Collusion?

[Sect7G]

Not very often.  Maybe a couple a month so I must be speaking out of turn.

[pirahn]

---

@Sect7Gwrote:

Not very often.  Maybe a couple a month so I must be speaking out of turn.

---

@Sect7G No mate, its a forum and every one entitled to an opinion. Does seem strange when someone makes a suggestion but that practice is already in place.

[WuDu]

 

Collusion? I don't know, but I'm pretty sure I saw "lovebird" rebuy during a SN10 rebuy game a few days ago, but not here for more value, with less opponents and less cost? That's now the third time over the last 10-14 days that this game ended prematurely. Maybe @Leo-Unibet can take a look here.

 

 

[Betzcom]

@JeppeL, @Leo-Unibet, @ReCorpH

Thank you for your response and action.

For the avoidance of doubt, it would be good if someone from Unibet would give an official declaration whether shoving all in early is or is not against the rules. @jonny2192 seems to be a decent guy, yet he's been doing it because he didn't think it was against the rules.

I also took a screenshot of that MW lobby in WuDu 's post so he's saved me the trouble of posting it (thanks @WuDu!). Notice who won a prize in the first line: c011uder2. He won quite a few tickets on Saturday night. For example, in a DSO Sat, he won €25 in less than 2 minutes:

 

 c011uder2 actually played some tourneys beyond 3 minutes, but being good half the time doesn't justify being bad the other half of the time (and that's assuming there was no collusion involved in getting him to the later stages of the tourney).

In yet another DSO Sat I played on Saturday, there was another avatar called c011uder1 who played in the same tournament as c011uder2. They likied played others as well.

I would like them both to be investigated and receive official communication just how serious Unibet takes collusion. With names like that, it is clear they not only do not take this matter seriously, they are brazen enough to stick 2 fingers up at the Unibet enforcement team and player community. Not only is such behaviour ruining honest players' experience, as mentioned several times in this thread already, it is also illegal (depending on your country, it would fall within the group of crimes of dishonesty, such as fraud and conspiracy to defraud).

Some of you might say, chill out dude, it's just some people trolling, get a sense of humour etc.

I am paying €10+ rake a day. Over a year, that's €3,000+. I pay this for a good poker experience with Unibet, not for a laugh (although I do sometimes have a good laugh on the community boards and the Twitchtv channels). With that sort of money, I could go to quite a few good live comedy shows if what I wanted was a laugh.

Also consider the effect on Unibet and the wider player base. These early tournament finishes are causing up to €100-400+ loss to Unibet each time, which could otherwise be spent on other promotions for honest players. That's €100,000+ a year if taken to the extreme. Every honest player loses out.

Other poker rooms take collusion seriously. For example, even without any prompting by me, I was refunded money from the assets that were confiscated from those who were caught cheating against me. That sort of action earns respect from honest players.

If players are found to be cheating on Unibet, something similar should happen, e.g. if a colluder wins a prize in a Sat, that prize should be awarded to the Bubble Boy instead. In non-Sats, everybody moves up ranks. That would be fair, wouldn't it?

 

 

[jonny2192]

@Betzcom There cant be a definitive answer, you could have AA vs AA vs KK. people play different when one off the money in general.

If you ban people for playing aipf with hands you wouldnt we will be saying goodbye to most players on Unibet that play freerolls and 1e mtts and sngs not to mention all them players in the flips.

I presume you and @WuDu are the other players in the screenshot sat, in the case of collusion shouldnt the game just be void and all prizes returned?

I say this because the other players could also be colluders just joining the game to make it reach the required players and just not going all in so they dont arouse as much suspicion.

 

 

[jonny2192]

Another question, just because it intrests me:-

If there are 2 players unkown to each other and one shoves and the prize is 10e and they have payed 2e each to play purely from a mathematical point of view.

How much equity do you need to be calling off with?

I am presuming this would be similar to ladder jumps and bubble spots but I could be totally wrong :) 

[Sect7G]

If 2 total strangers shove the 1st hand to secure an overlay in a sat that's one thing.  But if it's 2 people who know each other than that is collusion because they agreed ahead of time to take a course of action.  If the hands are AK vs. TT etc than it can't be proven but if it's rags vs. rags than they should get a stiff warning and funds won recouped.

[jonny2192]

@Sect7G except in something like the UK tour where 90% of the players all know each other, Its kind of hard to get in a game where you dont know someone.

[nekoneko]

This topic is getting weird.

If a player decides to enter something and just go all in with whatever he wants, it's his money and his cards lol.

Screenshots have been provided, now It's up to the unibet employees to check for collusions and cheats. And hope you didn't just wasted their time.

But hey ... feel free to make a poker guidelines, maybe something like:

Thou shall only go all in with AA and after 10 mins of play.  Punishment is 10 years on a remote island.

[JeppeL]

Forwarded this to the poker team to see if a closer look is needed on the setup and this specific situation in question , but as mentioned already, putting in a specific rule to say players can't perform certain actions at the start of a tournament seems rather impossible and against the spirit of poker.

Will update soon as we have more information!

/Jeppe

[RayL]

Hey Guys

I have been reviewing the internal communication of the raised issue, I can assure you the matter is being monitored daily and needless to say, it's being taken seriously.
The frustration is understandable, however setting an "ALL IN" block, at the start of the tournament would influence the experience and the overall spirit of poker as previously mentioned by @JeppeL !
Please take in account the fact that a fair amount of the time the players had a hand/situation that was justified to go all in.

Nonetheless the activity on certain tournaments has been and will be closely monitored and changes will be brought in the case that unethical behaviour starts to become a problem!   

/Rajmond

[WuDu]

---

wrote:

Please take in account the fact that a fair amount of the time the players had a hand/situation that was justified to go all in.

Nonetheless the activity on certain tournaments has been and will be closely monitored and changes will be brought in the case that unethical behaviour starts to become a problem!   

/Rajmond

---

 

Sounds like you graduated straight from the Saul Goodman School of Trouble-shooting.

[pirahn]

---

wrote:

@JeppeL, @Leo-Unibet, @ReCorpH

Thank you for your response and action.

For the avoidance of doubt, it would be good if someone from Unibet would give an official declaration whether shoving all in early is or is not against the rules. @jonny2192 seems to be a decent guy, yet he's been doing it because he didn't think it was against the rules.

I also took a screenshot of that MW lobby in WuDu 's post so he's saved me the trouble of posting it (thanks @WuDu!). Notice who won a prize in the first line: c011uder2. He won quite a few tickets on Saturday night. For example, in a DSO Sat, he won €25 in less than 2 minutes:

 

 c011uder2 actually played some tourneys beyond 3 minutes, but being good half the time doesn't justify being bad the other half of the time (and that's assuming there was no collusion involved in getting him to the later stages of the tourney).

In yet another DSO Sat I played on Saturday, there was another avatar called c011uder1 who played in the same tournament as c011uder2. They likied played others as well.

I would like them both to be investigated and receive official communication just how serious Unibet takes collusion. With names like that, it is clear they not only do not take this matter seriously, they are brazen enough to stick 2 fingers up at the Unibet enforcement team and player community. Not only is such behaviour ruining honest players' experience, as mentioned several times in this thread already, it is also illegal (depending on your country, it would fall within the group of crimes of dishonesty, such as fraud and conspiracy to defraud).

Some of you might say, chill out dude, it's just some people trolling, get a sense of humour etc.

I am paying €10+ rake a day. Over a year, that's €3,000+. I pay this for a good poker experience with Unibet, not for a laugh (although I do sometimes have a good laugh on the community boards and the Twitchtv channels). With that sort of money, I could go to quite a few good live comedy shows if what I wanted was a laugh.

Also consider the effect on Unibet and the wider player base. These early tournament finishes are causing up to €100-400+ loss to Unibet each time, which could otherwise be spent on other promotions for honest players. That's €100,000+ a year if taken to the extreme. Every honest player loses out.

Other poker rooms take collusion seriously. For example, even without any prompting by me, I was refunded money from the assets that were confiscated from those who were caught cheating against me. That sort of action earns respect from honest players.

If players are found to be cheating on Unibet, something similar should happen, e.g. if a colluder wins a prize in a Sat, that prize should be awarded to the Bubble Boy instead. In non-Sats, everybody moves up ranks. That would be fair, wouldn't it?

 

 

---

@Betzcom @WuDu I am c011luder2

Im not sticking 2 fingers up at Unibet or community just you two numbnuts.

In the screenshot, are you the other players or do you just watch with your trousers around your ankles. What you failed to mention was any context. Game lasted several rounds with all players getting involved. The final hand had a pre flop raise and calls. On the flop, i had a pair with fl draw. Raise, reraise and shove. Other player had nut fl draw.

As to legality. You can speak to your lawyer and roll the dice.. 

There is a legal issue needs addressing. Making criminal accusations and requesting Unibet to investigate on such spurious grounds of an alias and a game finishing without a rebuy is subject to SLANDER.

" c011uder2 actually played some tourneys beyond 3 minutes, but being good half the time doesn't justify being bad the other half of the time (and that's assuming there was no collusion involved in getting him to the later stages of the tourney)."

WTF are you talking about. Trouble with having trousers around your ankles all day and night is not much blood left for the brain.

For the purpose of full disclosure, the other player was @mo-sh ( I have his permission to divulge). He is a local, a friend and someone i introduced to Unibet. I play 6hrs plus a day on ubo,sn,mw,sputnik,dso and more plus other sites. I dont play uk tour any more out of principle even though i was hugely successful at it. It would be impossible for me to play a full day without hitting a table with a friend on it. I have been to many live events and know many people including @sgriff, @FeelsBadMan, @jonny2192, @Psycho79, @ChapInAChair, @Darkangel7,  and many many more. Furthermore, i have introduced many more to unibet who are not on the community and are friends i keep in touch with and give general or poker advise.

In an earlier post i stated i would help start an R/A game but would not rebuy if knocked out early. I went all in first hand against @IanSimpson. Maybe @RayL you want to check him out as well for collusion. Any game where there is more than 1 seat gtd and minimum players i will play aggressive as its similar to playing on the bubble.

After reading this nonsense, I did consider using alias AIFH and doing exactly that , but that would only have benefited these 2 self certified security experts.

What gives you the right to question how, when and where anyone plays. This has fcuk all to do with you. 

The only colluders i see on here are you two. Maybe @Leo-Unibet you should check these 2 out, i think they protesth a little too much.

@WuDu the only scummy behaviour is yours. Asking for more sats that overlay and asking for more seats gtd on Supernova which is costing Unibet a small fortune. 

Pscho and Mo are both good natured gentle giants who let things go by. I on the other hand am a child of a vengeful god ( many gods, im hindu) and am now your nemesis. For the unelightened the defintion of nemesis is A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent, personified by a orrible cnut, namely me.

[Leo-Unibet]

---

@pirahn wrote:

---

wrote:

@JeppeL, @Leo-Unibet, @ReCorpH

Thank you for your response and action.

For the avoidance of doubt, it would be good if someone from Unibet would give an official declaration whether shoving all in early is or is not against the rules. @jonny2192 seems to be a decent guy, yet he's been doing it because he didn't think it was against the rules.

I also took a screenshot of that MW lobby in WuDu 's post so he's saved me the trouble of posting it (thanks @WuDu!). Notice who won a prize in the first line: c011uder2. He won quite a few tickets on Saturday night. For example, in a DSO Sat, he won €25 in less than 2 minutes:

 

 c011uder2 actually played some tourneys beyond 3 minutes, but being good half the time doesn't justify being bad the other half of the time (and that's assuming there was no collusion involved in getting him to the later stages of the tourney).

In yet another DSO Sat I played on Saturday, there was another avatar called c011uder1 who played in the same tournament as c011uder2. They likied played others as well.

I would like them both to be investigated and receive official communication just how serious Unibet takes collusion. With names like that, it is clear they not only do not take this matter seriously, they are brazen enough to stick 2 fingers up at the Unibet enforcement team and player community. Not only is such behaviour ruining honest players' experience, as mentioned several times in this thread already, it is also illegal (depending on your country, it would fall within the group of crimes of dishonesty, such as fraud and conspiracy to defraud).

Some of you might say, chill out dude, it's just some people trolling, get a sense of humour etc.

I am paying €10+ rake a day. Over a year, that's €3,000+. I pay this for a good poker experience with Unibet, not for a laugh (although I do sometimes have a good laugh on the community boards and the Twitchtv channels). With that sort of money, I could go to quite a few good live comedy shows if what I wanted was a laugh.

Also consider the effect on Unibet and the wider player base. These early tournament finishes are causing up to €100-400+ loss to Unibet each time, which could otherwise be spent on other promotions for honest players. That's €100,000+ a year if taken to the extreme. Every honest player loses out.

Other poker rooms take collusion seriously. For example, even without any prompting by me, I was refunded money from the assets that were confiscated from those who were caught cheating against me. That sort of action earns respect from honest players.

If players are found to be cheating on Unibet, something similar should happen, e.g. if a colluder wins a prize in a Sat, that prize should be awarded to the Bubble Boy instead. In non-Sats, everybody moves up ranks. That would be fair, wouldn't it?

 

 

---

@Betzcom @WuDu I am c011luder2

Im not sticking 2 fingers up at Unibet or community just you two numbnuts.

In the screenshot, are you the other players or do you just watch with your trousers around your ankles. What you failed to mention was any context. Game lasted several rounds with all players getting involved. The final hand had a pre flop raise and calls. On the flop, i had a pair with fl draw. Raise, reraise and shove. Other player had nut fl draw.

As to legality. You can speak to your lawyer and roll the dice.. 

There is a legal issue needs addressing. Making criminal accusations and requesting Unibet to investigate on such spurious grounds of an alias and a game finishing without a rebuy is subject to SLANDER.

" c011uder2 actually played some tourneys beyond 3 minutes, but being good half the time doesn't justify being bad the other half of the time (and that's assuming there was no collusion involved in getting him to the later stages of the tourney)."

WTF are you talking about. Trouble with having trousers around your ankles all day and night is not much blood left for the brain.

For the purpose of full disclosure, the other player was @mo-sh ( I have his permission to divulge). He is a local, a friend and someone i introduced to Unibet. I play 6hrs plus a day on ubo,sn,mw,sputnik,dso and more plus other sites. I dont play uk tour any more out of principle even though i was hugely successful at it. It would be impossible for me to play a full day without hitting a table with a friend on it. I have been to many live events and know many people including @sgriff, @FeelsBadMan, @jonny2192, @Psycho79, @ChapInAChair, @Darkangel7,  and many many more. Furthermore, i have introduced many more to unibet who are not on the community and are friends i keep in touch with and give general or poker advise.

In an earlier post i stated i would help start an R/A game but would not rebuy if knocked out early. I went all in first hand against @IanSimpson. Maybe @RayL you want to check him out as well for collusion. Any game where there is more than 1 seat gtd and minimum players i will play aggressive as its similar to playing on the bubble.

After reading this nonsense, I did consider using alias AIFH and doing exactly that , but that would only have benefited these 2 self certified security experts.

What gives you the right to question how, when and where anyone plays. This has fcuk all to do with you. 

The only colluders i see on here are you two. Maybe @Leo-Unibet you should check these 2 out, i think they protesth a little too much.

@WuDu the only scummy behaviour is yours. Asking for more sats that overlay and asking for more seats gtd on Supernova which is costing Unibet a small fortune. 

Pscho and Mo are both good natured gentle giants who let things go by. I on the other hand am a child of a vengeful god ( many gods, im hindu) and am now your nemesis. For the unelightened the defintion of nemesis is A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent, personified by a orrible cnut, namely me.

---

@pirahn @Betzcom @WuDu @JeppeL First of all I want to say that we at Unibet look at collution as serious treat to the idea of poker etiquette, 

and of course take action against the bad behaviours as soon as we detect something.

This allin thingy in qualifiers is in the grey area I would say, I know that if we get a 3TIX qualifier running with 4 players for a little while more player joining and quite often where ill be an overlay anyway. Obviously this behaviour cost us some money that we could spent on something more enjoyable  for the playerbase. The situation don't happend so often compare to how many daily qualifiers we are running. If this which I don't belive turns into a bigger problem I just have to increse minumum players to start, that would be a bad experience for players when that number aren't reached. Hopefully we will have more player registered when the tournament start, not just the minimum....if so our issue were to be solved.

[Darkangel7]

You know I love hensie and his hensie rants live, I love you too vinny, lol you always make interesting reading. Xxx

[WuDu]

---

@pirahnwrote:

---

---

I am c011luder2

For the purpose of full disclosure, the other player was @mo-sh ( I have his permission to divulge). He is a local, a friend and someone i introduced to Unibet.

---

Nice!

[ChapInAChair]

This is a very silly thread. Poker is a game of maths and most of this criticism is about people playing their cards in a mathematically correct way.

Collusion: Two or more players discussing their hole cards with each other and making decisions based on live information that nobody else has.

Not Collusion: Going all in first hand, regardless of whether or not the tournament is overlaid or you have the correct odds to do so. A valuable lesson for newer players - If you're being laid 4/1 preflop then PUT ALL YOUR CHIPS IN THE MIDDLE AND HIGH FIVE THE DOG IF YOU GET ANY ACTION.

Not Collusion: Late regging or bubble sniping a tournament. I absolutely hate it when people do this but it has to be very profitable and the only reason I don't do the same is because I have too many tables open to give the situation enough attention. I really wish Unibet would do something to stop this but it's currently within the rules regardless of whether or not it's popular.

Not Collusion: Knowing other people at the tables and understanding how they play. Not Collusion: Communicating with other players on the same table, so long as you're not discussing the hand being played. Also, communicating hand info to players on the same table AFTER the hand is complete. People get very paranoid about this sort of thing but the staff can check hand histories easily enough.

Not Collusion: Registering for a tournament that is overlaying. The suggestion earlier in the thread that 'taking advantage' of an overlaying tournament is against the rules is ridiculous. By definition, you're taking advantage of overlay by just being in the tournament so if it were against the rules then nobody would be allowed to register after the first hand is dealt.

I recognise that there are a few issues that create headaches for Unibet, particularly the AIPF first hand scenario as it means that tournaments overlay and don't play out as desired (although I've very rarely had this extremely profitable scenario on Unibet). It's completely unsustainable in the long term but it's the best action for the player to take if given the correct odds; good players will always take these opportunities.

The way that some of these tournaments play out isn't ideal but the bottom line is that you can't just point fingers at people about collusion just because you're bad at satellites; it's ignorant and offensive. Go and learn a bit about basic pot odds and equity before accusing people of cheating because they're beating you.

[pirahn]

---

@WuDuwrote:

---

@pirahnwrote:

---

---

I am c011luder2

For the purpose of full disclosure, the other player was @mo-sh ( I have his permission to divulge). He is a local, a friend and someone i introduced to Unibet.

---

Nice!

---

@WuDu it is, very very nice. You got the balls to say something. You never replied to how old you are you. Have your balls dropped yet ?

People from same household can play together on mtts. @Leo-Unibet you might want to bar all these people playing from same household before our paranoid friends have a fit. Come to think of it, uhlen and jesus live together and play mtts. Get rid of one, save yourself some ambassadorial money.

I thought you had a friend in betzcom. Strange how your the beneficiaries of these colluders and yet never offer to give back your ill gotten gains.

[FeelsBadMan]

As @pirahn and @ChapInAChair said, it's purely a math problem, just cause some people ignore this math problem cause it's a peculiar situation doesn't make it cheating. That being said it is bad for the site, one could even say unethical because the tournament wasn't intended to end this way ... but on the other hand, it is how the tournaments are set up, the onus shouldn't be on the players to determine and do what is best for the site while esentially donating to the site a large amount of equity, by making very bad folds ( some situations you can call any 2 and make a huge profit , folding you're donating that money ).

And from the player perspective, other than the site losing (which is bad long term) I don't see how I could feel cheated from this. I will call a bit looser to these random all-ins and will always rebuy, no exception ... unless I misclick or timeout 😏 and I assume most people would do the same. Which is very profitable for the players that do it like me, and in a rebuy/re-entry format I would never expect the other guy not to rebuy, which would be very bad for the all-iner. But an implied collusion culture could form, which isn't collusion because no information is shared, kinda like people checking down the bubble of a sattie cause someone is all-in to maximize the chances to win (obvious move, most people know they should do it and do it while never having any communication), so long term it might become necessary to at least increase the minimum players by 1+ players, which currently is harmful to the games actually starting. I still hope the irish will solve the liquidity issue, as long as they stay here after they encounter the bugs, cause I'm sure the unibet team will do a very good job bringing them here.    

[Betzcom]

@Leo-Unibet, @JeppeL, @ReCorpH, @pirahn, @WuDu

I think it would be useful to separate 2 matters because it seems some people have misunderstood and went off barking up the wrong tree (making some entertaining rants as a result!).

The matters that need separating for clarification are: 

1) non-collusion all in pre-flop to end a tournament early to hit the overlay; and

2) Actual collusion, in whatever form it takes. 

Let me discuss these in more detail.

 

1) NC-AIPF 

The important thing to note here is that we are talking about situations where there is no collusion. If there is collusion, that is discussed in the Section 2) below.

Previous discussions showed that players disagreed on whether or not NC-AIPF was against the rules, and so I asked for official clarification on this point. I don't think I asked for a rule change or told anyone how, when or where they should play. I just wanted to know what the rules were. 

Leo has said that this is a grey area, and action might be required. I have some ideas but do not want to derail this thread, which is supposed to be about collusion. I would just say for now that the way to go is less overlay, not more.

2) Actual Collusion 

This was the original purpose of this thread. Unfortunately, it was some-what derailed by the sister/side topic of NC-AIPF as discussed above, and provoked some colourful descriptions. We can enjoy some banter on another thread, but collusion is a serious matter, as Leo has just recently affirmed, i.e. Unibet considers collusion such a serious matter that it warrants immediate action upon detecting wrong doing. 

I assume all players who have responded in this thread are against actual collusion, and this makes us allies; not enemies. Colluders are the enemy. We in the community might have different views about NC-AIPF, but on the matter of collusion, I think it safe to say that all honest players want to enjoy a good, anti-collusion, poker experience on Unibet.

If I understand things correctly, good poker rooms (on behalf of the player base) are constantly at war with colluders. If a person wears the emblem of the enemy (or something similar, like "c011uder"#), should they be surprised if they get treated as such? If someone tries the "It's just a joke, chill out man!" argument, I already stated that I am paying Unibet €3,000+ a year in rake for a good (e.g. anti-collusion) poker experience, not a laugh. I'm sure Unibet would rather I paid them this €3,000+ rather than spend it on comedy shows, even if this may seem a small amount to Regs.

What some might call paranoia, others might call vigilance. And the fact is, I did help catch 3 colluders, enabling Unibet to take appropriate action to make things better for all of us. Rather than making light of this matter and wasting Unibet resources by creating false positives, I'd encourage all those who are serious about removing colluders to be vigilant too.

Let me remind us about why I started this thread. I saw some suspicious behaviour and reported it, with supporting evidence. I did not make baseless accusations or simply insist Unibet investigate so-and-so. I gave screenshots and reasons. As a result, 3 accounts were banned for collusion (I assume this is what is meant by "appropriate action"). I was duly thanked for my good deed, and encouraged to report further suspicious activity. 

Remember: all that is required for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing.

 

[ChapInAChair]

---

wrote:

@Leo-Unibet, @JeppeL, @ReCorpH, @pirahn, @WuDu

Let me remind us about why I started this thread. I saw some suspicious behaviour and reported it, with supporting evidence. I did not make baseless accusations or simply insist Unibet investigate so-and-so. I gave screenshots and reasons. As a result, 3 accounts were banned for collusion (I assume this is what is meant by "appropriate action"). I was duly thanked for my good deed, and encouraged to report further suspicious activity.

 

---

..

Err... you concluded that @pirahn was colluding, you concluded that he was mocking the company and the community, you insinuated that he's being dishonest and you suggested that he could be breaking the law, all because he won a couple of satties with a silly username.

 

I think, at the very least, you owe him an apology.

[Betzcom]

@ChapInAChair

I think you have misunderstood. I'll let @pirahn consider my response and if he's still not cool with me, I'll try and straighten things out with him, probably by PM, to avoid further misunderstandings by third parties.

[jonny2192]

@Betzcom You know one of the Unibet poker mottos is "putting the fun back in the game" ?

 

[FeelsBadMan]

Yeah being vigilant and investigating actual collusion is super important and good, it's just the insinuation that people should be forced to have certain shoving ranges ( or if there is such a rule) was ridiculous, of course it would spark contradictory replies, and none to the initial issue of colluders which people agree with you.

Also I'm pretty sure unibet is super vigilent for colluders, I've randomly received some compensations for banned cheaters without even knowing that I had them at my table :cash: ... was a tiny amount of money tho.

 Another ridiculous thing is your alias outrage, we have a nice feature here where we can have fun with our aliases, where we can make the game a tiny bit more enjoyable though little silly things. People that rake way way more than you enjoy these things, and there's no reason why you can't play poker and have fun too. The fact that you raked a semi almost decent amount of money in a year doesn't make you the king of anti fun. Rake 25000€ in a quarter and you might get a King of anti-fun avatar tho 🆗

[WuDu]

---

wrote:

Let me remind us about why I started this thread. I saw some suspicious behaviour and reported it, with supporting evidence. I did not make baseless accusations or simply insist Unibet investigate so-and-so. I gave screenshots and reasons. As a result, 3 accounts were banned for collusion (I assume this is what is meant by "appropriate action"). I was duly thanked for my good deed, and encouraged to report further suspicious activity.

 

---

Very nice! 3 scammers less and Unibet actively monitoring further early AIPF to catch overlays in those qualifiers. I'll keep an eye open as well now...

 

 

@pirahn

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/stress-anxiety-depression/controlling-anger/

Wishing you the best to find the help you need.