All Categories› Poker› Poker Chat

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!

Collusion - Our Approach

245

Comments

  • RLT16RLT16
    edited April 2015
    May I ask, when someone has been banned for collusion (as may or may not be the case) do sky automattically refund the buy ins of any tournaments we have played with them or do we each individually have to find out which games and then contact customer care, i only ask because said incident occurred 6 weeks ago and if either of them are found guilty (not saying they are/were) it's going to be hard for me to track all the SNG's and MTTs i played with any players that this may be relevant to..
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Matt237Matt237
    edited April 2015
    lol
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Sky_PokerSky_Poker
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    May I ask, when someone has been banned for collusion (as may or may not be the case) do sky automattically refund the buy ins of any tournaments we have played with them or do we each individually have to find out which games and then contact customer care, i only ask because said incident occurred 6 weeks ago and if either of them are found guilty (not saying they are/were) it's going to be hard for me to track all the SNG's and MTTs i played with any players that this may be relevant to..
    Posted by RLT16
    Hi - in cases of individual games where collusion has been proven, we will sort that out.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • jimb0d1jimb0d1
    edited April 2015
    Whilst I respect the fact that it is impossible for Sky to verify IM conversations elsewhere, surely it is easy enough to check the validity of hand histories, forum posts and instant messages sent through the site which have now been alluded to public? 

    Colluding is unacceptable, regardless of stakes, schoolyard 'plots', blackmail, threats and/or team poaching. 









    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RLT16RLT16
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : Hi - in cases of individual games where collusion has been proven, we will sort that out.
    Posted by Sky_Poker
    Thankyou for our reply. 

    My reply again relates to no individual but cheaters as a whole:

    So all the games played after the event are not refunded despite a player being proven to be a cheater? I understand you want to save your money and all but its your security teams job to stop these players quickly and get them off the site, if you can not garuntee the fairness of the game by allowing that player to continue to play (even if you cant prove the cheating) then you can not verify the result as being a fair one and therefore a refund should be afforded to the players of that game. 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Sky_PokerSky_Poker
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    Whilst I respect the fact that it is impossible for Sky to verify IM conversations elsewhere, surely it is easy enough to check the validity of hand histories, forum posts and instant messages sent through the site which have now been alluded to public?  Colluding is unacceptable, regardless of stakes, schoolyard 'plots', blackmail, threats and/or team poaching. 
    Posted by jimb0d1

    We use all the information available to us and stick to the facts in hand, the other (possibly) associated factors definitely play second fiddle to verifiable information.

    Thanks
    Sky Poker
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bbMikebbMike
    edited April 2015
    I'm glad to have read on multiple sites that you got your £1.10 back RLT. Did you also request the £2.20 stakes from the other tournaments?

    Might have been easier to check the lobbies to see who was playing then decide if you wanted to join.

    Of course, if you can't trust the security procedures of the site it's probably not sensible playing at all.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hhyftrftdrhhyftrftdr
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    I'm glad to have read on multiple sites that you got your £1.10 back RLT. Did you also request the £2.20 stakes from the other tournaments? Might have been easier to check the lobbies to see who was playing then decide if you wanted to join. Of course, if you can't trust the security procedures of the site it's probably not sensible playing at all.
    Posted by bbMike
    He got his £1.10 cos he was moved to a table that contained a player in question being investigated over collusion.

    Had he shared one of his £2.20 tables with said player, I'm sure he could have also claimed that back too.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Sky_PokerSky_Poker
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : Thankyou for our reply.  My reply again relates to no individual but cheaters as a whole: So all the games played after the event are not refunded despite a player being proven to be a cheater? I understand you want to save your money and all but its your security teams job to stop these players quickly and get them off the site, if you can not garuntee the fairness of the game by allowing that player to continue to play (even if you cant prove the cheating) then you can not verify the result as being a fair one and therefore a refund should be afforded to the players of that game. 
    Posted by RLT16

    Hi RLT16 - each case is different really but in the instance of collusion, each game where it is proven is dealt with as we've said before. Colluding once, for example, doesnt necessarily mean you've done it in every game afterwards (or before). 

    However, it is fair to say that when collusion is proven, that specific players gameplay in other games will come under greater scrutiny, especially in instances where they are playing with their fellow colluder(s). 

    Thanks
    Sky Poker
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • FCHDFCHD
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    ... if you can not garuntee the fairness of the game by allowing that player to continue to play (even if you cant prove the cheating) then you can not verify the result as being a fair one and therefore a refund should be afforded to the players of that game. 
    Posted by RLT16

    If you can't prove the cheating, surely you can't ban the player? Presumed innocent until proven otherwise should be the principle here surely?

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Matt237Matt237
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : If you can't prove the cheating, surely you can't ban the player? Presumed innocent until proven otherwise should be the principle here surely?
    Posted by FCHD
    Have to be suspended pending investigation RE: the T&Cs.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • EnutEnut
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : Hi - in cases of individual games where collusion has been proven, we will sort that out.
    Posted by Sky_Poker
    Will you contact the players involved to inform them of when they are getting a refund and why? I have had previous experience on another site of having buy ins refunded. I knew nothing of it until I received a refund and message from CC telling me they had refunded and the reason. I was most appreciative and would like to think that Sky will have the same consideration for those possibly affected by any collusion.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Matt237Matt237
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : Will you contact the players involved to inform them of when they are getting a refund and why? I have had previous experience on another site of having buy ins refunded. I knew nothing of it until I received a refund and message from CC telling me they had refunded and the reason. I was most appreciative and would like to think that Sky will have the same consideration for those possibly affected by any collusion.
    Posted by Enut
    In past of DYM collusion I have been notified so would like to think its consistent.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • EnutEnut
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    I'm glad to have read on multiple sites that you got your £1.10 back RLT. Did you also request the £2.20 stakes from the other tournaments? Might have been easier to check the lobbies to see who was playing then decide if you wanted to join. Of course, if you can't trust the security procedures of the site it's probably not sensible playing at all.
    Posted by bbMike

    'Did you also request the £2.20 stakes from the other tournaments?'  I don't think he did because at no stage was he sat at the same table. My understanding is that as soon as he realised he was sat at the same table as someone who had admitted colluding he sat out and asked for a refund as a matter of principle.
     
    'Might have been easier to check the lobbies to see who was playing then decide if you wanted to join.' I think he may have been under the impression that a player who had 'self excluded for the rest of April' would not be playing. 

    'Of course, if you can't trust the security procedures of the site it's probably not sensible playing at all.' That is a very good point and it remains to be seen how Sky will handle these sorts of situations. Of course it may be easier to deal with on an individual basis, for example in a team game when someone accused of dishonesty is on the same team it is much easier to ignore as it is unlikely you will be colluded against. On a rival team of course we have to have utmost confidence in Sky's security procedures.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • VespaPXVespaPX
    edited April 2015
    I'm struggling to get my head around how 1 person can collude across multiple MTT's.
    Even if he/she had a partner in crime, the odds of them being on the same table are pretty slim.
    Obv SnG's are a totally different scenario.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RLT16RLT16
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    I'm glad to have read on multiple sites that you got your £1.10 back RLT. Did you also request the £2.20 stakes from the other tournaments? Might have been easier to check the lobbies to see who was playing then decide if you wanted to join. Of course, if you can't trust the security procedures of the site it's probably not sensible playing at all.
    Posted by bbMike
    The player that we may ok may not be referring to also joined during late reg, not a lot we can do about that is there
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RLT16RLT16
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : If you can't prove the cheating, surely you can't ban the player? Presumed innocent until proven otherwise should be the principle here surely?
    Posted by FCHD
    The point being that the person is already been banned for cheating, if there not banned then ofc you would get nothing and they should be presumed innocent
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • samantha25samantha25
    edited April 2015
    why are all my posts being deleted? the one's sticking up for those involved aren't.... 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GELDYGELDY
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    why are all my posts being deleted? the one's sticking up for those involved aren't.... 
    Posted by samantha25
    i don't know Sam
    but there are a lot of accusations being thrown around and no doubt sky is working very hard to get to the bottom of it all. Probably best to let them get on with it. 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RLT16RLT16
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    why are all my posts being deleted? the one's sticking up for those involved aren't.... 
    Posted by samantha25
    It's probably because even reading what you have to say gives people a headache ;)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • samantha25samantha25
    edited April 2015
    Hi Geldy, BLT :)

    Yeah, at this rate, for having an opinion, I'm likely to be banned quicker than the accused :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SlipwaterSlipwater
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : It's probably because even reading what you have to say gives people a headache ;)
    Posted by RLT16
    Haha.

    Shots fired.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GELDYGELDY
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    Hi Geldy, BLT :) Yeah, at this rate, for having an opinion, I'm likely to be banned quicker than than the accused :)
    Posted by samantha25
    ha

    that's because sentencing the accused is probably quite difficult
    whereas banning you would be easy
    hope it doesn't happen though

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SlipwaterSlipwater
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : ha that's because sentencing the accused is probably quite difficult whereas banning you would be easy hope it doesn't happen though
    Posted by GELDY
    Gelders, how about you and I collude to get this done? ;)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • samantha25samantha25
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : ha that's because sentencing the accused is probably quite difficult whereas banning you would be easy hope it doesn't happen though
    Posted by GELDY


    you would have no-one to spar with? ;)



    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GELDYGELDY
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : Gelders, how about you and I collude to get this done? ;)
    Posted by Slipwater
    try Harry 
    God forbid but i like Sam 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • samantha25samantha25
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : Gelders, how about you and I collude to get this done? ;)
    Posted by Slipwater

    gtf ;)




    I mean, do your best :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • samantha25samantha25
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : try Harry  God forbid but i like Sam 
    Posted by GELDY


    Likewise Geldy... you ever thought of being poached? ;)

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GELDYGELDY
    edited April 2015
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach:
    In Response to Re: Collusion - Our Approach : Likewise Geldy... you ever thought of being poached? ;)
    Posted by samantha25

    allegedly there are peeps in your team that would rather i was fried
    deep fried
    for a long time
    so no cooking for me
    not even poaching 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GELDYGELDY
    edited April 2015
    besides which TPT has the Rose

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.