Evidence GG poker are simply banning all players over a certain w/r?
Using this site, https://smarthand.pro/top, I cant find literally any high-volume players at any stakes with w/r over 4bb/100. Using that site and sorting by hands at any stake, the results are shocking. Meanwhile, at other sites there are loads of substantial winners, even on sites that offer a higher RB%. Is this the confirmation that people have been suspecting for a long time, that GG is simply banning any player above a certain winrate and using "bum hunting" as a justification? IT makes a lot of business sense to do this. Only allow small winners, break-even, or losing Rakeback grinders on your platform.
Here is GG poker top volume players for 100-200nl, last 2 years (all stakes are similar):
Ps:
Ipoker (more rakeback here than GG)
WPN (again, MUCh more RB without GG bait and switch PVI system)
My account has been frozen on GGpoker. Even micro stakes can be frozen.
To me, even finding a table with fish isn't bum hunting.Bum hunting to me is following fish from table to table, or habitually always sitting out the moment the big fish leaves the table.But yeah, all this is just more and more evidence that subjective TOS rules methods, is perceived very differently among varieties players.I like the charm factor, but I'm worried that simply c
Thats close to the way i look at it. Only i have no problem leaving a table if a particularly bad player leaves Example i was playing a week or so a go and was about ready to leave and a player sites down and vpips 4 hands in a row. Long story short they have a 98% vpip after 2 rotations. So i decide cant pass fee money. After they leave i sit out next button.
Most regs at 500nl+ bumhunt. There’s literally no point banning them. What they gonna do, ban every reg? Then the original -20bb rec is gonna bumhunt the -100bb whale. It doesn’t solve the problem.
If you follow a spewy rec from table to table and ruin their buzz thus hurting the economy with your greed, then I think you probably deserve to be banned.
Was a losing player years ago. 0 warnings even tho I table selected like everyone.
Then small winner. Little bit of warning.
Then amazing winrate. Warnings coming in droves.
To me thats a clear yes.
lol onlineaments
there was never any real evidence gg was doing this. and if they did they stopped 4 years ago
Was a losing player years ago. 0 warnings even tho I table selected like everyone.
Then small winner. Little bit of warning.
Then amazing winrate. Warnings coming in droves.
To me thats a clear yes.
can you prove this?
Was a losing player years ago. 0 warnings even tho I table selected like everyone.
Then small winner. Little bit of warning.
Then amazing winrate. Warnings coming in droves.
To me thats a clear yes.
How did you get an amazing winrate? It would make sense that your winrate increased because you table selected better... And exactly that is against ToS, so you'd get the warnings
Im sure they dont ban people who have very high wr's but dont table select
But bumhunting does get you a warning
And it also gets you a higher WR thats why it seems like they warn/ban big winners
But I did just check the top100 lifetime GG winners on SN and zero of them are banned, if they would "simply ban players over high winrates" that would be their place to start
Lolz those people dont exist. Every single reg there is bumhunting. You even get flagged as bumhunter because you instaquit after reg quit.
Basically avoiding the bumhunting ban is a new skill you need to develop there, lol.
Of course there are big winners who dont table select
But in my book 20bb is a huge winner but they only get a little bit of warnings. Seems fine then, as those wr's are very possible done with huge table selection, let alone the stable 35bb/100 winners
The numbers you mention seem to be plucked out of thin air or do you have any sources for them?
Of course there are big winners who dont table select
But in my book 20bb is a huge winner but they only get a little bit of warnings. Seems fine then, as those wr's are very possible done with huge table selection, let alone the stable 35bb/100 winners
The numbers you mention seem to be plucked out of thin air or do you have any sources for them?
If you had an iq more than lemon, you could prob make educated guess that those numbers come from GGs own graph and why even 20bb is a lot smaller after rake and reductions.
But anyway, to me its pretty obvious that how vague the Bumhunting TOS is and how you only get warned after winning not losing...is only a slow way to kick out the winners.
If you had the iq of a lemon you would know winrate is post-rakeback.
And again, the top100 biggest winners on GG have been playing steadily there. So clearly they are not warning/banning for just winning alone.
If you had the iq of a lemon you would know winrate is post-rakeback.
And again, the top100 biggest winners on GG have been playing steadily there. So clearly they are not warning/banning for just winning alone.
Let me re-phrase that: they dont warn/ban you for winning if you are as good at the game as avoiding their automated warning game.
Let me re-phrase that: they dont warn/ban you for winning if you are as good at the game as avoiding their automated warning game.
Ohhh so they ban people for winning but not for winning a lot. That makes total sense.
Must really suck to be just below the top then... except those guys keep on playing as well.
The rules against bumhunting are to be found on their website though.. it includes only sitting in vs certain players and leaving when they leave, refusing action to others, leaving a table within 10 hands, like it says on their site:
"The following are completely unacceptable and violate the house rules of the GGNetwork:
Opening tables only at which an avoidably weak player is sitting.
Leaving a table immediately after a weak player has left, and subsequently searching for another at which a weak player is sitting.
Actively avoiding playing against other players at the table while concentrating on targeting the weak player.
Screening for and engaging certain users.
Only choosing to participate in games when these specific users are present.
Targeting specific users, for instance, by leaving a game shortly after certain users depart, and/or resuming the game when those particular users return."
Yourpokerdream has a stable GG players and says this about it:
"Please note that winning players are not specifically blocked! We have numerous professional players in our community who have already achieved very high profits when playing on the GGNetwork. None of them got banned or had the slightest problem with their accounts! To make the most of GGPoker, simply stick to the rules and, if for some reason you make a mistake and consequently receive a warning, act accordingly."
So if you do get a warning its simply for breaking bumhunting rules. And personally, im totally fine with a site trying to combat this predatory behaviour. Maybe its why GG has grown so much compared to other sites.
Its like you see all those players who got banned for being good.
Newsflash to you: you dont.
Exactly you dont see them if they are banned
And the top winners I still see, so they are not banned
Big winners at midstakes below the top I still see, so they are not banned
Only players getting banned are repeatedly breaking bumhunting rules and ignoring warnings.
And you only get warned after winning.
Take that as you want.
I dont know if the alarm only goes off once a player start winning but pretty much only regs bumhunt, fish themselves dont. And a bumhunting reg is very likely a winning player.
They are warning bumhunters who break ToS, if you win and dont break ToS you wont get warned.
Take that as you want.
