Final Decision on UltimateBet: None of My Business

On Friday, the Kahnawake Gaming Commission -- the entity that “is empowered to regulate and control gaming and gaming related activities conducted within and from the Mohawk Territory of Kahnawake [near Quebec, Canada] in accordance with the highest principles of honesty and integrity” -- issued its “final decision” regarding the cheating that occurred at UltimateBet, one of the sites to which the KGC issues a license (and thus purports to regulate and control).

Friday’s news comes nearly a year after we last heard from the KGC, and about 20 months after a few online players first began publicizing their suspicions that cheating might be happening on the site.

Turns out at least 31 different people -- in addition to 1994 WSOP Main Event champion and UltimateBet “consultant” Russ Hamilton -- were involved in the cheating at UB. And those guys had over 100 separate accounts with which to have their fun (click on list to enlarge). Over $22 million has now been refunded to affected players, and the KGC has further fined UB $1.5 million. The KGC says it believes “criminal behavior” has taken place, and so is providing information to law enforcement authorities, although whether any sort of prosecution will follow remains to be seen.

According to Friday’s report, this applesauce went on at UltimateBet for a period of four-and-a-half years -- from June 2003 to December 2007. If you’ve been paying attention, the UB cheating era keeps getting lengthier (and involves more cheaters) with each report. Back in May 2008, Tokwiro Enterprises, the company that owns UltimateBet (and Absolute Poker), reported that the “fraudulent activity” on UB first began in March 2006. The last time we heard from the KGC back in September 2008, we were told that “multiple cheating incidents” started to occur on UltimateBet in May 2004.

Since this is the “final decision,” I imagine the UB cheating era won’t be extending back any further. Couldn’t go back too much further, I guess -- UB only went online in 2001.

I’m glad the KGC has at last made its “final decision” public. I’m glad efforts are being made to try to make the criminals pay for their deeds, although am skeptical those efforts will get very far. I’m glad that the KGC has audited and approves of the operation of Tokwiro Enterprises, and has also audited and approves of the Cereus Poker Network system on which both Absolute Poker and Ultimate Bet presently run.

Of course, it took a bunch of players noticing a player named “NioNio” was enjoying a statistically improbable run of good fortune on UB -- not the Kahnawake Gaming Commission, despite its being “empowered to regulate and control” the sites to which it issues licenses -- for the cheating by 30-plus other individuals on the site to be discovered. And, it appears, eventually stopped.

Not so glad about that.

Tokwiro took over ownership of UB in October 2006, and Friday’s report further details how the new owners became aware of the cheating, reported it to the KGC, and aided KGC with the investigation. The new report confirms the previous statement made by Paul Leggett, CEO of Tokwiro, that “this cheating occurred on our site through illicit software placed on the UB servers prior to our purchasing UltimateBet” and “that Tokwiro and its entire management team had no knowledge of the illicit software until it was revealed by our investigation; and no one associated with Tokwiro was involved in the cheating scheme at any point.”

Fine. The new owners are clean, although they were in charge for over a year before recognizing that a gang of folks using over 100 different usernames were cheating the site. And again, such recognition only arriving after some players started to notice and complain.

When that happened -- in January 2008 -- we had just heard from the KGC regarding the Absolute Poker cheating scandal that took place in 2007. There it was concluded that cheating had occurred at AP for a period of about six weeks during the late summer of 2007. Multiple user accounts were identified as having been involved in the cheating, “with players using software that enabled the viewing of the ‘hole cards’ of each of the other players.” Not exactly what happened at UB, apparently, according to the “Anatomy of the Cheating” section of the new report, but practically speaking very similar. The suckers playing with these cheaters were playing with their cards face up.

Absolute Poker was fined $500,000 and placed on a two-year probation by the KGC, a probation which involved the KGC conducting random audits of AP. By then, I had already abandoned Absolute Poker as a place to play, having pulled my money off the site in October 2007. I had an account over at UltimateBet at the time as well, and realizing that the same company ran both sites, I soon removed my funds from UB, too, in November (though not without some headache) -- that is, even before the NioNio thing came to light and (eventually) we all began to realize the UB scandal was much, much bigger in scope than what had happened at Absolute Poker.

So I was no longer playing on UltimateBet when the site acknowledged in March 2008 that a cheating “scheme” had been detected on the site via an “interim statement” sent to various poker industry folks. Nor was I a couple of months later when players began uncovering a number of other usernames that appeared to be involved in the cheating. Nor in September 2008 when the KGC issued its “initial findings” on the UB matter.

Nor in November 2008 when that “60 Minutes” story about the scandals appeared along with accompanying features in The Washington Post. Nor in December 2008 when UltimateBet spokesperson Phil Hellmuth was shipped a pot despite holding the worst hand, about which he said afterward (on the 12/28/09 episode of The Ultimate Poker Show) “this has happened 100 times.”

Like I say, I made my decision long ago. Am a bit incredulous, I guess, that an online poker site can manage to abuse its customers so badly for so long -- not to mention negatively affect the reputation of the industry as a whole -- and still be endorsed. And attract players.

But that’s none of my business.

Hamilton, UltimateBet, & the WSOP

“Former World Series of Poker Main Event Champ Implicated in Online Poker Cheating Scandal.”

Doesn’t sound too good, does it? I mean, we might complain about other champs having come up short in various ways when it comes to fulfilling our (probably unreasonable) expectations for them to serve as the game’s “ambassadors.”

But this.... Sheesh. Talk about a failure to respect the game.

Can’t say I’d really thought all that much about Russ Hamilton before this summer when his name came up in connection with the simmering UltimateBet insider cheating scandal. I remember at the time thinking back to having seen ESPN’s coverage of the 1994 World Series of Poker Main Event which Hamilton had won. That was one of those for which Dick Van Patten provided the commentary.

The other reason for remembering that particular program (on YouTube here) was the fact that Jack Binion had that year promised the winner the additional prize of his weight in silver to commemorate the WSOP’s 25th anniversary. Hamilton was (by far) the heaviest player at the final table at over 300 pounds.

I’ve read various stories about Hamilton having purposely gained 100-plus lbs. and/or loaded his pockets with $2K worth of silver dollars for the weigh-in. Not really sure how valid either tale is, actually. About a month before the ugliness popped up this summer, Tom Sexton wrote an account over on PokerNews of the story of Hamilton’s claiming the 43-silver bar bonus (worth about $28,000).

The bit about the weigh-in -- mythical or not -- had the effect of tagging Hamilton as an angle shooter. So when the rumors surfaced in July that Hamilton, as a consultant-slash-possible part-owner of UltimateBet, had some involvement in the scandal, that reputation (deserved or not) probably didn’t help him. Some sleuths had connected Hamilton to some of the implicated accounts used for the cheating, and for about a week there right at the end of the WSOP it was all the buzz.

Barry Greenstein appeared on the July 16th episode of PokerRoad Radio to summarize a two-hour conversation he’d had with Hamilton. Sort of a pseudo-interview, as Hamilton was being advised by his lawyers not to talk. Was a little tedious to listen to, as I recall, but there were a couple of nuggets in there. One was Hamilton professing to Greenstein that when everything came out a couple of months, names would be named, and he wouldn’t be one of them. So much for that.

Greenstein sounded like he wanted to believe his friend. (EDIT [added 10/2/08]: Or rather, “acquaintance” -- see comment below.) Nonetheless, the Bear said he did think Hamilton most certainly at least knew the guilty party or parties, even if he didn’t seem to know a lot about the day-to-day operations of UltimateBet.

The other interesting item that came up in that interview was Greenstein’s account of a conversation he had had with Phil Hellmuth. Hellmuth is, of course, UB’s most prominent spokesperson, a role he purportedly was recruited for by Hamilton back in the day.

Greenstein spoke about having talked previously with Hellmuth about the scandals at UB, and used the word “oblivious” to describe the Poker Brat’s reactions to suggestions that the problems might negatively affect his image. Greenstein was/is not alone in having that opinion about Hellmuth.

However, when Greenstein asked Hellmuth about Hamilton shortly after the stories about the 1994 champ’s possible involvement in the cheating had surfaced, the Bear says Hellmuth appeared “sheepish” -- the first time in the nearly 20 years he’d known Hellmuth that he’d ever seen him that way. Despite the fact that we’re several removes from what was actually going down, one got the sense that Greenstein was suggesting that when Hamilton’s name became associated with the thing, the Eleven-Star General of the UB Army suddenly seemed marginally less oblivious to the situation.

Then yesterday came that presser from the Kahnawake Gaming Commission unambiguously singling out Hamilton as “the main person responsible for and benefiting from the multiple cheating incidents” that occurred on the site from mid-2004 to early 2008. The release says UB has already refunded $6.1 million to affected players, and that the site will recommence handing out more refunds in early November. Then, as we saw earlier with Absolute Poker, the KGC lists a number of sanctions UltimateBet must abide by in order to retain its gaming permit from the Commission.

My initial response on hearing the news was surprise -- and a bit of disbelief -- at the singling out of Hamilton here, although the release does also say other “individuals” were involved. That is, he was the ringleader of the operation, according to the Commission’s audit.

Then I thought about Hellmuth’s reaction (as conveyed by Greenstein), as well as Annie Duke’s PokerNews interview back in July in which she earnestly defended the company and its new ownership. (Wrote a bit on that here.)

Yesterday’s news cannot be good for either Hellmuth or Duke, one would imagine. While neither spokesperson is apparently guilty of any wrongdoing, their friendship with Hamilton -- and apparent knowledge of his involvement well before yesterday’s report -- certainly doesn’t help ’em, image-wise, I wouldn’t think.

Meanwhile, that 60 Minutes piece looms. And here we are, six weeks from the final table of the WSOP Main Event. Which Hamilton won, fourteen years ago....

Are we starting to get an idea how that might spin?

(EDIT [added 10/1/08]: Just heard on this week’s Two Plus Two Pokercast that the 60 Minutes piece on the scandals at Absolute Poker & UltimateBet is scheduled to air on Sunday, October 26th -- exactly two weeks before the WSOP Main Event restart.)

UB & AP Think Makeover Gives Them a Do-Over

Like most of you, I saw yesterday’s presser from the “management” of online poker sites Absolute Poker and UltimateBet announcing “the upcoming launch of CEREUS: a new poker platform that will integrate the customers and features from both poker rooms, instantly making CEREUS the third largest online poker network.”

First read the news over on Pokerati. Dan’s headline to his post -- “AP and UB Merge to Form Criminally Questionable Supersite” -- initially gave the impression that we were reading some sort of lampoon in the style of The Onion (or Melted Felt). But apparently this is no joke.

Sounds like the idea here is not to form a single site, actually, but rather to share the player pools between AP and UB. Thus, as is the case with other networks that feature “skins,” players will (I assume) only be allowed a single account on both, but will have the option of which interface to use.

Aside from the dozens of puns that spring to mind (“Are they Cereus?”), I just have three initial reactions to the news:

(1) Damage control.

What we are seeing here is not unlike what the Kahnawake Gaming Commission was doing earlier in the week with its much-belated statement regarding the UltimateBet scandal. Despite appearances, said the KGC, we weren’t “doing nothing” with regard to UB. Rather, its “investigation... has yielded a number of key findings which, within the next several days, will enable the KGC to issue its decision on the appropriate steps to be taken.”

That 60 Minutes exposé ominously looms in the near future, and both Absolute Poker and UltimateBet stand to lose face when that feature finally airs. When that day comes, all of those associated with both AP and UB will want to have positioned themselves in such a way as to appear to have responded correctly to the scandals. A new network with a new name affords new titles for those running the show, enabling them (perhaps) to distance themselves even further from all that unpleasantness everyone keeps going on about.

(2) People are buying this?

I see an enthusiastic announcement over on Pocket Fives about the merger. Bluff Magazine also thinks it’s just the cat’s pajamas. (P5s continues to operate as an affiliate of UltimateBet, while Bluff is still an affiliate of both Absolute Poker and UB.)

Applesauce, of course. The reasonable response to such news is serious (I said it), deep-rooted skepticism. The idea that two online poker sites, both of which permitted insiders to exploit breaches in the sites’ integrity in different ways, could somehow be expected to manage the task of creating a unified, trustworthy network between them is frankly beyond belief.

(3) How futile.

What a half-baked, facile attempt at rebranding. Really. Something likely dreamed up by the same underachieving ad execs who thought putting Phil Hellmuth in a general’s uniform in order to recruit dupes to join the “UltimateBet Army” was clever.

Over on UltimateBet, we read that “the strongest online poker community is about to get CEREUS.” Over at Absolute Poker, word is “the future of online poker is CEREUS; bigger, badder, better...” Only those utterly ignorant of online poker could possibly be convinced that AP and UB together comprise “the strongest online poker community.” And perhaps some segment of that group responds positively to hollow (yet alliterative!) phrases like “bigger, badder, better.”

No telling where it all will lead. Can’t help thinking, though, that somewhere down the road -- perhaps not that far -- we’ll be reading about “Cereus missteps” and “Cereus problems.”

UB Owns Up (Sort of)

Got back a little while ago from a long day of training and meetings. A memorable day, to be sure. Will share a few reflections about all that tomorrow morning, as well as a look ahead to Day 1 of the 2008 World Series of Poker.

For now, though, I’ll briefly weigh in on the statement from UltimateBet summarizing the findings of an investigation into allegations of a cheating “scheme” (as UB had characterized the malfeasance in an earlier statement regarding the matter).

As you might imagine, having spent all day hanging out and interacting with other poker media types, there was a bit of buzz among my colleagues about UB’s statement. Having been occupied all day, I hadn’t seen the statement myself, and so gathered what I could from others’ impressions. Some felt the statement said what needed to be said, while others saw it as inadequate, essentially raising more questions than providing answers.

The statement specifically comes from Tokwiro Enterprises ENRG, the company that owns both UB and Absolute Poker. According to Tokwiro, the cheaters used six different player accounts (changing account names multiple times in the process) to exploit “unauthorized software code that allowed the perpetrators to obtain hole card information during live play.” Not unlike the “super-user” scandal over at Absolute Poker, although the logistics here appear to have differed somewhat from what happened at AP.

Also similar to the Absolute case, UB’s statement fails to identify any of the cheaters by name (aside from listing usernames), though does state that “the individuals responsible were found to have worked for the previous ownership of UltimateBet prior to the sale of the business to Tokwiro in October 2006.” Nat Arem adds further clarification here with his post relating a series of questions he asked of UB and their replies. In response to Arem’s question about the cheaters’ identities, UB explained that they did “not believe anyone involved was an owner of the business.”

Of particular note is the confirmation “that the fraudulent activity took place from March 7, 2006 to December 3, 2007,” with UltimateBet only having discovered the existence of “the unauthorized code” in February 2008. That’s nearly 21 months of cheating, not discovered until almost three more months after it had stopped occurring.

The statement goes on to describe how the security breach has been permanently closed. Also, UB has added “to its existing security department” what is described as “a new specialized Poker Security team of professionals dedicated to fraud prevention.” Arem was apparently consulted in the creation of this new, extra level of security, something he thinks is “going to be a great tool when it’s finished.” In his Q&A, Arem reports this newly-implemented system will be in place in six to eight weeks.

The statement also outlines UB’s plan to refund all players who lost money to those operating the fraudulent accounts. I noticed that Terrence Chan received an unexpected refund. Also saw on the forums others reporting how they had already received their refunds as well.

The statement concludes with an assertion that “UltimateBet has worked closely and transparently with its governing body, the KGC [Kahnawake Gaming Commission] and its designated expert auditors, to determine exactly what happened, how it happened, and who was involved, and has taken action to prevent any possibility of this situation recurring.”

Glad to hear UB was transparent with the KGC and Gaming Associates (the auditors) during the past few months. Unfortunately, they haven’t been at all transparent with their customers during that same time period. And while this statement does provide some clarity, it also continues to conceal a great deal of information that customers should be demanding (e.g., how much money was involved; what games/stakes were affected; etc.).

Still a little baffled at the timing of the statement, too, although I think I might understand why today was the day designated for its release. I am realizing as I type this that I myself would much rather be thinking and writing about what’s going to happen at the Rio starting tomorrow. I imagine you’d rather be reading about those goings-on, too.

Perhaps that was part of the plan -- to reckon on poker people not wanting to be bothered at this moment with such unpleasantness, and thus continue (essentially) to ignore the fact that such extensive cheating occurred on UltimateBet without its owners’ knowledge for such an extended period of time.

We’ll put this one to bed (for now). See you in the morning for the fun stuff.

One (Ex-)Member Inspires PPA to Alter Its Mission Statement

Still in S.F. Vera and I ended up at Fisherman’s Wharf last night for a wind-blown walk up and down the bay. Stopped off for some seafood and a glass of Anchor Steam (supersized), then took a rowdy bus back to our hotel. Along with my Oaks Card Club excursion earlier in the day, I probably walked at least six miles altogether yesterday, and so I was fairly zapped when we made it back last night.

Wanted to weigh in briefly on Frank Frisina’s interesting interview with John Pappas, the Executive Director of the Poker Players Alliance. Frisina posted the interview on Life’s a Bluff yesterday, along with his own comments regarding some of Pappas’ answers. There have also been a number of comments by others added there as well, including some from Rich “The Engineer” Muny, a PPA Board Member and frequent (& helpful) contributor to the 2+2 Legislation forum.

If yr interested, you should check out the interview and subsequent discussion. I just wanted to touch on a couple of items I found intriguing.

One point of interest concerns the issue of PPA’s funding. I had not previously realized the PPA wasn’t solely maintained by those dues some of us have sent to the organization. (By the way, I sent ’em my twenty bucks back in October 2006, shortly after the UIGEA was signed into law. My member number is 16,290, although I think there were actually over 100,000 members when I signed up.) According to Pappas, “the PPA receives its funding from member dues, merchandise sales, individual contributions, and financial support from the Interactive Gaming Council.”

The Interactive Gaming Council is a not-for-profit outfit located in Vancouver whose interests cover not just online poker, but all forms of “interactive” or online gaming. According to their website, the IGC’s purpose is essentially twofold -- (1) to establish fair trading guidelines and practices so players can be sure the sites they play on are legit ; and (2) to be a public policy advocate (e.g., fight things like the UIGEA).

Like a lot of us, Frisina was interested in having Pappas explain why the PPA hasn’t bothered to speak publicly about the various scandals that have plagued online poker over the last year or so, including the Absolute Poker insider “super-user” scam from last year. From an outsider’s perspective, it seems that the PPA would be very interested in talking about such scandals as they could be used to further their case for the passage of bills like Barney Frank’s H.R. 2046 -- a bill that would invite governmentally-run, industry-wide regulation.

Frisina suspects the IGC’s support of the PPA may have something to do with the PPA’s reluctance to weigh in on the matter. He points to the presence of Mohawk Internet Technologies on the IGC’s member list as potentially significant here. Mohawk Internet Technologies is that server farm where something like 60% of the world’s online gambling sites are hosted, and it is owned by the Kahnawake Mohawk territory (located just outside of Montreal). That’s where you’ll also find the Kahnawake Gaming Commission, the group that adminsters licenses to 400-plus online gambling sites.

You remember the KGC. They’re the ones who made public that report back in January telling how Absolute Poker had violated four of their regulations, and so the Commission put AP on a kind of probation (the site is subject to random audits for two years, and if they fail any they’re no longer a KGC permit holder), made the site get rid of the guilty guy(s), forced them to pay a fine, etc. (Here’s the full report.)

Of course, Absolute Poker is owned by Tokwiro Enterprises ENRG, which is located there in the Mohawk territory and is owned and run by the tribe. Tokwiro is presently headed by Joe Norton, former Grand Chief of the Mohawk Territory of Kahnawake. Norton has also served as the CEO of Mohawk Internet Technologies, though I don’t believe he presently holds that position. All of which means it isn’t obvious how separate Absolute and the KGC really are, thus making the Commission’s $500,000 fine of AP more than a little suspect-seeming. (Who was paying whom?)

So what we have here is a lengthy, possibly-curious chain linking the PPA to the IGC to Mohawk Internet Techologies to the KGC to Absolute Poker, all of which makes it reasonable to wonder (as Frisina does) whether there might be something in the way the PPA is funded that prevents them from weighing in on the AP scandal. I can’t really say one way or the other here -- the web of obligation and influence is too tangled for me to see through clearly. However, something else came up in the interview that perhaps explains even more directly why the PPA isn’t interested in being involved when online poker cheating scandals erupt.

In the context of asking Pappas about the AP scandal, Frisina asked the PPA’s Executive Director to comment on the organization’s mission statement, specificially its reference to wanting to “ensure the integrity” of the game. Pappas responded by saying “Admittedly, our mission statement overstates the PPA’s interest in serving as the ‘integrity police’ for the poker industry.” Rather, said Pappas, the organization is more directly focused on “providing the legal/legislative framework for licensed and regulated poker to prosper,” thereby establishing “a secure and safe place for poker players to enjoy the game they love.”

Sort of a weird, unexpected response here, I thought, to say the PPA isn’t going to act as the “integrity police” while also saying the PPA wants to make poker not just legal, but “safe and secure” for everyone.

Even more eyebrow-raising, the PPA has apparently altered its mission statement in the wake of the Life’s a Bluff interview. Up until this week, the PPA described itself as a group “who have joined together to speak with one voice to promote the game, ensure its integrity and protect the right to play poker” (emphasis added). If you go to the PPA website today, you’ll find the organization now consists of people “who have joined together to speak with one voice to promote the game and protect the right to play poker in all its forms.” The reference to “integrity” has now been removed.

Perhaps it makes sense, on a practical level, to get rid of the “integrity” stuff. Hell, I don’t know of any group, now matter how big, who can do that for online poker at present. Even so, doesn’t it strike you as just a little bit disingenuous to alter your mission statement after nearly a million people have joined your group?

The PPA definitely should have made it clear from the outset it was simply a lobbying organization looking to keep poker legal (“in all forms”), and not anything more than that. Easy for me to say that now, of course. Then again, it isn’t clear to me that supporting bills like H.R. 2046 really is going to result in accomplishing that goal, either, as discussed here previously (“Do We Want Online Poker Regulated? (1 of 2)” & “Do We Want Online Poker Regulated? (2 of 2)”).

Anyhow, lots of stuff to ponder. Gonna meet up with Tim Peters (of “The Literature of Poker” and CardPlayer) later today -- looking forward to that. There is a possibility I might get over to Lucky Chances tomorrow; I’d say the odds are about 70-30 against at the moment . . . .

Looks like another windy day out there. Better take my hat.

Full Tilt Poker Apparently Plans To Violate One of the Kahnawake Gaming Commission’s “Regulations Concerning Interactive Gaming”

Disclaimer: The following has been written under the assumption that when an online poker site advertises itself as having been “regulated” by a third-party organization that claim is intended to signify a meaningful declaration to its customers that the site can be trusted. (A hopelessly naive premise from which to proceed? Perhaps. But let’s just pretend for a little while, shall we . . . ?)

A month or so ago I wrote to Full Tilt Poker to ask them about how the site was regulated. I was told they were licensed by the Kahnawake Gaming Commission, and that “At this time, that is the only regulatory body under which Full Tilt is currently licensed.”

Well, it appears that Full Tilt Poker has decided to violate one of the “Regulations Concerning Interactive Gaming” put forth by its only regulatory body. Namely, this one:



Let me explain.

Early last week, it was announced that an agreement had been reached between CardRunners and Full Tilt for the online poker site to begin sponsoring all of the CardRunners pros -- Taylor Caby, Andrew Wiggins, Brian Townsend, Brian Hastings, Mike Schneider, Cole South, and Eric Liu -- in one bundle. As the breathless press release noted, all of these “hottest young players and instructors in online poker now play exclusively at Full Tilt Poker.”

A thread soon began on Two Plus Two. “Great move by FTP to save face after firing that disgrace known as FieryJustice,” said one early poster. (You recall how Full Tilt Poker dealt with Jonathan Little’s indiscretion not two weeks ago.)

Didn’t take long, though, for some to wonder what effect the agreement might have on the quality of CardRunners’ instructional vids. “This could be pretty bad for the CR videos,” speculated one poster. “It will create a lot of unrealistic settings, where people go after them/stay away from them because their name is in red.”

After a couple of days and a few hundred more posts, Taylor Caby came onto the thread to announce that CardRunners had negotiated some new terms for its deal with Full Tilt. According to Caby,

Full Tilt will be making an exception to their “one account per player” policy for Cardrunners pros with the following stipulations:

The “alternate” account will only be used for the creation of educational video content.

At the end of every recorded session (on an alternate account), every player that played with the CR pro will be notified via email to explain what happened. In addition, they will be given a small token of appreciation (most likely FTP points) for their participation.

Anyone who loses money directly to the CardRunners pro will be given additional compensation for their loss.

I should also note that this arrangement applies to all videos created AFTER the FTP/CR partnership, as we have some unreleased videos to be released shortly.

As you might imagine, subsequent posters immediately began listing numerous potential problems with Full Tilt’s decision not to restrict CardRunners pros to its “one account per player” policy. I’ve also seen a couple of other responses to the news on PartTime Poker and PokerKing’s blog in which they, too, list a few of the many possible problems that could result from Full Tilt’s decision.

Lots of issues involved here. (That Two Plus Two thread I mentioned will probably go over 1,000 posts today.) Frankly, the whole idea of signing an exclusivity deals with instructional sites seems pretty half-baked. The fuzzy temporary bending of the site’s rules and then making nice afterwards only makes it worse. Giving money back to the losers? What the hell . . . ? (Online poker becomes less and less like “real” poker every day.)

Getting back, though, to the Kahnawake Gaming Commission’s reguations. (Which we’re continuing to pretend actually mean something . . . .)

Caby’s reference to the “one player per account” rule comes from Full Tilt Poker’s “Site Rules.” It is Rule No. 2 that states “Players are not allowed to create, use, or deposit to more than one account. Players who are found to have multiple accounts or to have allowed multiple users to access their account may face account suspensions or revocations, and forfeiture of their accumulated Full Tilt Points and real money balances.”

Of course, if one looks further down the list, one encounters Rule No. 12, which states “Full Tilt Poker reserves the right to modify or revise the Rules at any time, without notice to Players. Such amendments will become effective immediately upon being listed on the Full Tilt Poker website. It is the Players' sole responsibility to review the Rules and Policies, and remain abreast of any changes.”

I suppose one could argue, then, Full Tilt has already made it plain to us that if they want to make exceptions to the “one account per player” rule then they can do so. However, allowing the CardRunners pros to create these temporary “alternate” accounts clearly violates the Kahnawake Gaming Commission’s own “one account per website” rule.

Conclusion: If Full Tilt Poker does not rescind its agreement with CardRunners to allow the CR pros to use multiple accounts, it will violate one of the rules set forth in the Kahnawake Gaming Commission’s “Regulations Concerning Online Gaming” and thus subject itself to whatever sanctions the KGC deems appropriate.

I’ve written Full Tilt to ask them why they believe it is okay to ignore their only regulatory body’s regulations. Will share their response here.

(Okay, you can stop pretending now.)

(EDIT [added 3/21/08]: It took five days, but Full Tilt support did finally answer my question. Sort of. I asked them specifically about the Kahnawake Gaming Commission’s regulation No. 180 and how FTP could violate it this way and still remain a permit holder. Here is what they told me:

“We fully understand your concerns regarding CardRunners’ accounts on our site. Rest assured, we value our players’ opinions and are considering all options before a decision is made.

Please stay tuned for updates via email or our software on how CardRunners’ educational videos will be handled.”

Dunno if others pointed out the KGC regulation to them or not, but it sounds as though Full Tilt is still thinking about how to handle their new agreement. I guess we'll all just have to “stay tuned.”)

Cheating “Scheme” Confirmed at UltimateBet

Rather than notify users or post anything on its website, Ultimate Bet -- following the same, questionable path of its partner, Absolute Poker -- has decided to publicize news regarding allegations of cheating on its site by sending messages to various poker people who then pass the stuff along to the poker community at large.

Around 9:00 p.m. (EST) on Friday, Mason Malmuth posted the following over on Two Plus Two:

Hi Everyone:

We just received this from Ultimate Bet and they asked us to post it. So here it is.

Best wishes,
Mason

ULTIMATEBET INTERIM STATEMENT

Contact: Press@ultimatebet.com

Montreal, Canada (March 6, 2008) – UltimateBet (UB), one of the ten largest online poker cardrooms, today issued the following interim statement with respect to allegations of unfair play on its site.

“On January 12, 2008, UltimateBet was alerted to allegations that a player with the online handle “NioNio” exhibited abnormally high winning statistics and was accused of having an unfair advantage during play. These allegations were made both directly to UltimateBet by concerned players and the KGC, and indirectly through several web forums. The allegations also included reports of suspicious activity concerning the deletion of the NioNio account and other accounts that may have been related to this scheme.

“We immediately launched an extensive inquiry involving an independent third-party expert to review hundreds of thousands of hand histories, all of which were promptly locked down and made available to this expert. The initial findings of our third-party expert confirm that the NioNio account’s winning statistics were indeed abnormal, and we have expanded the investigation to look into whether an unfair advantage existed, how such a scheme might have been perpetrated, and whether additional accounts beyond those of NioNio were involved.

“UltimateBet is in regular communications and contact with its regulatory authority, The Kahnawake Gaming Commission (KGC), and will continue to cooperate fully with that body.

“UltimateBet is determined to complete a full and thorough investigation. We pride ourselves on providing a safe, secure playing environment for our customers. The investigation has proven to be extremely complex and, therefore, has been more extensive and taken much longer than initially expected. We continue to aggressively pursue the matter and will communicate the findings of our full investigation to our regulatory authority and to our customer base as soon as practicable.”

Of course, when Ultimate Bet says they plan to communicate the findings to its customer base, I think we all know better. Only those among their customer base who happen to peruse forums like Two Plus Two, poker blogs, and/or a few of the poker news sites are ever going to hear the first word about cheating occurring on the site on which they play.

If you do happen to be one of those few who both play at Ultimate Bet and read the forums and/or Hard-Boiled Poker, tell me this: Does this vague report of a cheating “scheme” make you feel any safer about UB?