New Posts For Thread: Absolutely blatanthttps://community.betfair.com/poker/go/thread/view/94146/28767509/absolutely-blatantWell, the colluders have now arrived in the 6 man D2NS. Caught my first pair today and have reported them. Will be interesting to see if I get a refund for this game. I'd pu the odds at 250/1.Have removed their names from hand history. The two of theNo, because it took place on stars They did a through investigation and found nothing between the two players in question. Which I accept completely, I have great confidence in how they operate. Maybe it was just a misclick or an error, but it certaihttps://community.betfair.com/poker/go/thread/view/94146/28767509/absolutely-blatant?post_id=514084829#514084829No, because it took place on stars They did a through investigation and found nothing between the two players in question. Which I accept completely, I have great confidence in how they operate. Maybe it was just a misclick or an error, but it certaiWed, 21 Dec 2011 14:23:25 -0600Did you send the hand history onto Investigations via the Helpdesk ? I deffo would if one of them had their stats blocked.https://community.betfair.com/poker/go/thread/view/94146/28767509/absolutely-blatant?post_id=514083987#514083987Did you send the hand history onto Investigations via the Helpdesk ? I deffo would if one of them had their stats blocked.Wed, 21 Dec 2011 14:03:47 -0600The thread I put up was entitled "Is this cheating" NOT "This is cheating" - a quite important difference I'm sure you will appreciate.The hand history looked very dodgy, a player who was chip leader min raised to 600 and then folded when the shortsthttps://community.betfair.com/poker/go/thread/view/94146/28767509/absolutely-blatant?post_id=514079409#514079409The thread I put up was entitled "Is this cheating" NOT "This is cheating" - a quite important difference I'm sure you will appreciate.The hand history looked very dodgy, a player who was chip leader min raised to 600 and then folded when the shortstWed, 21 Dec 2011 12:19:03 -0600I think there is a world of difference between publishing a hand history which looks a bit iffy and asking for other peoples viewpoints as to how it has been played, as opposed to simply naming players and branding them as cheats with no supporting ehttps://community.betfair.com/poker/go/thread/view/94146/28767509/absolutely-blatant?post_id=514075623#514075623I think there is a world of difference between publishing a hand history which looks a bit iffy and asking for other peoples viewpoints as to how it has been played, as opposed to simply naming players and branding them as cheats with no supporting eWed, 21 Dec 2011 10:23:16 -0600A screen name / nickname is personal information.Example:If you were to accuse me on this forum of cheating it will affect me and potentially the people I play against online.When I am at a table people would treat me differently which could affect mhttps://community.betfair.com/poker/go/thread/view/94146/28767509/absolutely-blatant?post_id=514075507#514075507A screen name / nickname is personal information.Example:If you were to accuse me on this forum of cheating it will affect me and potentially the people I play against online.When I am at a table people would treat me differently which could affect mWed, 21 Dec 2011 10:20:19 -0600But again, this would involve the personal details which would lead to the identification of that individual.Can you explain how this applies to a screen name on a poker site which is registered in another country? How does one "defame" a screen namehttps://community.betfair.com/poker/go/thread/view/94146/28767509/absolutely-blatant?post_id=514074531#514074531But again, this would involve the personal details which would lead to the identification of that individual.Can you explain how this applies to a screen name on a poker site which is registered in another country? How does one "defame" a screen nameWed, 21 Dec 2011 09:55:18 -0600Dear masked avengerThe reason why you cannot name a suspected cheater is because you would be open to prosecution.Not only could you be prosecuted but so would we for printing it.By all means once they have been found guilty print their names to warnhttps://community.betfair.com/poker/go/thread/view/94146/28767509/absolutely-blatant?post_id=514073833#514073833Dear masked avengerThe reason why you cannot name a suspected cheater is because you would be open to prosecution.Not only could you be prosecuted but so would we for printing it.By all means once they have been found guilty print their names to warnWed, 21 Dec 2011 09:33:16 -0600Mr PR, the whole point why names are mentioned is so that other people can check if they come up against the same players, can you seriously not understand that?!? And don't give me some tripe about the Data Protection Act, that is used to protect ahttps://community.betfair.com/poker/go/thread/view/94146/28767509/absolutely-blatant?post_id=514073399#514073399Mr PR, the whole point why names are mentioned is so that other people can check if they come up against the same players, can you seriously not understand that?!? And don't give me some tripe about the Data Protection Act, that is used to protect aWed, 21 Dec 2011 09:21:14 -0600A gentle reminder that all suspicions of collusion should be sent to our investigations team at Betfair.Happy for you to post details /discussions of suspected cheating on the forum so long as the names of the accused are not mentioned.We will of couhttps://community.betfair.com/poker/go/thread/view/94146/28767509/absolutely-blatant?post_id=514065805#514065805A gentle reminder that all suspicions of collusion should be sent to our investigations team at Betfair.Happy for you to post details /discussions of suspected cheating on the forum so long as the names of the accused are not mentioned.We will of couWed, 21 Dec 2011 04:39:15 -0600Well done chip !!!https://community.betfair.com/poker/go/thread/view/94146/28767509/absolutely-blatant?post_id=514064213#514064213Well done chip !!!Wed, 21 Dec 2011 03:08:22 -0600