From: jasond@eskimo.com (JD)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling.poker
Subject: Re: Incompetent support and bugs @ pacific poker (I have proof!)
Date: 16 Jan 2004 10:26:21 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID:
References: <4007ea2b$0$215$edfadb0f@dread14.news.tele.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.232.30.75
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:26:22 +0000 (UTC)
That's definitely a bug. It's bad enough that the software has a
significant bug like that, but for the people running the site to
DISMISS a bug report.. that's ridiculous. Those guys must be totally
incompetent. They're treating the bug report as if you didn't
understand what "all-in" means. You don't really need video.. they
acknowledged the issue clearly below; they just don't think it's an
error.
> So when Topp44 folded, you went all-in, so you were unable to
> play/call/bet without chips. Stargazer won 565 chips, thats equivalent
> to yours 265+100 from Topp44 + 200 chips from Stargazer.
He doesn't notice that Stargazer risked 200 of his chips to win 265 of
yours, even though he JUST SAID IT??? This doesn't seem like a
problem to him?
I was just thinking about checkout out Pacific, actually. Now I
certainly won't.
JD
"Supaking" wrote in message news:<4007ea2b$0$215$edfadb0f
> I have discovered a serious bug in Pacific Poker's software, and in trying
> to convince Pacific Poker Support about this bug I have met the most
> incompetent support I have ever dealt with....!
> I have 100% proof of this bug, I have captured the hand on video and I will
> give you the URL to this video in the end of this post.
> But please read through this post first, to make sure you understand the
> scenario....
> I do *NOT* want to say that I question the outcome of the hand - in this
> particular hand the player in BB would definitely have called my remaining
> chips and knocked me out. But I want Pacific Poker to *admit* they have a
> serious bug in their newly launched tournament software! However, I could
> have had 395 chips and thereby probably could have forced player in BB to
> fold a mediocre hand. In that case I would have questioned the outcome.
>
> The scenario is this:
> Sit'n'go tournament
> Blinds 100/200
>
> I'm on the button with 265 chips
> Player Topp44 posts SB 100 chips
> Player Stargazer posts BB 200 chips
>
> I'm dealt QQ on the button and, of course, raise all in with my 265 chips.
> Player Topp44 folds his SB
> Player Stargazer should now either call my 65 chips or fold his hand !! but
> what happens is one of the 3 options:
>
> 1. The software automatically checks Stargazer's BB (and gives him a free
> shot at my remaining chips) and deals the community cards (which I suspect
> happened because the flop was dealt at the exact same time Stargazer had to
> act)
> 2. Software gave Stargazer the options to just check his BB - thus giving
> him a free shot at my remaining chips.
> 3. Stargazer was disconnected and treated as all-in - but if this was the
> case, I should have had my 65 chips returned.
>
> Now bringing this to the attention of Pacific Poker Support (in this case a
> guy named Mark), I first got the following reply:
>
> ***********************************************************************
> Hello Ib,
>
> Thank you for participating in our tournaments.
>
> I checked your game, however I was unable to find any discrepancies, as
> you went all-in, 'Topp44' folded, and the game terminated with Stargazer
> winning with 2 pairs, A 5. Please see the game summary below:
>
> Pot Size: $565.00
> Rake: $.00
> Board Hand: 7? 6? A? 5? 5?
> Players:
> 4. Supaking - Lost $265.00 - Q? Q?
> 6. Topp44 - Lost $100.00 Fold - 9? J?
> 8. Stargazer - Win $565.00 - A? K?
>
> Thank you for being our member and for the confidence you have placed in
> us. Please contact us whenever we can be of further service.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Mark
> Pacific Poker
> By Casino-on-Net
> ***********************************************************************
> So he can't see that the pot size don't add up???
> Pot Size: $565.00 = my 265 chips, SB 100 chips + Stargazer's 200 chips.
> Should have been: my 265 chips, SB 100 chips + Stargazer 265 chips = 630
> chips in the pot!
> 65 chips is missing somewhere, and he can't see this???
>
> Okay, now I question this guy's ability to read hand histories - and I ask
> to have someone else at Pacific Support to read this hand..... Mark then
> replies again:
>
> ***********************************************************************
>
> Dear Ib,
>
> Sorry, I think you didn't understand what happened.
>
> Ib, if a Member finishes his/her Chips in the middle of a Poker game,
> but does not wish to Fold his/her hand, the hand will be automatically
> considered "All-in":
> The All-in hand will remain live for consideration during the
> "Showdown", and the Member will no longer be required or able to take
> additional actions throughout the rest of the hand.
>
> So when Topp44 folded, you went all-in, so you were unable to
> play/call/bet without chips. Stargazer won 565 chips, thats equivalent
> to yours 265+100 from Topp44 + 200 chips from Stargazer.
>
> I invite you to read about our all-in policy on our website. I hope this
> has helped clarify the issue for you, but should you require any further
> information, please do not hesitate to contact us.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Mark
> Member Support Representative
>
> ***********************************************************************
> Eh, i don't understand what now....?????
>
> Okay, you want proof that this really happend???
> Here it is: www.rakeguide.com/pacificbug.avi
> Pay close attention to the blinds, my all-in raise and the *pot size* !
>
> Please tell me there's something wrong in this case, and I'm not losing my
> mind :-)