SickOldIMLOF

GL @GothMoth

*F5* *F5* *F5* instead of *rebuy* *rebuy* *rebuy*

1:0

After playing for too long on too many tables with too many timeouts and loose shoves with way too high heart bpm, I managed to capture all 20 santas in one go. Now ss spam: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20

Will try to be there on friday and saturday to test my rebuy button smashing skills developed during community league.

Number of hands like once a week, everything else once or twice a month. Was checking it a bit more often during 100x Hexa promotion.

I like name in general, but it looks more like someones nickname and I think it might be lowering number of players slightly. I ignored it when I saw it in lobby first time, because I assumed its private game organized by some Bulalakaw. Hopefully more people will notice and try it after UOS. Structure without antes is nice change of pace. For now the only thing I would suggest changing is latereg duration.

Could be people wanting to extend expiration date of their cash ticket.

Looks like more than enough evidence to me, I will be surprised if security check will find them innocent. A9 vs A9 hand alone maybe could be explained, but K2 vs K2 doesnt make any sense at all of course. You also mentioned that these were the only two times that they went all out against each other, and they just happened to have same hand twice, what a coincidence, just like in case I posted. The other two hands seems to be even more damning. Perhaps Konsultti could try to defend himself, saying that its the first time he is playing poker or that he misslicked. But what are the odds that he missclicked terribly twice and saved kudnc in both situations. 4€ SNG collusions seems to be even more obvious than 10€ ones. I got "oh, we have same hand, lets go all in" type hands, but no "oops, missclicked again" (unless they just werent that obvious). Makes me wonder how well they mask it in 25€. Btw, what if "kudnc" stands for: Konsultti's Uncle Doing Naughty Collusion

Thank you for reviewing it, gave me some peace of mind indeed. I was getting worried that not only there will be no response at all, but that my horrible run on weekend was a punishment for reporting it. On a more serious note, knowing that security team is there to check stuff like this restored a lot of my faith in fair play on tables. I will now definitely try 10€ SNGs again in the future.

So if I conclude correctly, your theory is that the other two players are communicating with each other outside of Unibet, realized they have the same hand and went in for the LOLsss. Correct? Correct. After hand #1 J6vsJ6, I simply assumed they are both maniacs and correct play for me will be to tighten up, I gave 0 thought to them having same hand there. After #2 J7vsJ7 5 minutes later, which made even less sense, I actually felt like they are doing it "for the LOLsss". It will be relevant to add here that I play online poker for over 10 years, I played millions of hands on over 20 pokerrooms. I was in countless bubble spots that screamed "softplay", but I never bothered to report any of it before. This case is different than anything else I encountered before. So far it's just two hands where you really weren't at a disadvantage. In your first post, you wrote yourself that "I mean in hand 2, they're both all in on the turn, that's not the smartest way to collude against you. That's exactly what I want as the short-stack in this scenario.". I assume that you would also start playing tighter, fold some hands you wouldnt usually fold, play some calls instead of all ins and give up a bit more on flop etc. All with the idea of chance that they will fight it out. Correct? Can you now see how them showing drunk maniac tendencies when they had same hands is beneficial for them and terrible for me? Towards the end of it I understood that I essentially became "dead money" when I adjusted to their fake maniacal images. I dont like this feeling and so I decided to at least post here about it. If it was all just variance work, so be it. Im aware that variance can be tricky. Like when someone 3bet you 3 times in a row and when you finally 4bet, he shows up with AA. And so you realize that he wasnt a maniac, but rather was lucky enough to get strong hands few times in short time span. I simply feel that the odds of this case here happening randomly are way beyond odds of anything like described above. Could be still variance, sure, anything is possible. Maybe you should present some of the other 54 hands here. So far it's just two hands where you really weren't at a disadvantage. Possible signs for collusion could be all hands where the chipleader is "gifting" chips to the middle stack, for instance. Without access to hole cards I cant prove or disprove any "gifting" of course. I posted all 3 hands where they went to showdown. The fact of there being only 3 showdown hands (considering how these hands looked like) is already pretty damning in my opinion. Here is Psychodelico stack size progression during 3handed: #1 1812 #10 2262 #20 2862 #30 3356 #40 4536 #50 3576 #57 4526 This info proves next to nothing compared to showdown hands I posted in my opinion, but Im not sure how else suspected "gifting" can be displayed. There were few hands along the way like this: Game #1426794475: Seat 1: TimonPumba (2006) Seat 4: Psychedelico (2622) Seat 5: ffrreezzee (5372) *** Hole cards *** Dealt in ffrreezzee Dealt to TimonPumba [5c As] Dealt in Psychedelico *** Preflop *** Psychedelico raises 120 to 120 ffrreezzee raises 150 to 180 TimonPumba folds Psychedelico calls 60 *** Flop *** [2s 4c Jd] ffrreezzee checks Psychedelico bets 420 ffrreezzee folds But I wont bother listing them all. I think that proving "gifting" chips in poker have to be next to impossible, even if someone from security would check hole cards. Even if Psychodelico was asked why did he 4bet J7o, then bet pot on AKT flop and go all in on K turn, while 80 seconds later, playing against same villain, he didnt 4bet with AKs and played it safe postflop. He could just answer "I felt like it sir, it was just a coincidence" and nothing could be done about it. Reminds me of Lucky Larry. At this point I would be content if some mod would step in and wrote something like "we checked relation between these two players and found nothing suspicious".

Thanks, good luck to you too I would probably have to post the remaining 54 hands, so you can see these J6vsJ6 and J7vsJ7 hands in big picture. I imagine that otherwise you will just assume that I picked hands that suits my suspicions and ignore the rest. From my point of view though, people who are capable of playing this way: *** Hole cards *** Dealt to Psychedelico [7h Js] Dealt to ffrreezzee [Jc 7s] Dealt to TimonPumba [Qh 6h] *** Preflop *** TimonPumba folds Psychedelico raises 180 to 240 ffrreezzee raises 240 to 360 Psychedelico raises 240 to 480 ffrreezzee calls 120 *** Flop *** [Kd As Th] Psychedelico bets 960 ffrreezzee calls 960 *** Turn *** [Kd As Th] [Ks] Psychedelico bets 2880 ffrreezzee calls 2268, and is all-in Uncalled bet returned to Psychedelico: 612 Wouldnt only go to showdown 3 times in 57 hands 3handed. I also doubt they would suddenly, 80 seconds later, find enough discipline to play this way: *** Hole cards *** Dealt to Psychedelico [Ad Kd] Dealt to ffrreezzee [As Th] Dealt to TimonPumba [Jc 5s] *** Preflop *** TimonPumba folds Psychedelico raises 180 to 240 ffrreezzee raises 480 to 600 Psychedelico calls 360 If you still dont see anything unusual about it, then its case closed really. I guess I will just have to adapt to this 10€ SNG magic.

I already wrote why argument for these guys being maniacs or drunk doesnt apply here, but in case my post was tldr, I will repeat most important part of it here in shorter form: We played 57 hands 3handed. There were only 3 showdown hands between them. They went all out against each other only twice, they had exactly same hand in both cases J6vsJ6 and J7vsJ7 (guaranteed split). In the remaining 54 hands they never "battled it out" postflop. If it would last just 10 hands or if they would go "drunk style" in more than 2 hands, I wouldnt post it of course. Oh yea, I loved seeing it too. I tighten up, but sadly they never went after each other like that again, in 50 hands, even with AKs vs ATo bvb.

Hello Community, Although this is my first post, I have been reading this forum for a while and I know how "cheating report" threads usually look like. I also understand that collusion in poker may be difficult, if not impossible, to prove. For these reasons I hesitated before posting, but in the end I decided that this case is unusual enough. Even if nothing comes out of this report, Im looking forward to your opinions on these hands. For the record, I mostly play tournaments and sometimes add some SNGs. In 2020 I played a bit over 1000 of them, mostly 4€ ones. This month I finally decided to try 10€ ones and this situation happened in 6th one I played. I probably wouldnt notice it all otherwise. Hand #1 Game #1426795284: Table €10 SNG 5 Seat - 40.00/80.00 - No Limit Hold'Em - Total prize €47.50 - 01:27:59 2021/02/12 *** Seated players *** Seat 1: TimonPumba (1408 ) Seat 4: Psychedelico (3226) Seat 5: ffrreezzee (5366) *** Blinds and button *** ffrreezzee has the button TimonPumba posts small blind 40 Psychedelico posts big blind 80 *** Hole cards *** Dealt to TimonPumba [4s 7h] Dealt to Psychedelico [Jc 6h] Dealt to ffrreezzee [Js 6c] *** Preflop *** ffrreezzee calls 80 TimonPumba folds Psychedelico checks *** Flop *** [8h 2d Kc] Psychedelico bets 200 ffrreezzee calls 200 *** Turn *** [8h 2d Kc] [7s] Psychedelico bets 600 ffrreezzee calls 600 *** River *** [8h 2d Kc] [7s] [Jd] Psychedelico bets 1800 ffrreezzee calls 1800 *** Showdown *** Psychedelico shows [Jc 6h], A Pair of Jacks, tied ffrreezzee shows [Js 6c], A Pair of Jacks, tied Psychedelico wins 2700 from main pot ffrreezzee wins 2700 from main pot This hand alone wouldnt mean much perhaps, but I was very surprised by the way they played it while I was short on bubble. Especially bet and call on turn. Because of this hand and couple others in which they played weirdly (like minraising back and forth), I assumed that they both might be a bit on "maniacal" side and so I decided to tighten up a bit, giving them chance to battle it out. Hand #2 Game #1426796749: Table €10 SNG 5 Seat - 60.00/120.00 - No Limit Hold'Em - Total prize €47.50 - 01:32:56 2021/02/12 *** Seated players *** Seat 1: TimonPumba (1756) Seat 4: Psychedelico (4536) Seat 5: ffrreezzee (3708 ) *** Blinds and button *** TimonPumba has the button Psychedelico posts small blind 60 ffrreezzee posts big blind 120 *** Hole cards *** Dealt to Psychedelico [7h Js] Dealt to ffrreezzee [Jc 7s] Dealt to TimonPumba [Qh 6h] *** Preflop *** TimonPumba folds Psychedelico raises 180 to 240 ffrreezzee raises 240 to 360 Psychedelico raises 240 to 480 ffrreezzee calls 120 *** Flop *** [Kd As Th] Psychedelico bets 960 ffrreezzee calls 960 *** Turn *** [Kd As Th] [Ks] Psychedelico bets 2880 ffrreezzee calls 2268, and is all-in Uncalled bet returned to Psychedelico: 612 *** Showdown *** *** River *** [Kd As Th] [Ks] [Td] Psychedelico shows [7h Js], Two pairs, Kings up, tied ffrreezzee shows [Jc 7s], Two pairs, Kings up, tied ffrreezzee wins 3708 from main pot Psychedelico wins 3708 from main pot This is the hand that made me doubt it all the most. Pretty much all of it. Remember that its on the bubble and I had only 15bb. After seeing these 2 hands and reading my description, you may think that these guys were just crazy, decided to go against each other and by chance went hard twice while holding same hand. That wasnt really the case. We played 3handed for 57 hands and, despite them battling a lot preflop, there were only 3 hands between them that ended in showdown (2 of them you can see above, I will also post 3rd one below, just for the record). Hand #3 Game #1426797122: Table €10 SNG 5 Seat - 60.00/120.00 - No Limit Hold'Em - Total prize €47.50 - 01:34:14 2021/02/12 *** Seated players *** Seat 1: TimonPumba (1576) Seat 4: Psychedelico (4596) Seat 5: ffrreezzee (3828 ) *** Blinds and button *** TimonPumba has the button Psychedelico posts small blind 60 ffrreezzee posts big blind 120 *** Hole cards *** Dealt to Psychedelico [Ad Kd] Dealt to ffrreezzee [As Th] Dealt to TimonPumba [Jc 5s] *** Preflop *** TimonPumba folds Psychedelico raises 180 to 240 ffrreezzee raises 480 to 600 Psychedelico calls 360 *** Flop *** [Qc Ts 4h] Psychedelico checks ffrreezzee bets 900 Psychedelico calls 900 *** Turn *** [Qc Ts 4h] [4d] Psychedelico checks ffrreezzee checks *** River *** [Qc Ts 4h] [4d] [2h] Psychedelico checks ffrreezzee checks *** Showdown *** Psychedelico shows [Ad Kd], A Pair of Fours ffrreezzee shows [As Th], Two pairs, Tens up ffrreezzee wins 3000 I initally didnt even plan to add any comment to this hand and post it just so you can see all 3 showdown hands, but its interesting one too. Freeze's AT raise preflop might actually be argument against collusion, because why would he raise if he knew Psycho had AK. My question for this hand would be: why Psycho didnt reraise preflop with AKs if 80 seconds earlier he did with J7o and even got a loose call from another J7o? Again, 57 hands 3handed and only 3 showdowns. I played enough of poker to know that sometimes variance can be insane and produce unreal stories. Perhaps its just another case of it. I wonder what odds would Unibet put to two random guys deciding to both go for crazy bluffs and hero calls, on the bubble, with exactly same hands, twice, within 5 minutes. All while playing aggressive preflop and conservative postflop in remaining 93% of 3handed hands, keeping decent balance between their stacks at all times. Either way, looking forward to opinions on hands, especially 2nd. Maybe there is just huge skill gap between 4€ and 10€ and I have to adjust.