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!
DYM FIX?!
Is it just me or does this hand seem very suspicious? What makes it even more suspicious is that both of these players were both from the same area (Liverpool). It didnt matter too much in this game because i trebled up in the next hand and still finished in the cash. So does anyone else think these 2 players were in cahoots? Is there any way to stop this happening aswel?
| Player | Action | Cards | Amount | Pot | Balance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dozza | Small blind | 200.00 | 200.00 | 665.00 | |
| Demc | Big blind | 400.00 | 600.00 | 5680.00 | |
| Your hole cards |
| ||||
| london5 | Fold | ||||
| dannydemc | Call | 400.00 | 1000.00 | 85.00 | |
| Dozza | Fold | ||||
| Demc | Check | ||||
| Flop | |||||
| |||||
| Demc | Check | ||||
| dannydemc | Check | ||||
| Turn | |||||
| |||||
| Demc | Check | ||||
| dannydemc | Check | ||||
| River | |||||
| |||||
| Demc | Check | ||||
| dannydemc | All-in | 85.00 | 1085.00 | 0.00 | |
| Demc | Fold | ||||
| dannydemc | Muck | ||||
| dannydemc | Win | 1085.00 | 1085.00 | ||
Comments
The board gives possible flush and low str8 so as 1 goes all in the other naturally folds. I think sometimes people are a little too eager to see cheating when this could just be 2 people who know each other playing a friendly game online. I have loads of people online i play against that are friends, i'm not cheating just because i know or am related to them.
For 85 chips, any 2 should ideally be an inst call given the amount of chips the leader has.
The names and locations does seem ifffy. Sky should be able to see the frequency of play of these 2 players. But then again, if I and a pal were in cahoots, doubtless, I would choose completely different names and locations as to try and throw people off the scent, so this may just be coincidence.
Even if Sky do nothing, it would be worth a word as it could keep them on guard for future occassions.
I have just sharkscoped both of them, coincidently, both players have played a similar amount of games, both have the same profit/loss (to within a pound) although one has had an account a year longer than the other.
So it appears the one that has the account longer took a huge break away from the tables and has suddenly come back.
Coincidently, the other player also only played 3 games yesterday.
Now it may be that at 4am, the only people around invariably meant they were gonna meet twice and all of this could be coincidence, but doubtless, if it were me, I would be asking questions.
This is not a money Spinning Idea. In fact this is a stupid idea lol
Just another pal deliberately NOT taking out his mate is still collusion.
I have personal friends and family here, but I will never play online with them. I leave that for home games. It is best not to generate suspision, even if it is unwarranted. I would not want any fold I did to a pal scrutinised and my account risked for this.
On a serious note, as there is no advantage money wise (i think we can agree on that) and 1 folding to an all - in from the other doesn't particularly look suspicious (as the coard has a couple of draws with pre-flop play that could mean any 2 cards are the holding of either player) then this enitre thread is based on the fact that they share a similar name and live in the same city.
There may be collusion here but just as easily there may not be. The thought that these 2 are cheating would be suposition and assumption
Yes, I fully agree.
The issue lies within the fact that the chip leader folded for 85 chips into a 1000 pot when he had almost half the chips in play. (I would be calling with 37 in this spot, just to see what he was calling with)
The fact that the small stack did not push for his last 85 chips in the first place. (may just be inexperience)
The fact they come from the same town, Liverpool. (known for its honesty, lol)
The fact they share an uncanny similarity in their usernames.
The fact they played they both only played 3 games yesterday, and 2 together, one of them after over a years break.
All these are coincidences that raise questions. Albeit, these coincidences could just be genuine and that the best hand just won.
Without seeing the hole cards of the players, and only Sky could do that, no one knows.
Like I say, these are questions that when I play, I would not like raising. Hence the reason that I steer clear of pals on the tables.
dannydemc = 85 chips behind him.
1000 in the pot.
It will cost Demc 1.5% of his stack to make the call and possibly finish the game. Furthermore, there is no way he can fail to cash from this position with such a commanding chip lead and 2 others really really short-stacked.
you've also got to ask yourself why the massive chip leader (Demc) didnt put dannyDemc all-in for an extra 85 pre-flop?
The answer is quite obvious really.
Call me Devils advocate if you will, would be a boring thread if peoples only comment was yeah i agree
Yet another reason why I hateeee these kind of games - Obviously theyre in it together - 100%
My advice is to report it via live support so Sky are aware of it. Then if you feel it necessary, keep a little record of the games they play together via sharkscope.
If you see more and more games being played together, then a pattern starts to emerge and this new evidence can be then given to Sky to coroborate your original report.
To satisfy my own curiosity, I have made a note of the usernames before Sky delete the names and will have a little look at their sharkscopes next week to see if they have played anymore together.
From what I have seen of it, it looks dodgy, but ultimately, could just be a couple of mates playing a friendly game. The stakes concerned were hardly big enough to worry about.
haha, this post made me laugh. :-)
If the all in for 85 chips had been called by the other player and the short stack won, then there was no collusion provable.
If the big stack would have lost, but folded, no collusion likely, as if he knew he was going to lose then he would happily give 85 more chips to his mate.
If he had not called but would have won, then collusion is likely.
You would call here with a pair of 2's or even a high card for 85 chips. (like I say, I would call with anything)
If you are worried that this thread may alert them, take out all the players names.
You know who they are, and you can continue to monitor any activity anyway.
it's really important that all suspected fraud is Reported through the correct channels (customer care).
posting on the forum is likely to be less effective than going straight to the team (using the links at the very bottom of this page)
having said that i'll make sure the Fraud team see this thread.
thank you
Torryboy has an excellent point and in turn, I do not play with my partner for this reason.
Plus, we only have one laptop in the house.
Would you keep your friend in or enjoy taking them out, especially in a DYM.
Best to steer clear of the issue and never worry about it.
ok so i've had word from the fraud team...
"the accounts in question have been suspended pending a poker audit"
they would also like to again reaffirm that all complaints should be made via email/telephone/live chat and not the forum.
thanks again everyone
Rich
2 games together doesnt seem like much evidence.
But if they were using the same I.P. adress, then...........
But all heresay and gossip. If you have acted that quickly then something must be afoot.
Well done Sky, and thanks Rich.
excellent work hale .
After 11 years of marriage, I would rather have a pork chop!!!
Seriously though, collusion is a real hate of mine and it can easily be used to turn a tidy profit in DYM games.
Sitting in the car waiting to take my son to school, I worked out the following.
I have used £11.00 DYMs as an example here as it makes the maths easier.
If 2 unknown average players were to meet regularly, you would expect that the breakdown of cashes as follows.
25% neither cash
50% one cashes.
25% both cash.
Over 100 games, this would equate to £2200 being invested for a £2000 return with the loss being the rake.
A collusionist could easily increase these percentages by carefully dropping chips and not taking on your pal.
Now a bad collusionist could easily change these percentages to
20% neither
30% one cash
50% both cash.
Again over the same 100 game sample would generate £2600 return giving £400 profit between them, on top of that would be the £10 each cash for points and at least one place in the league stars freeroll.
It is easy to get both players into the final 4 by just playing carefully and not getting in to any big arguments. By then it is a 75% chance both will then cash.
If this were the case, the breakdown would be
15% neither
15% one cash
70% both cash.
Over the 100 game sample generates now £3100. This is serious money for little work on a mid stakes DYM.
To get 100 games is less than 4 games per night over a month, just a couple of hours work a night.
Now tell me a couple of pals playing together and not taking each other out is nothing too much to worry about.