Topic: BetcoinPoker.com Betcoin.ag-Big Tourneys-BONUS-Freerolls, Ring Games, Real Poker - page 40. (Read 367789 times)

So let me get this straight....all the fuzz about winning the jackpot was a lie....pretty soon they won't have any feet...the world is running out of ammunition because they continue to shoot themselves in the foot....LOL

Thanks, you are making it tough to keep up with all the scummy things Betcoin does.

Glad I wont have to spend any time on this.

This article has been corrected!  Thank you.

According to the rules posted on your site (and available by clicking on the 'info' button on the big BBJ ticker in the lobby):

2. There must be a minimum of four or more players dealt in the hand and a rake must be collected in order to qualify for the Bad Beat Jackpot.

Two is less than four.  Therefore that hand was not eligible for the BBJ.  You can tell that's accurate because you didn't take a jackpot drop in the hand.  No jackpot drop + less than four players = no BBJ.

lol was the jackpot even worth more than he lost in the hand?

50/100 Hold'em... Daayuum. Back Door Royal Flush - Soohh Sick.

Gratz to both!

#mesojelly

__ACTl0NNNN Loses King Quads to Royal Flush in Bad Beat Poker Hand

Betcoin Poker's __ACTl0NNNN Loses King Quads to Royal Flush in Bad Beat Poker Hand . What a hand!

There is frequent talk of Bad Beats at Betcoin Poker and Bad Beats happen to everyone who plays poker. Following is a review of __ACTl0NNNN losing king quads to a royal flush in a bad beat at Betcoin Poker.

How would you have played this hand?

You can see a full replay of the hand below:

https://i.gyazo.com/fb067174531138df56643c8878b232c4.gif

Here is how the hand played out:

How would you have played this hand?

You can see a full replay of the hand below:



Here is how the hand played out:



We will continue to provide you with the very best opportunities and have some exciting improvements and new features coming. As always, we look forward to your suggestions and feedback anytime.



As of the time of this article being written the bad beat jackpot is just over 4.2 btc and will be reset to reflect this shortly.

OK thanks

I think he's saying that saying you'll take 200 and taking 200 is better than saying you'll take 2 and taking 5.  With the former, while it's still horrible and unbeatable at least you aren't being lied to and stolen from.

What do you mean still better better than taking 2 or 5...
I thought you said HU no cap and on 25/50 2 guys go all in they take 200 chips instead of just one....How can anybody beat that rake? Only a superuser could beat that rake.

Guess how they "fixed it"?

They increased the rake % and cap at all tables without notifying anyone.

Heads up tables are now capped at infinity. (more fun to say than "uncapped")

So with the new rake structure if 2 guys get all in with full buyins at the 25/50 table, they take 200 chips instead of just 1.

Still, better than taking 2 (or 5) when they say they will only take 1.

Well that seems very easy, you already figured the whole thing. I approve you to figure the refunds

If they don't respond, then force them by not playing until they respond.

What??? They were taking 5 times as much in heads up??

Its actually a little more complicated - but not much.  The % they took isn't the issue, it's the cap. 

For example, on the heads up tables that should have never been raked more than 1 chip, they were taking 5.

The rake used to be a consistant 2.5% with a cap that varried based on total players and stakes.

They would have to go through each stake, determine the max pot size that would be unaffected by the correct cap, and then sort all pots larger than that.

For example:

At .5/1 6max table, the rake was advertised 2.5% with a cap of 2 chips.  They "unintentionally" increased the cap to 6 chips.

2.5% of 80 = 2

So any pot 80 chips or smaller was not affected.

I think it would be reasonable to use the following rounding:

All pots 80-120 chips be treated as if they were 100 chips and raked 2.5 chips with .5 chips needing to be refunded to the winner of the pot.

All pots 120-160 would require a 1.5 chip refund.

All pots 160-200 would require a 2.5 chip refund.

All pots 200-240 = 3.5 chip refund

Any pot greater than 240 = 4 chip refund.

Dear Betcoin,

I volunteer to determine exactly how much money was taken that should not have been while you "unintentionally" increased the rake cap at your cash games from October 31st 2015 - December 9th 2015.

I will send you a list of exactly how much you owe to each player and a list of the specific hands that were over raked and won by the player.

Hands won by players that were receiving 100%+ rakeback at the time of the hand will not be added to the amount owed.

Players who received more rakeback than they paid during this period will be excluded from any refund.

The max refund any player will be eligible to receive will be determined as follows:

(Total Rake Paid by Player during period) - (Total Rakeback paid to player during period) = Maximum Refund

Please send me the hand history of every cash game you dealt from October 31st to December 10th as well as an itemized list of all rake back paid to each player.

If you are worried about how it would look when the truth was revealed or simply would rather keep the money you stole from you players, simply ignore this request.



Sincerely,

TwitchySeal

PS - Please remove holecards as it would be unethical for you to give any player (past or present) access to that sort of info (not that you have any sort of privacy policy....or ethics)

I really don't understand why they ignore this...is not as if they had so many players that losing a few would not hurt them...I have taken the stance that won't play here until a reasonable resolution is reached. There really is no excuse when it can be so easily figured out. I mean so little players play here...2 hour or less job. In the meantime they have this stain on their record.
I don't think is the time it would take....I think is giving back $4k is a problem for them.
So there...that's why they don't grow...always shooting themselves in the foot....

I would bet that when SWC gets the web client or Android  client out, that Betcoin would go back to what they were before Micon had a little problem at Seals and some Seal's player made the jump to betcoin...yes the WPN satellites are nice but WPN also accepts bitcoins and the fee on tournaments is the same.

Wonder is someone wins big bucks in a tournament...do the funds go straight to the player from WPN or does it go from WPN to Betcoin to the player?

Maybe that explains the rake issue...oh how I wish Nitrogen had more players...instant withdrawls  and the worse players in the world.

Yes, it seems like child's play...they don't even need to go over any hand or program anything...just figure out how much rake was paid during that period of time by each player then deduct from the rake paid the % that was overcharged...there is really no excuse now.

So if its max 2 hours, volunteer to do it and see what excuse they come up with...there is no private info in a PT4 or HEM2 database.

Somebody stated in another post I read today that for a withdrawal over 1 btc, Betcoin has to take it from a cold wallet, and they review play.

One btc at the minute is worth ~ 373 USD.


So for withdrawals of 374 and higher USD, the funds are not available in a hot wallet.
And play is reviewed.


anchordraw:

"pokerscout says this site has a 7 day average of 28 players, with a 24hr peak of 50.

how are they making enough money to stay open?"


http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/showthread.php?11404-Betcoin-ag-Scams-Scandals-and-Shadiness-Galore


The fact that Betcoin doesn't have $374 available in a hot wallet for withdrawal, but has to withdraw from a cold wallet into their hot wallet for payout, plus that they review play for every withdrawal of that amount or more, shows the accuracy of anchordraw's "...7 day average of 28 players..." and these players are obviously playing for microstakes if $374 is a large withdrawal.

Plus it shows that they are undercapitalized. How can they have less than $374 in their hot wallet for payouts?

yeah, that's what they told me. Then they had to open a warm wallet and so on with the excuses. I just got the btc but I dont think I'll ever play there again.