furbean.com -- MY APOLOGY

- My Apology

My Apology - 4/25/2010

To whom it may concern:

According to PokerStars Security Team, from their recent routine review of my and fua9999's account, they have realized that we have been using some unusual playing patterns during our play. After we explain the strategies we have been using since June 2008, PokerStars have decided to bar us from playing at PokerStars permanently as they think it is the detriment to other players.

As some of you have already heard about this matter, you can find all the details regarding this matter from this tab. To people who have not heard about this and have been wondering what furbean (me) and fua9999 have been doing since early March, you will also find your answers here.

As a result, both I (furbean) and fua9999 have been barred from PokerStars permanently and this is the final decision made by PokerStars Security Team. Here, I would like to give our sincere apology to whoever has played with us together and taken a loss from our strategies from June 2008 to March 2010. I would also like to personally apologize to whoever has been following/reading my website since the first day it's published; I have let you guys down and I truly feel sorry for it.

There are a few things I have been working on for the last month and hopefully you would feel better:

1. I have created this tab for sharing the complete details for this matter. I have trimmed a little bit email details, for example, some hand histories, people's names and players' names involved, to respect their privacies.

2. I have completed my study for all hand histories for both me and fua9999. You can find the results under this tab. I hope that this will help to clarify some of the questions have been raised from 2+2 forum.

3. I have summarized all the funds (in all forms, e.g., SNE benefits, FPPs) on both my and fua9999's accounts; I have also listed the name of the players who have played the most against both of us on the tables, life time and also for the year of 2010. I hope that this will help some of you who have not received any reimbursement from PokerStars for this matter.

We hope that the efforts we put in for the last month will somewhat make up for what you consider as losses on the tables. We understand that PokerStars think that our strategies are to the detriment to other players and so do some of you believe; as a matter of fact (you can find the study result under this tab), from the study of all hand histories we have played on PokerStars, we did take a loss as we expected in terms of money. We hope that this result will make you feel better.

We also realize that as a result which both me and fua9999 have been barred permanently from PokerStars, virtually 4 tables of Fixed-Limit Full-Ring game for both $3/$6 and $5/$10 are gone permanently as well, as we play 20+ those tables at the same time on a regular basis. As a consequence, the number of tables has been decreased since the day our accounts suspended and barred eventually. Here, we sincerely apologize to the players who play on those limits, especially to the current SNE chasers and regular grinders. We also apologize to PokerStars as creating a negative image to their customers who think PokerStars offers games with lack of integrity.

We truly regret about what we have done in the past and the mistake we have made which we did not realize in the past how serious it was. We could have avoided this if we consult with more people back in 2008. It was a painful lesson for us to learn and we paid a good price for it. We promise that we will not do anything like that again in the future, both online and live.
We appreciate the support from family members and friends both online and in the real life; without them, it would be much harder for us to walk out from this shadow.

The website is now back online and my blog will continuously be updated. As before, I wish you guys will be benefited by reading the stuff here and I wish you successful playing poker in the future.

Best regards,

furbean
April 25, 2010

- The Strategy

The Strategy - 04/25/2010

Let me explain the complete strategy we have been using in the past since June 2008:

1. If one of us has entered the pot pre-flop with a raise, the other would raise with AA regardless. The chance for this to happen is less than 20% /221 x 2 = 0.001% , assuming we raise 20% of time pre-flop, which neither of us do.

2. For the situation when one of us has entered the pot pre-flop with a raise, the other holds KK, a phone call will be made to ensure that the other does not have AA; if one does hold AA, the other would fold KK to simplify the game. The chance of this situation to happen is same as with AA, which is less than 0.001%. We admit that what we did here is wrong and this is against the T&C, as we did share the hole card.

3. If one of us has entered the pot pre-flop with a raise, the other would fold all hands except the above mentioned. What this means is, the other would fold hands like QQ, JJ, AK without knowing the raiser's holdings. This happens 99.998% of time at least.

Analysis of the strategy

In any case, the ONLY intention of adapting this method was trying to simplify the matchup between us and hence keep the games going faster. There was no squeezing or pot-building before or after the flop EVER involved. We did not share the hole cards except the #2 mentioned above. Also, by adapting this method, instead of making a profit, we are actually losing money on the table (you can see that from "The Results" under this tab). As a matter of fact, we did share hole cards for 0.001% of time, and again, we agree that this is our fault for breaking the rules.

Why do we do this even we know sharing hold cards is wrong? At the time that we decided to use this strategy, we were only focus on 99.999% of time: this will speed up the game and at the same time in return, this will benefit the players on the table (which as a fact, what we expected has come true).

We did think about the consequences before using this strategy. We expected that in case PokerStars find out about the strategy, we would get punished into some degree. However, no matter how we thought about it, we never expected that this would lead to a permanent ban as we didn't think that our strategy was a detriment to other players. And, there was no chance turning things around.

- The Results

The Results - 04/25/2010

      As a lot of you think the strategy is harmful to other players on the tables and some even think that they got robbed heavily and accused us for the most important reason why they lost on the table, I would like to show you that, instead of making money, we are actually losing money on the tables by using the strategies we employed. 

      Please do not get mad at us for what I say above. I am not trying to convince you; I am showing you the fact that nobody can deny. 

      Below is the entire hand history of furbean (me) and fua9999:
 

  

      As you can see, we have played games on many different levels Limit Hold'Em as well as other games. In order to make the truth more obvious, I will ONLY use $3/$6, which we have played the most as an example. 

      Below is the winrate for $3/$6 Full-Ring Fix-Limit Hold'Em life time we have played while both of me and fua9999 sitting on the same table:

 

 

      Below is the winrate for $3/$6 Full-Ring Fix-Limit Hold'Em life time we have played while we were NOT sitting on the same table:

 

  

      As now you can see, it is pretty obvious that both of us have taken a loss while we were sitting on the same table. In terms of money, here is the amount each one of us lost to other players while we were sitting on the same table (which we should not lose them if we were sitting along):

furbean: (0.33 - 0.02) X 592243/100 X $3 = $5507.96

fua9999: (-0.20 - (-0.26)) X 592243/100 X $3 = $1066.04



      Some of you have argued that the strategy we used will confuse other players while using HUD, because the key stats from HUD will be different comparing to the stats while we were sitting apart. I do not think that we are obligate to show our actual stats; therefore, I am only showing you the key stat differences for both me and fua9999 (again, I am using $3/$6 FRFLHE as an example) :

furbean: VPIP%: 0.8 PFR%: 0.1 3BET%: 0.2 4BET Range: 0.2 WTSD%: 0.8 Agg: 0.18 Flop CBet%: 0.5 Turn CBet%: 1.7 River CBet%: 0.8 Steal Pct: 0.5 BB Fold to Steal: 2 SB Fold to Steal: 2.5

fua9999: VPIP%: 1.3 PFR%: 0.4 3BET%: 0.5 4BET Range: 0.2 WTSD%: 0.3 Agg: 0.0 Flop CBet%:  0.5 Turn CBet%:  0.3 River CBet%: 0.9 Steal Pct: 0.8 BB Fold to Steal: 3.1 SB Fold to Steal: 1.6

      I am not sure how you would read the stat difference above; for me, none of the above difference will make me change the playing strategy against a certain player. 



      Some of you have argued that the VPP losses because the strategy we used in the past. True, we totally agree with it. It obviously hurts both players (loss in VPPs) and PokerStars (in terms of rake). However the amount in terms of VPP loss is not nearly close to the time players benefited. For instance,  I would like to show you the loss while both of us at blinds (either me and SB+ fua9999 at BB or me at BB +fua9999 at SB). 

      Total number of Hands:735414
      FUA9999@SB: 82816
      # of times open-to SB: 12057
      # of times furbean @ BB: 1452
      FUA9999@ SB to Steal %: 33.2

      Assuming furbean defend 100% of fua9999's SB Steal, that's 482 times, assuming we are raked average $1, that's 1 VPP awarded to each one. Assuming each VPP worth $0.05 (for SNE, each VPP worth $0.1) for each player, so the 8 other player (assuming it's 10-handed game the whole time) would lose 8 x 0.05 x 482 = $192.8.

      Assuming the chance fua9999@SB while furbean@BB is the same as furbean@SB while fua9999@BB, for the life time we played at the same time on $3/$6 table, the rest players combined would lose less than $400 in terms of VPP (I think it will be a lot of less than $400 as we assume that the one at BB will defend 100% of time), which is less than 6% of what we lost to the table ($6574).  

      We are not trying to prove something that makes our strategy valid, neither trying to hope for another chance playing at PokerStars. We know that what we did was wrong (for hole-card sharing and heavy softplays) and we are truly sorry for that. However, we are willing to show all the results above so that, some of you may feel better as, after all, you did not lose "much" because of us sitting on your table (Instead, you gain more money and game goes faster). If you insist that the strategy we used is the main factor that you lost on those limits, I would highly recommend that you should plug your leaks in the game instead of blaming on us.

- Players' deserved Credits

Players' deserved Credits - 04/25/2010

As a part of the penalty for what we have done, no money will give back to both me and fua9999 since the day our accounts were suspended. First, I will list everything in our accounts in terms of money, FPPs, SNE benefits and cash bonuses which were being cleared. As we never had a chance to access our accounts since the day they were suspended, we can only provide relatively accurate numbers. And then I will list the result from Holdem Manager for all opponents we have encountered in the past.

The reason I provide this information is because from 2+2 forum and people I know who played us in the past, they have not received anything as a refund. This surprised me as some of them already received their refunds a few days after we were barred. I feel that it is my obligation to share the information below so that people will be treated fairly. I have to say that as the 2nd round of admin credits being released to the players, which PokerStars has never done this before, whether or not PokerStars releasing the full amount of barred players' accounts becomes a question.

Values in both accounts:

furbean:

Money in account: ~$8,500.00

FPPs: ~140,000FPPs = $2,240.00

Cash Bonus being cleared: $4,000.00 (1.6K VPPs needs to earned to release this bonus)

WSOP Main Event: ~$13,000.00 PokerStars has released the $10,000.00 into both accounts. However, another 3,000.00 ($1,000.00+ hotel stay with upgraded room, $1,000 spending money, others) are supposed to be awarded as the entire package value.

WCOOP Main Event: $5,200.00

Total: $32,940.00

fua9999:

Money in account: ~$11,000.00

FPPs: ~80,000FPPs = $1,280.00

Cash Bonus being cleared: $4,000.00 (20K VPPs needs to earned to release this bonus)

WSOP Main Event: ~$13,000.00

WCOOP Main Event: $5,200.00

Total: $34,480.00

Both accounts grand total: $67,420.00

Loss in terms of VPPs: Players have asked for the lost VPPs to PokerStars because of our strategy. Unfortunately PokerStars will not credit anyone for the loss of VPPs as a refund.

Now let me show you the results from HM (Holdem Manager) Note that only the first letter and last letter of a player's screen name will be shown as respect to their privacies. Only the top 100 players are listed for the entire report and top 80 players are listed for the year of 2010.

<<<< The entire report >>>>

<<<< The report for the year of 2010 ONLY >>>>

As some players's received refunds have been posted on 2+2 forum (by themselves), you can compare with their amounts so that you can figure out the approximated amount of yours. Obviously, as PokerStars never shows how they distribute the funds in the past, simply using the number of hands you played against both of us will not be accurate enough to figure out your refunds.

Once again, we would like to express our apology here to whoever we have played in the past. We hope that the admin credits distributed by PokerStars will make you feel a little better.

In case you cannot figure out whether you are on the list or not with the information provided, send a private message on 2+2 forum to "furbean" or simply send me an email with your screen name and I will get back to you as soon as I can.

- 03/06 ~ Now & Future Plan

- Emails Part #1

- Emails Part #2

Emails Part #2 - 04/25/2010

Hi, Jxxxxxx:

Thank you for bringing up this issue. It's Sunday afternoon March 7, 2010, and I just got back home after a short vacation. Now, I am sitting down in front of my computer with fua9999 to answer the questions and concerns you have. We guarantee that everything written below is 100% true.

First of all, we would like to give you a detailed relationship between furbean and fua9999. We met each other back in 2000 from playing billiards; then we become friends and play billiards together. Since the poker boom in 2003, we have joined the poker society and start to play poker separately in the local casinos. Furbean has become a professional poker player in 2008 and starts to play on PokerStars in April, 2008. You can find more information from his blog http://www.furbean.com. After a few months of playing at PokerStars, furbean realized that it's profitable playing there and a decent profit can be earned through PokerStars' VIP programs. Furbean then informed fua9999 and recommended him to join the site and hopefully make some profit as well. Since then, furbean and fua9999 have been playing on the full-ring fixed limit hold�em, which it's the game they are familiar with and good at. We have never lived together in the past, neither playing poker online together in one place. We have no blood-related relationship.

Now, let us explain the strategy and thinking during the play of the hands you have copied in the email. As you have read from the above, we have started to play FR FLHE extensively at PokerStars. Since we play similar limit, it's unavoidable we will have confrontation between each other all the time. As we both play 20 tables at the same time, we came up a strategy to speed up the games and simplify the matchup between the two of us. The idea is, if one of us has entered the pot pre-flop, the other would raise with AA regardless, and voluntarily fold all hands except KK. For the situation when one has entered the pot pre-flop, the other holds KK, a phone call will be made to ensure that the other does not have AA; if one does hold AA, the other would fold KK to simplify the game. In any case, the ONLY intention of adapting this method was NOT to collude or cheat during the game; by doing so, our ONLY purpose was trying to simplify the matchup between us and hence keep the games going faster. Also, we would like to mention that, by adapting this method, instead of making a profit, we are actually losing money on the table. The reason is simple, if one holds AA and the other holds KK, the one with KK would always enter the pot as well so that the chance of winning the pot is higher.

However, after reviewing the Terms and Conditions from PokerStars, we have realized that it is inappropriate to use this method even without hurting other players on the tables (in fact, other players would benefit from the method we use). We have decided that, from today, March 7, 2010, on, we will no longer use this method in any circumstances; we will play each other just like against any other players on the table. We will also promise that there will be no soft-play between the two of us. If we violate the Terms and Conditions again, feel free to penalize us with the maximum punishment possible.

We have been playing on PokerStars full-time since 2008 and have been treating playing poker professionally as our business. Furbean has achieved the Supernova Elite status in 2008 and 2009, fua9999 has achieved the Supernova Elite status in 2009. We have contributed over 300K U.S. dollars in terms of rakes to PokerStars and virtually keeping 4 tables going just by the two of us (we both play 20 tables at the same time). We both believe that poker is a game of skill and we have NEVER adapted any method to collaborate to make profits from others since the first day of playing poker, both live and online. We would like to continue our business at PokerStars so that all parties would benefit greatly in the future.

Once again, we apologize for the method we have used in the past, and we promise that we will no longer use it anymore in the future. Please consider our reply thoroughly and feel free to ask us for any further questions or concerns. We would like to help you to have this issue resolved in a timely manner. If in any case, you choose to make any kind of aggressive action on us, we would like to have a face-to-face conversation with you as soon as possible before the decision is final.

P.S. for the further email regarding this matter, please reply to furbean@yahoo.com along so that we don't have to reply twice to complicate the process.

Sincerely,
furbean
fua9999

- Emails Part #3

- Emails Part #4

Emails Part #4 - 04/25/2010

Hi, Jxxxxxxx:

We (furbean and fua9999) have just received the email from you.
We have to disagree with your decision and some of the statements you made in the email. Clearly, you and your other specialists have NOT understood completely about the "Team play strategies" we employed. By using "Team play strategies" we employed, it is clear that our routinely made team plays to create situations where we were supposed to get DAMAGED as an overall result. The strategies have proven to lose money in the long run for the team players.

From your email, you state that "you and 'fua9999' worked together as a team to the detriment of other players while playing at the tables", "In reviewing hands it is clear that you routinely made team plays to create situations where you were supposed to benefit." We believe that this is a very unprofessional statement and it is very unlikely that a TRUE poker specialist should make such statement as a response. There is no such thing called "were supposed to be" in poker; poker is a game entirely based on mathematics and skills.

PLEASE, let some of those who are knowledgeable about poker strategy to take a look at this matter. Now, let us prove that what we say it's true.

From the last response we wrote, the ONLY intention of adapting this method was NOT to collude or cheat during the game; by doing so, our ONLY purpose was trying to simplify the matchup between us and hence keep the games going faster. We are certain that we are NOT benefiting by doing so.

In case you have missed, this is the strategy we use:
"If one of us has entered the pot pre-flop, the other would raise with AA regardless, and voluntarily fold all hands except KK. For the situation when one has entered the pot pre-flop, the other holds KK, a phone call will be made to ensure that the other does not have AA; if one does hold AA, the other would fold KK to simplify the game." In other words, we would fold QQ, JJ, TT, 99, AKo, AKs, AQs, WITHOUT KNOWING THE OTHER'S HOLE CARDS.

By doing so, we have voluntarily fold these hands in the past and made $0 profit.

It has been mathematically proven that, against one raise, it is profitable to play QQ, JJ, TT, 99, AKo, AKs, AQs.

By doing so, from January 2009 until now, furbean has fold 215 times of those hands we mentioned above when he is not at small blind nor big blind, and fua9999 has fold 247 times. By folding the total of 462 times, it is clear that we took a SIGNIFICANT LOSS by adapting this strategy.

For the situations where we fold KK when the other has AA, it is clear that we are getting LESS chance to win the pot and other players would benefit from our strategy.

It is inappropriate to use a few hands as examples where it seems that we benefit to prove our strategy is harmful to other players. There are a few examples where clearly we TOOK A LOSS by using our strategy:

***** PokerStars Game #.... (A set of hand histories removed for privacy purpose)
*****

We are willing to take penalties into some degree by using this team play because we know that it is inappropriate to do so, for example, sharing hole cards when one has KK and the other has entered the pot with a raise. Like we have mentioned from previous email, we are NOT sharing the hole cards the entire time with the ONLY situation where one has KK and the other has entered the pot with a raise. It is humanly impossible to share all hole cards when both of us playing 20 tables at the same time. WE are clearly the ones who got hurt by using this strategy and we have all hands proven that.

If you insist that our strategy is to "the detriment of other players while playing at the tables", PLEASE, give us the HARD prove that, MATHMATICALLY the strategy is harmful to other players. Just simply saying "it is clear that..." is CLEARLY NOT a solid prove to support your statement. We are treating playing poker as a professional business and we treat it seriously, especially at PokerStars. We have been 100% loyal to PokerStars for the last a few years, and we think that we deserve the right to see some HARD prove before we get banned permanently.

It is clear that barring both of us permanently is over penalized, and if you think that it will be better for us having a face-to-face conversation which might help our situation, we would like to come to the Isle of Man and we can talk it over.

Again, PLEASE, let some of those who are knowledgeable about poker strategy to take a look at this matter.

Sincerely,
furbean
fua9999

- Emails Part #5

Emails Part #5 - 04/25/2010

Hello Hansen, [CC fua9999 since you are submitting your emails together]

Thank you for your email, which has been escalated to me, as a collusion team
supervisor, for response. Also, I was the senior collusion specialist responsible
for your case.

I understand your frustration at having been caught violating our card-room rules, but your appeal, to be honest, strains credibility. I will go through it step-by-step, and will address each point--it is my opinion that you deserve that. This is a thorough response, and is therefore quite lengthy.

You said:

"We have to disagree with your decision and some of the statements you made in the email."

Yes, I expect you would. No longer being allowed to play on PokerStars, as well as the confiscation of your funds, is not something I would expect you to agree with. Having said that, I assure you, this decision was not taken lightly. The poker specialist who researched your case, myself (who reviewed his research), my manager, and *his* manager (the head of Game Security for PokerStars), are all in agreement, however, that we took the correct--indeed, the only possible--course of action.

You said:

"Clearly, you and your other specialists have NOT understood completely about
the "Team play strategies" we employed."

We understand them perfectly, which is why we have taken the action we have taken. Team play of *any* kind is strictly prohibited at PokerStars, as our Terms of Service and card-room rules clearly stipulate. You can review them here, though I would expect players of your stature, with your experience, would be well aware of them regardless:

Card-room Rules: http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/room/policies/

You said:

"By using "Team play strategies" we employed, it is clear that our routinely made team plays to create situations where we were supposed to get DAMAGED as an overall result. The strategies have proven to lose money in the long run for the team
players."

If your intent is to convince us that you employed a strategy that you expected
would hurt you in the long-run, that you intentionally employed what you thought was a losing strategy, then quite simply we don't believe you. Why would anyone knowing adopt what they thought was a losing strategy? It makes no sense. Point of fact though, this is irrelevant. Whether you intended it to be a losing strategy, and whether or not is was in fact a losing strategy (it wasn't), makes no difference whatsoever. Collusion of *any* kind, for *any* reason, regardless of intentions or outcome, is strictly prohibited. It is impossible for us to believe that players with over 3,000,000 FPPs, lifetime, would not know this. In fact, you all-but admit in your last email that you *do* know this (I will address that in a moment).

You said:

"From your email, you state that "you and 'fua9999' worked together as a team to the detriment of other players while playing at the tables", "In reviewing hands it is clear that you routinely made team plays to create situations where you were supposed to benefit." We believe that this is a very unprofessional statement and it is very unlikely that a TRUE poker specialist should make such statement as a response. There is no such thing called "were supposed to be" in poker; poker is a game entirely based on mathematics and skills."

I can assure you that Jxxxxxx is a true poker specialist, as am I, as are my
manager, and his manager. We happen to think it is unprofessional to cheat at our tables and expect to get away with it, particularly among players as experienced as yourselves. That is neither here nor there, however. While I think quibbling over semantics is kind of silly, what the quoted paragraphs mean are simply that you attempted to realize an unfair advantage, using your relationship, by sharing information not commonly available to all players. This is universally despised bahavior among poker players the world over. If you doubt it, ask some, and they will be more than happy to tell you.

We agree, however, that poker is a game of mathematics and skill, which is befouled by behavior such as that which you engaged in. Collusion, again, will not be tolerated, in any form, for any reason.

You said:

"PLEASE, let some of those who are knowledgeable about poker strategy to take a look at this matter."

Between Jxxxxxxx, myself, my manager, and the head of game security; I estimate we have, roughly, fifty or sixty years of experience playing poker, and have reviewed literally millions of hands (a fair number of them yours). I don't think calling into question our expertise is a strategy that is going to work for you.

You said:

"From the last response we wrote, the ONLY intention of adapting this method was NOT to collude or cheat during the game; by doing so, our ONLY purpose was trying to simplify the matchup between us and hence keep the games going faster. We are certain that we are NOT benefiting by doing so."

Whether you are benefitting or not is irrelevant. Collusion is cheating, and
cheating is not tolerated. Point of fact, though: you did benefit, everytime you cheated. While I doubt that it is possible you truly don't know this, I will illustrate one possibility with a fictious hand:

furbean: Ah Ad
fua9999: Ks Kc
Player C: Th Td

Now, let's imagine how this hand would play out honestly (without the collusion).
There would be some fairly strong betting pre-flop, but experienced players would
not get overly committed, and likely these hands see a flop.

Flop: Ts 7h 2d

After a flop like this, what kind of action should we expect? I would argue the
action would be furious, and furbean and fua9999 very likely get taken to the felt. By colluding, and encouraging fua9999 to fold, his *entire stack* is spared here, to the detriment of Player C.

What your particular form of cheating does is something called "variance
mitigation". By ensuring only the stronger of the two hands played, the player with the second strongest hand is protected from unusual cases like the example above. This was only an example to show how you could benefit. I could dream up cases like this all day, and if I wanted to wade through the 100's of thousands of hands you two have played together, there is no question I would find plenty.

Further, and even more deviously, knowing any cards that are out of play increases the information available to just one player, to the direct detriment of others still in the hand. This should be intuitively obvious to you, given your experience. Poker is, after-all, a game of information. Your having information others do not is patently unfair... which is why we and every other poker room in the world have rules against it.

You said:

"If one of us has entered the pot pre-flop, the other would raise with AA
regardless, and voluntarily fold all hands except KK. For the situation when one has entered the pot pre-flop, the other holds KK, a phone call will be made to ensure that the other does not have AA; if one does hold AA, the other would fold KK to simplify the game." In other words, we would fold QQ, JJ, TT, 99, AKo, AKs, AQs, WITHOUT KNOWING THE OTHER�S HOLE CARDS. By doing so, we have voluntarily fold these hands in the past and made $0 profit. It has been mathematically proven that, against one raise, it is profitable to play QQ, JJ, TT, 99, AKo, AKs, AQs"

This paragraph is, frankly, baffling to me. It is possible, first of all, to share hole-card information without being precise. Having said that, the above strategy *is* hole-card sharing--I am at a loss as to explain how you don't see that. To be honest, I think you understand it perfectly, and are just positing a defense out of desperation. This part, in particular, is what I am referring to:

"a phone call will be made to ensure that the other does not have AA; if one does hold AA, the other would fold KK to simplify the game.� In other words, we would fold QQ, JJ, TT, 99, AKo, AKs, AQs"

This *is* hole-card sharing.

You said:

"It has been mathematically proven that, against one raise, it is profitable to play QQ, JJ, TT, 99, AKo, AKs, AQs"

Not against AA or KK it isn't. However *folding* these hands is especially
profitable if you are in a position to do so against superior hands, using an
advantageous relationship not available to others. By working as a team, you ensure that only the strongest of your hands faces your opponents, which is, also, clearly an advantage.

You said:

"By doing so, from January 2009 until now, furbean has fold 215 times of those hands we mentioned above when he is not at small blind nor big blind, and fua9999 has fold 247 times. By folding the total of 462 times, it is clear that we took a SIGNIFICANT LOSS by adapting this strategy."

You are, as a team, in fact, significant winners: I suspect you know this. By
controlling your variance you have unfairly decreased your losses, and helped
yourselves be more profitable.

I haven't even mentioned the avoidance...

Knowing that you only have x-1 REAL opponents at a table of X opponents, also gives you an enormous advantage. If you need me to explain how, please advise, and I will be happy to do so--though I suspect you know this as well.

You said:

"For the situations where we fold KK when the other has AA, it is clear that we are getting LESS chance to win the pot and other players would benefit from our
strategy."

In fact, you are getting less of an opportunity to lose, and other players are
suffering from this strategy. KK would not prevail against AA anyway, most of the time. So, in fact, you are not suffering any significant losses regardless, as you are folding what you KNOW will be a losing hand. KK is destined to lose, and by folding it, you simply ensure this occurs without losing any additional funds you may have lost due to variance. This tactic *protects* you, it does not harm you. It may decrease, slightly, the funds won by AA, but since AA is held by your partner anyway, this is a zero-sum game except in extraordinary hands.

You said:

"It is inappropriate to use a few hands as examples where it seems that we benefit to prove our strategy is harmful to other players."

Actually, it isn't. Colluding at all, for any reason, is inappropriate. If even ONE player is harmed by your actions, that is one too many. Even if ZERO players were harmed by your actions, our response would have been the same. Fact of the matter is, however, your collusion, over a period of two years, has harmed many, many players. I am not going to get into a hand-by-hand analysis with you though, as it would literally take years. You colluded, you got caught; that's all that is really relevant here.

You said:

"We are willing to take penalties into some degree by using this team play because we know that it is inappropriate to do so, for example, sharing hole cards when one has KK and the other has entered the pot with a raise."

This is the first thing you have said so far with which I can agree. You knew it was wrong, and did it anyway. You have in fact taken penalties in accordance with our policies regarding collusion.

You said:

"If you insist that our strategy is to "the detriment of other players while playing at the tables", PLEASE, give us the HARD prove that, MATHMATICALLY the strategy is harmful to other players. Just simply saying "it is clear that..." is CLEARLY NOT a solid prove to support your statement."

It is, and I have clearly argued our position above. While I did not, and am not particularly inclined to, provide mathematical proof, my philosophical proof, above, should be enough. If you want mathematical proof, ask a mathematician who has the mathematical edge: a player who knows ONLY his two cards, or a player who knows his two and two of another player. Similarly, ask the mathematician if KNOWING only 7 of the 8 players playing against you are actual adversaries is an advantage. I think we both know what he will say.

You simply magnify this advantage by playing many, many, many hands.

You said:

"We are treating playing poker as a professional business and we treat it seriously, especially at PokerStars."

I'm not sure cheating others is a good, long-term business strategy. We take the integrity of our tables very seriously, and will jealously defend it. I will argue that any strategy involving collusion will be negative EV at PokerStars.

You said:

"We have been 100% loyal to PokerStars for the last a few years, and we think that we deserve the right to see some HARD prove before we get banned permanently."

We have sent you all the proof needed. You even admit it: you shared
information "inappropriately" as part of your routine strategy. We call this hole-card sharing, and it is the most serious offense for which we have a name. Feel free to discuss this matter among members of your local poker community, and you will see that this form of collusion is universally reviled by honest players.

Look at it this way. If there were three players at a table, and two of them were sharing hole-cards, would you want to be the third player? I suspect not.

You said:

"It is clear that barring both of us permanently is over penalized, and if you think that it will be better for us having a face-to-face conversation which might help our situation, we would like to come to the Isle of Man and we can talk it over."

We do not offer face-to-face support.

We have no room for collusion on our site, and are frankly quite surprised to see it from players as experienced as yourselves. It is simply inexcusable. Our decision is final.

We wish you the best in your future endeavours.

Regards,

D M
Supervisor
PokerStars Game Security

- Emails Part #6

Emails Part #6 - 04/25/2010

Hi, D:

Thank you for the quick and thorough response, we really appreciated that. We respect every person working at PokerStars and we appreciate the effort from the people who worked on this case.

From the past emails, we have admitted that "by making a phone call" while have KK after one's raise, IS hole-card sharing. We apologize for what we have done. We have some disagreements regarding whether or not the strategy we employed is profitable. However, based on what you have stated, whether or not it's profitable, it is considered as cheating and cheating is not going to be tolerated. We don't want to argue about the strategy we used anymore because it's just irrelevant in this matter.

We think it's reasonable and fair to split both of the entire funds from our accounts as a result. We were not mad nor frustrated since the beginning and even after realizing all our money would be gone. We are Supernova Elites and we have the highest status at PokerStars. We also think it is fair to take them away from us, including all the FPPs, Tournament tickets and so on.

We understand that what we have done is inappropriate and we will no longer do it again no matter where we will play poker at, regardless.

Fua9999 is a floor manager for 10 years in one of the biggest local casinos. After he discussed with his co-workers regarding hole-card sharing, his co-workers agreed that hole-card sharing is strictly prohibited and they would give a certain time period of baring, for example, baring for 45 days. They also agreed that everyone makes mistakes and they deserve at least one chance, if they realized what they have done wrong and promised not to do it again. This is universally agreed.

Now, feel free to take away everything we had in our PokerStars accounts and we have absolutely no problem with that. However, we do feel like we deserve a chance to play on PokerStars again. Once again, we apologize for what we have done wrong and we promise that we will not do it again and we will not even be playing on the same tables ever.

We hope that you and PokerStars would reconsider the decision for banning us for life, that is all we are asking for. We are totally fine that if PokerStars decides to ban us for a certain time period, for example, 6 month and so on.

We have been playing poker for more than 10 years and we have loved playing PokerStars since the first day, not because the inappropriate strategy we used in the past, but the great services and VIP programs PokerStars offers. We would definitely like to have an opportunity playing on PokerStars again.

Regards,

Furbean
Fua9999

- Emails Part #7

- Leave Your Comments Here

Leave Your Comments Here - 4/25/2010

      You have read all the details regarding this matter and you have seen the results from our hand history research. You may have questions and concerns and this section is designed for you to leave your valuable comments. 

      I will answer all your questions and concerns in a timely fashion and I am willing to spend more time on the research if you are interested in some other data/stats.
 
      I am also interested at your opinion regarding this matter on whether barring both me and fua9999 permanently is appropriated. So, feel free to leave anything you want to say and I really appreciate for your feedback.

Morten left a comment on 04/25/2010

Hi Furbean

I never played with you, but follow the SNE chaser thread on 2+2 and read about your case there. I have been a pro and semi-pro online pokerplayer for almost a decade.

Your punishment is hard. Very hard. I agree to that. Losing that kind of money, respect, and job opportunities at once is not easy to cope with for anyone.

You have my respect for trying to argue for your case on this website, instead of hiding under a rock. That takes quite some stamina to come forward and be honest about everything.

That being said, I have to agree with the decison Pokerstars have made. They have to protect the integrity of the game. 

Allthough your "strategy" might not have been hugely +EV, you  invented the strategy because you expected to increase your yearly salary. 

And this extra money had to come from someone. Other players or Pokerstars. Not from thin air.

Your intentions were wrong, and other players have good reason to feel cheated. Even if they did not actually lose money.

Sitting down and expecting to play a fair game of poker, and then find out that 2 of your opponents are "sometimes" sharing cards. And "sometimes" follow a strategy. That will always feel wrong. And because of you, many thousands players are now questioning the honesty of Pokerstars and online poker in general.

Thumbs up to Pokerstars for having the guts to outright ban 2 SNE's.

furbean left a comment on 04/25/2010

Morten:

Thanks for the reply and your feedback is really appreciated. 

For whatever efforts we put in under this Tab, I hope that most of you will take it as a way of we are saying sorry for whatever the mistakes we made in the past. 

We do feel sorry for the "strategy" we used in the past, espeically for the hole-card sharing part. To us, this sounds much more stupid than what we thought it was the time we came up the "strategy": we were taking everything we had at a huge risk and what we gained is something worse than nothing. 

We have learned this lession in a hard way and we have nobody to blame on but ourselves. 

Once again, thank you for the reply and wish you good luck on the tables.

Jimbob left a comment on 04/25/2010

Furbean, 
You are like a guy that beats his wife, and then tries to get her to take him back.  Its a ridiculous request.  You will always be a cheater.  You shouldn't be allowed to play poker anywhere.  Pokerstars doesn't care how much money you think you made them on those 4 tables a night, and they certainly don't care about the fact that you think you are somehow professional.  Go pound sand douchebag.

Bulz-I left a comment on 04/26/2010

Whereas I can't really fault you for attempting a defense, as one of those who recently received a refund I can also not empathize in the slightest with your fate. Too often the players encountered online have this sense of entitlement, and have no appreciation for the decades spent developing the game of poker to the point where you can enjoy it whenever/wherever you choose. The competitive nature of the game leads people to seek out edges, sure, I get that. This goes waaaaay beyond an "edge", and while I do believe you understand that now, I find it disingenuous of you to claim you didn't understand it all along. Normally, I'm not one to pile on, but this affects me personally and all your "quotation marks", rationalizations, justifications and of course your blatant disregard for the rules in the first place are indicative of just the sort of attitude that tilts me to no end. While you may think of it as lending your perspective, I see the culture behind this style all over the tables and maybe, just maybe, with enough punishments this godawful trend can be thwarted.

Ann left a comment on 04/26/2010

Hello,

I played with both of you often thru the ladt few years.  I actually enjoyed the good player company.  Can you please email at my above email address and let me know what I should do to recover anything. My PS screenaname is lv lioness. I have not heard anything from PS I just heard on a table I was playing at.
Best to you.  Thanks

furbean left a comment on 04/27/2010

Jimbob:

Thanks for the reply. 

We are certainly not proud for what we did in the past. We've got what we deserved. I hope with all the info we provide here, you would feel better regarding this matter.

furbean left a comment on 04/27/2010

Bulz-I:

Thank you for the reply. 

First of all, I am glad that you got your refund as some of the players haven't recieved their fair share. 

We surely regret for what have done in the past, especially for the part which we broke the rules; if we could go back in time, we would've just played normally against each other. 

GL at the tables.

furbean left a comment on 04/27/2010

Ann:

Thanks for the reply. 

I just sent your an email with the number of hands you have played against both of us at the tables. I also showed you the amounts some other players have recieved for this matter. Hope this will help.

GL at the tables.

Sheriff left a comment on 05/01/2010

You are only apologizing because you got caught.  There is no excuse.  Please refrain from rationalizing your actions.  You knew from the beginning that is was wrong.  No one is interested in your excuses or reasoning.

Floris left a comment on 05/04/2010

for you and your cheating pokerpartner it might be a vey tough decision that has been taken bij PokerStars, you lose a lot of money and the chance to play at the best site there is at the moment. But for the rest of the players who play there in a fair way, PokerStars only took the right decision, actually i think they should go a step further and forward your information to other sites so you wont be able to play there either. Cheaters are the biggest threat for online poker, they should be banned as hard as they can.

Tom left a comment on 05/05/2010

I can only say that I hope you learned from your mistake and I wish you all the best at Full Tilt.
What you did was wrong, but you got your punishment so the case is closed.

Anmol left a comment on 05/16/2010

What you did was wrong, but I think you are correct, Taking the 67k from your accounts is enough punishment. It was a losing strategy anyway. Also, point out to the manager that if you get in to a situation where you have aa and he has kk, if both of you play regularly, and the 3rd player has a premium, say ak, he actually gains money by you folding the kk, because the pot would be made bigger. Against aa, lets assume he gets around 7BBs of his stack in. His EQ of a 15 BB pot would be around 1.5-2 BBs, so it's a -ev strategy around 5 BBs. Against aa and kk, the pot will get gigantic. All of you will invest around 15-16 BBs into the pot. now its a 50BB pot in which he invested 15 BBs. To make it the same EV he needs a return of around 20% , which would return 10 BBs and make it a -5 BB strategy. However, his Eq% is significantly less than that, around 5%, making his Eq -12.5 BBs. He saves 7.5BBs by you folding KK. I think pokerstars should reconsider, especially because they didn't ban Justin Bonomo for multi accounting.

jared left a comment on 06/17/2010

im dissapointed to hear all this....but what are you doing now?

furbean left a comment on 07/01/2010

I am temporarily disabling comments for the entire site as some people are abusing it and leave non-sense comments with my name. Sorry for the inconvenience.

I am not sure the purpose of doing so; for now, I will treat them as someone is so bored and thinks messing around here is fun.

I will re-open the comment area for the site once we enhance the security feature so that no one will be able to leave a comment with "furbean" except me. 

-furbean

MY APOLOGY