 1 dealt hole cards versus actual wins with group 1 cards (bad beats) on the site. 

    By new year's day (2013) - i had established a very significant sample of data which show a higher bad beat scenario than would be statsitcially viable. The difference was significant enough that winning with the sklansky group 1 cards when dealt could be considered equal to losing with the same cards. This can be considered an outlier in correlation terms. 

    In dealt hole cards, sky dealt so significantly lower valued cards and combinations of cards that their RNG could be questioned (over those sample data). 

    However, the situation suddenly changed on new year's day when i made the mistake of commenting on the flaws in the RNG algorithm during a tournament in the chat box to another player. Within 3 hands, and for the next 250 hands my data showed a complete reversal with a very very high average dealt hole card value and 100% hit on the board (even with group 2 cards). That's a 100% hit in 250 hands where every hand hit a match on the board. Also - there were zero bad beats for any of my hands. In the last hand of the tournament in heads up, my opponent's A high hand was bad beat by my K high hand. 

    I also played cash tables and heads up cash tables and had exactly the same high value dealt hole cards and zero bad beats. Almost as if a switch had been flicked. 

    I'm testing the data because I believe the algorithm they are using has a manual intervention capability or a skew to certain types of play/player. 

    I write algorithms for a living and I like to query the integrity of other algorithms. If a poker site like sky which is geared to maximum profit (7.5% and 10% rake which is actually very high comparatively) wants to make sure the algorithm contributes significantly to the profit them: 

    >> It must be close to random but it must favour the reckless play because this gets more money in the rake. 
    >> It must punish tight play and encourage loose play by restricting the hole card value to tight players thereby forcing them to be more aggressive with lower value cards. 
    >> It must have a high bad beat ratio because this encourages more inexperienced players to go all in with lesser cards thereby generating more rake, and kills good tight players because they don't contribute enough t 

    Does the sky poker algorithm do any of that? Not sure yet... If you were the boss of that poker site, and your salary was directly correlated to the profitability of the business - would you skew it? Probably not. Would anyone? 

    As i type - i just got bad beat QQ v 99 - knocked out to a loose player in the final stages of a bounty hunter. Come on sky, keep those bad beats coming because i feel a day of reckoning is coming...
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to THIS DATA IS VERY EYE OPENING - SKY SHOULD BE ASHAMED:
    I've been analysing sky for more than 10,000 hands (MMT) and over 7,000 hands (cash games) to establish whether the dealt hole cards and bad beats are correlated with the accepted statistics of both random draw (hole cards) and likely win odds for sklansky group 1 dealt hole cards versus actual wins with group 1 cards (bad beats) on the site.  By new year's day (2013) - i had established a very significant sample of data which show a higher bad beat scenario than would be statsitcially viable. The difference was significant enough that winning with the sklansky group 1 cards when dealt could be considered equal to losing with the same cards. This can be considered an outlier in correlation terms.  In dealt hole cards, sky dealt so significantly lower valued cards and combinations of cards that their RNG could be questioned (over those sample data).  However, the situation suddenly changed on new year's day when i made the mistake of commenting on the flaws in the RNG algorithm during a tournament in the chat box to another player. Within 3 hands, and for the next 250 hands my data showed a complete reversal with a very very high average dealt hole card value and 100% hit on the board (even with group 2 cards). That's a 100% hit in 250 hands where every hand hit a match on the board. Also - there were zero bad beats for any of my hands. In the last hand of the tournament in heads up, my opponent's A high hand was bad beat by my K high hand.  I also played cash tables and heads up cash tables and had exactly the same high value dealt hole cards and zero bad beats. Almost as if a switch had been flicked.  I'm testing the data because I believe the algorithm they are using has a manual intervention capability or a skew to certain types of play/player.  I write algorithms for a living and I like to query the integrity of other algorithms. If a poker site like sky which is geared to maximum profit (7.5% and 10% rake which is actually very high comparatively) wants to make sure the algorithm contributes significantly to the profit them:  >> It must be close to random but it must favour the reckless play because this gets more money in the rake.  >> It must punish tight play and encourage loose play by restricting the hole card value to tight players thereby forcing them to be more aggressive with lower value cards.  >> It must have a high bad beat ratio because this encourages more inexperienced players to go all in with lesser cards thereby generating more rake, and kills good tight players because they don't contribute enough t  Does the sky poker algorithm do any of that? Not sure yet... If you were the boss of that poker site, and your salary was directly correlated to the profitability of the business - would you skew it? Probably not. Would anyone?  As i type - i just got bad beat QQ v 99 - knocked out to a loose player in the final stages of a bounty hunter. Come on sky, keep those bad beats coming because i feel a day of reckoning is coming...
    Posted by Si_Pies
    Dude, it's a big lovely world out there you know.
  • edited March 2014
    Also, why do you continue to play on Sky if you don't trust the site? Plenty of other sites out there to lose your money on. You've been moaning about it (albeit in only 8 posts) since NYD 2013. It's now March 2014....

    Like I said, there is a big lovely world out there when you close your laptop down and open your eyes.
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    Also, why do you continue to play on Sky if you don't trust the site? Plenty of other sites out there to lose your money on. You've been moaning about it (albeit in only 8 posts) since NYD 2013. It's now March 2014.... Like I said, there is a big lovely world out there when you close your laptop down and open your eyes.
    Posted by hhyftrftdr

    True...there is....but should it be more of a case of what is right?

    To openly promote that your site is totally random and then pass off the inconcievable amount of spurious bad beats as "variance" with highly paid TV Presenters in the vain attempt to placate and hide some of the realities?

    I dont mind losing, and the fair share of bad beats.....but i do expect to be treated fairly and have a fair and just site to play on!

    So, before you consider comedy as a career, i would think again!
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to THIS DATA IS VERY EYE OPENING - SKY SHOULD BE ASHAMED:
    I've been analysing sky for more than 10,000 hands (MMT) and over 7,000 hands (cash games) to establish whether the dealt hole cards and bad beats are correlated with the accepted statistics of both random draw (hole cards) and likely win odds for sklansky group 1 dealt hole cards versus actual wins with group 1 cards (bad beats) on the site.  By new year's day (2013) - i had established a very significant sample of data which show a higher bad beat scenario than would be statsitcially viable. The difference was significant enough that winning with the sklansky group 1 cards when dealt could be considered equal to losing with the same cards. This can be considered an outlier in correlation terms.  In dealt hole cards, sky dealt so significantly lower valued cards and combinations of cards that their RNG could be questioned (over those sample data).  However, the situation suddenly changed on new year's day when i made the mistake of commenting on the flaws in the RNG algorithm during a tournament in the chat box to another player. Within 3 hands, and for the next 250 hands my data showed a complete reversal with a very very high average dealt hole card value and 100% hit on the board (even with group 2 cards). That's a 100% hit in 250 hands where every hand hit a match on the board. Also - there were zero bad beats for any of my hands. In the last hand of the tournament in heads up, my opponent's A high hand was bad beat by my K high hand.  I also played cash tables and heads up cash tables and had exactly the same high value dealt hole cards and zero bad beats. Almost as if a switch had been flicked.  I'm testing the data because I believe the algorithm they are using has a manual intervention capability or a skew to certain types of play/player.  I write algorithms for a living and I like to query the integrity of other algorithms. If a poker site like sky which is geared to maximum profit (7.5% and 10% rake which is actually very high comparatively) wants to make sure the algorithm contributes significantly to the profit them:  />> It must be close to random but it must favour the reckless play because this gets more money in the rake.  >> It must punish tight play and encourage loose play by restricting the hole card value to tight players thereby forcing them to be more aggressive with lower value cards.  >> It must have a high bad beat ratio because this encourages more inexperienced players to go all in with lesser cards thereby generating more rake, and kills good tight players because they don't contribute enough t  Does the sky poker algorithm do any of that? Not sure yet... If you were the boss of that poker site, and your salary was directly correlated to the profitability of the business - would you skew it? Probably not. Would anyone?  As i type - i just got bad beat QQ v 99 - knocked out to a loose player in the final stages of a bounty hunter. Come on sky, keep those bad beats coming because i feel a day of reckoning is coming...
    Posted by Si_Pies
    whan an absolute load of rubbish, ive played you many times in the mtts on here and you do nothing but complain in the chatbox about bad beats and other peoples play, how you have the cheek il never know, u limp call all the time regardless of stack size and position, maybe cut this out of ur game and u will recieve less bad beats and stop getting owned all the time!!!
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: THIS DATA IS VERY EYE OPENING - SKY SHOULD BE ASHAMED:
    In Response to THIS DATA IS VERY EYE OPENING - SKY SHOULD BE ASHAMED : whan an absolute load of rubbish, ive played you many times in the mtts on here and you do nothing but complain in the chatbox about bad beats and other peoples play, how you have the cheek il never know, u limp call all the time regardless of stack size and position, maybe cut this out of ur game and u will recieve less bad beats and stop getting owned all the time!!!
    Posted by THEROCK573
    lawl
  • edited March 2014

    Si pies or should I say Kadz? lol

    Here's a review off poker scout from January 2013 see if you can spot the similarities:

    "I've been analysing sky for more than 10,000 hands (MMT) and over 7,000 hands (cash games) to establish whether the dealt hole cards and bad beats are correlated with the accepted statistics of both random draw (hole cards) and likely win odds for sklansky group 1 dealt hole cards versus actual wins with group 1 cards (bad beats) on the site.

    By new year's day (2013) - i had established a very significant sample of data which show a higher bad beat scenario than would be statsitcially viable. The difference was significant enough that winning with the sklansky group 1 cards when dealt could be considered equal to losing with the same cards. This can be considered an outlier in correlation terms.

    In dealt hole cards, sky dealt so significantly lower valued cards and combinations of cards that their RNG could be questioned (over those sample data).

    However, the situation suddenly changed on new year's day when i made the mistake of commenting on the flaws in the RNG algorithm during a tournament in the chat box to another player. Within 3 hands, and for the next 250 hands my data showed a complete reversal with a very very high average dealt hole card value and 100% hit on the board (even with group 2 cards). That's a 100% hit in 250 hands where every hand hit a match on the board. Also - there were zero bad beats for any of my hands. In the last hand of the tournament in heads up, my opponent's A high hand was bad beat by my K high hand.



    It's almost like it's word for word the same......oh wait it is! Plagarise much do you?!

    http://www.pokerscout.com/AllReviews.aspx?id=608

  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE : True...there is....but should it be more of a case of what is right? To openly promote that your site is totally random and then pass off the inconcievable amount of spurious bad beats as "variance" with highly paid TV Presenters in the vain attempt to placate and hide some of the realities? I dont mind losing, and the fair share of bad beats.....but i do expect to be treated fairly and have a fair and just site to play on! So, before you consider comedy as a career, i would think again!
    Posted by Si_Pies
    Comedy as a career? What are you on about?

    Look at your own game. Look at all the decisions you make. All the plays you do. Question everything. Then question it again. Look to improve your game through hard work, instead of taking the easy (cowards?) way out and blaming the site. Only then will you see an improvement in your results/skills.

    Good luck.
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    Si pies or should I say Kadz? lol Here's a review off poker scout from January 2013  see if you can spot the similarities: " I've been analysing sky for more than 10,000 hands (MMT) and over 7,000 hands (cash games) to establish whether the dealt hole cards and bad beats are correlated with the accepted statistics of both random draw (hole cards) and likely win odds for sklansky group 1 dealt hole cards versus actual wins with group 1 cards (bad beats) on the site. By new year's day (2013) - i had established a very significant sample of data which show a higher bad beat scenario than would be statsitcially viable. The difference was significant enough that winning with the sklansky group 1 cards when dealt could be considered equal to losing with the same cards. This can be considered an outlier in correlation terms. In dealt hole cards, sky dealt so significantly lower valued cards and combinations of cards that their RNG could be questioned (over those sample data). However, the situation suddenly changed on new year's day when i made the mistake of commenting on the flaws in the RNG algorithm during a tournament in the chat box to another player. Within 3 hands, and for the next 250 hands my data showed a complete reversal with a very very high average dealt hole card value and 100% hit on the board (even with group 2 cards). That's a 100% hit in 250 hands where every hand hit a match on the board. Also - there were zero bad beats for any of my hands. In the last hand of the tournament in heads up, my opponent's A high hand was bad beat by my K high hand. It's almost like it's word for word the same......oh wait it is! Plagarise much do you?! http://www.pokerscout.com/AllReviews.aspx?id=608
    Posted by jdsallstar

    POWNED (This is someting my son says, I am not sure the exact meaning but think it fits here)
    Well played jd well played.
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    Si pies or should I say Kadz? lol Here's a review off poker scout from January 2013  see if you can spot the similarities: " I've been analysing sky for more than 10,000 hands (MMT) and over 7,000 hands (cash games) to establish whether the dealt hole cards and bad beats are correlated with the accepted statistics of both random draw (hole cards) and likely win odds for sklansky group 1 dealt hole cards versus actual wins with group 1 cards (bad beats) on the site. By new year's day (2013) - i had established a very significant sample of data which show a higher bad beat scenario than would be statsitcially viable. The difference was significant enough that winning with the sklansky group 1 cards when dealt could be considered equal to losing with the same cards. This can be considered an outlier in correlation terms. In dealt hole cards, sky dealt so significantly lower valued cards and combinations of cards that their RNG could be questioned (over those sample data). However, the situation suddenly changed on new year's day when i made the mistake of commenting on the flaws in the RNG algorithm during a tournament in the chat box to another player. Within 3 hands, and for the next 250 hands my data showed a complete reversal with a very very high average dealt hole card value and 100% hit on the board (even with group 2 cards). That's a 100% hit in 250 hands where every hand hit a match on the board. Also - there were zero bad beats for any of my hands. In the last hand of the tournament in heads up, my opponent's A high hand was bad beat by my K high hand. It's almost like it's word for word the same......oh wait it is! Plagarise much do you?! http://www.pokerscout.com/AllReviews.aspx?id=608
    Posted by jdsallstar
    haha.

    it's a shame people aren't allowed to play TOTP 2 months in a row.
  • edited March 2014

    Well..... now this IS interesting as I happen to know who posted that original post on Poker Scout and he's a complete tool.

    And...... he's also Forum banned and Sky banned.

    So, what we have here is one of two things........

    Either, Si_Pies has blatantly plagiarised a deeply, deeply flawed post made by a very bitter and frankly deluded individual.  Or..... It's his own work and we're dealing with a multi accounting banned player!

  • edited March 2014
    Another thread that, as usual, tries to blame the site for people losing.  Yawn

    Over the last 4 weeks I have turned my Bank Roll for £0.69 to £203....     Yes bit of  a brag,  but the way I did was by playing within my Bank Roll,,,  not difficult with 69p to start,  and by concentrating in improving my game

    Stop looking to the site for any losses and try and look at your own game   
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    Another thread that, as usual, tries to blame the site for people losing.  Yawn Over the last 4 weeks I have turned my Bank Roll for £0.69 to £203....     Yes bit of  a brag,  but the way I did was by playing within my Bank Roll,,,  not difficult with 69p to start,  and by concentrating in improving my game Stop looking to the site for any losses and try and look at your own game   
    Posted by JockBMW
    £0.69 to £203 in 4 weeks?? Sure that isn't a typo,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,???
  • edited March 2014
    ahhhhh, pokerscout.  Got to love the crayon munchers on there.  This one couldn't be much more wrong
     Rating:1 / 10  
     By:Anonymous  
     Date:Monday, October 14, 2013  
     Title:So obviously rigged6 out of 8 readers found this review helpful 
     
     For a start I noticed a stupidly abnormal amount of pairs on the flops, me and somebody else at the table started counting and twice we saw 7 out of 8 flops included pairs, the deals are not random at all. Then as everybody else has mentioned the bad beats, I lost on the river pretty much every time, to the same person strangely enough, called "Donttelmum", who when I checked through the tables, found "she" was playing at 9 different tables simultaneously, but called/folded/checked/raised as quick as everybody else on every table, impossible for a human.. Whoever is in charge of deeming whether a site is rigged or not has taken an enormous back-hander from sky. STAY WELL CLEAR!!
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    ahhhhh, pokerscout.  Got to love the crayon munchers on there.  This one couldn't be much more wrong   Rating: 1 / 10       By: Anonymous       Date: Monday, October 14, 2013       Title: So obviously rigged 6 out of 8 readers found this review helpful       For a start I noticed a stupidly abnormal amount of pairs on the flops, me and somebody else at the table started counting and twice we saw 7 out of 8 flops included pairs, the deals are not random at all. Then as everybody else has mentioned the bad beats, I lost on the river pretty much every time, to the same person strangely enough, called "Donttelmum", who when I checked through the tables, found "she" was playing at 9 different tables simultaneously, but called/folded/checked/raised as quick as everybody else on every table, impossible for a human.. Whoever is in charge of deeming whether a site is rigged or not has taken an enormous back-hander from sky. STAY WELL CLEAR!!
    Posted by cenachav
    Confirmed.

    DTM is a bot.
  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE : £0.69 to £203 in 4 weeks?? Sure that isn't a typo,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,???
    Posted by dominon105

    Actually just checked out the dates  6th March   BR £0.69p   20th March £207.91  So it took me 2 weeks.  Send you a PM with the details Dominion.

  • edited March 2014
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE:
    In Response to Re: SKY POKER HAS REALLY GONE DOWNHILL - JOKE OF A SITE : Actually just checked out the dates  6th March   BR £0.69p   20th March £207.91  So it took me 2 weeks.  Send you a PM with the details Dominion.
    Posted by JockBMW

    No probs Jock :) 

    Look forward to chatting to you more :)
Sign In or Register to comment.