Stakers are good for the poker economy. There's no question about it.

They're good for the players, as they put more money in action -- especially in tournaments.

They're good for the house, as they cause a lot of extra rake to be paid.

They're even good for the fans, as they allow down-on-their-luck "name" pros to rise again to glory. Think of where a guy like Michael Mizrachi would be this WSOP without stakers.

Pokerstars benefits from stakers, especially in the rake aspect mentioned above. When a person gets staked into a tournament, Pokerstars directly profits from it.

So it would make sense for Pokerstars to treat stakers with respect and fairness, right?

You'd think so, but that's not what they do.

Instead, they are incredibly hostile and unfair to stakers -- even when both players involved are well-known, longtime active players on the site.

Let's say you decide to stake your friend John Smith into a $5200 tournament on Pokerstars. You agree to pay his full buyin, and will get 50% of what he cashes. John is broke, and his Pokerstars account sits at $0. However, you send him the $5200, and he immediately uses it to buy into the tournament that you're staking him in. It is obviously very clear in this case that you have staked John, and a quick browse of the transfer/buyin history will verify that.

Now let's say that John wins the tournament and cashes $500k.

Now you're $250k richer!



... but not so fast!

Pokerstars will allow John to transfer you the 250k after some reasonable security checks. However, you will not be allowed to cash out! Instead, you will be required to clear a ridiculous number of VPPs (i.e. raked hands played) until you can get all of the money off their system. At the same time, John, who didn't even pay for his own buyin, will be allowed to cash out the full remaining 250k immediately.

You can appeal this to Stars all you want, but they will be stubborn and won't budge. You will be required to clear a lot of additional rake on that 250k before it ever sees the light of your bank account.

This might appear to just be a case of overzealous security measures, but it's not that at all. In fact, Pokerstars will admit that it's not a matter of security. They will simply tell you, "We're not a bank." It's a matter of money.

All online poker rooms, Pokerstars included, pay a hefty premium on each cashout. This is because they hire third-party payment processors, who charge steep fees on performing cashouts. Therefore, Pokerstars does not want people using their site to cash out (costing them money) if they don't actually play on the site. Think of it like a restaurant not wanting you to use their bathroom if you don't eat there.

That makes sense, but Pokerstars takes this to a ridiculous extreme that punishes the people actually doing brisk business with them. First off, it should be the tournament winner's prerogative how he wants the money cashed out. Whether he cashes out the whole sum himself, or whether he sends it to 10 different people to cash out, the cost to Pokerstars ends up relatively the same. The tournament winner paid rake to win that money, so he should be able to cash it out as he wishes -- even through third parties.

But let's even put that aside, and accept Stars' reasoning that people shouldn't be allowed to cash out money that they didn't have a part in winning. In the staking case, the staker is just as important, if not more important, than the player himself! Without the staker, the winner would not have had the opportunity to enter in the first place, and Pokerstars would have never collected his rake! So the staker actually paid the rake on the tournament, and he isn't allowed to cash out the winnings! Unbelievable!

At the very least, Stars' policy on the matter should be the following:

If a review of the accounts in question shows a clear trail of money that would make it highly likely that a tournament winner was staked his buyin, the staker should have equal rights to a speedy and no-strings-attached cashout as the player.

It just amazes me that Pokerstars is so hostile to stakers, and are trying to find every excuse to keep cashouts from occurring.

They should be ashamed of themselves for literally biting one of the important hands that feeds them.

TBF

I had this happen once to me when I tried to cashout after a transfer moving money from one site to stars they told me I had to play some on it as their site isn't used to money laundering.

I told them it was a trade and I was only cashing out like 15% of the transfer but they still told me I had to play on it for a few days or until "X" amount of VPPs was met.

It's a stupid policy and in my case I wasn't in desperate need for the money which I intended to play anyways but for stakers especially if a big score happens I can see how this would be a big problem. I bet some people are exempt though. I'm sure that cashmanbrian guy that used to flood my tables in the chat box trying to rape people on their T$ or W$ was able to get around this somehow.

Wow, that is retarded.

Usually Stars is top notch, but this is ridiculous.

IRONIC THEY OPENLY BREAK US LAWS BY PROCESSING TRANSACTIONS YET HAVE A CONSCIENCE WHEN IT COMES TO "MONEY LAUNDERING"

then why doesent John Smith just cash out the entire 500 k, then send you the half another way? am i missing something?

Regardless if it is a stake or not they see it as money laundering...I've transferred some cash to a few people regulary and they can't cash out until they play. These amounts are in the hundreds not thousands.

Pretty Fucking Weak imo!

Maybe I don't fully trust John.

Maybe there are large court judgments against him, and he'll lose the money if it's found out he has received it.

Maybe I just feel more comfortable being the one cashing out what everyone agrees is my money!

The bottom line is that Stars should not be refusing stakers' cashouts. Do you disagree with any of what I wrote?

The only think I don't agree with is that we shouldn't be talking about the player named JohnSmith on Pokerstars behind his back.

I think its becoming increasingly obvious that all these poker sites are fucking jokes.

There is absolutely no way anyone can rationally argue that there is any real effort being made to honor/maintain/reward their client bases loyalty.

Watching Stars take $500+ off the table during the match between neverwin & china.. thinking of that much money being paid for the privilege of *playing fucking cards*... if they played that match 8 times, *both of them would have spent their buyins on rake*.

Its all so fucked up. Someone needs to white-horse their way into this equation. Part of me wants to see Stars whimper and fold as their clients flock to a less predatory poker site but lets be honest; their conduct states to the world in letters a mile high, "We're millionaires and we don't give a fuck if this site or its clients disappear".

Still and all, if someone can pull off a secure site with low rake and UB's original interface's performance, it would be by no means a joke.

The one thing I disagree with is your statement, "We're millionaires and we don't give a fuck if this site or its clients disappear."

They actually care a lot if their site disappears. However, they realize that this is a semi-monopoly situation (US players currently have very few choices of active networks to play on), so they basically do what they want.

I have stated for a long time that the rake is very high, given the extremely low cost of operations as compared to live rooms. However, at least it can be argued that these are market forces at work, and nobody is forced to play there.

The situation I'm describing here is downright offensive because it often takes the stakers by surprise. It is not only disrespectful toward their best customers, but it's also bad business practice. This sort of behavior discourages staking, which will end up costing them money in the long run.

Unfortunately, Pokerstars has developed an obsession with "not being used as a bank", and is now harming some of their best customers as a result.

Stars was just fine before it started making retarded fucking decisions like this. Lee Jones is god.

This is obviously a terrible policy. Is it new? What is the required rake that needs to be cleared?

this is total bullshit it has happened to me several times...i have a online friend that is cool enough to give me some of his action when he playing a ton of gurantees and we have had some big scores...if the funds are valid they shouldnt put restrictions on shit...full tilt doesnt pull that shit

i agree with everything you are saying completely. it's a retarded rule but i guess it is what it is.

I think I may be able to shed some light on this matter. Simple logic really. Poker sites are being used to launder money. Simple as that. They really don't want this getting to be a public issue in the media, so they are trying to beat the monster before it grows too big, which it already has. And they know it. So now what they are doing is attempting to look tough on it in order to avoid further government intrusions in their enterprise. Truth.

Cheese with your wine, Druff?

When I was moving big bucks from poker sites through Western Union, the transactions started taking longer and longer and the questions from the clerks more and more invasive. Coinky dink?

I am assuming this happened to Reggiman after BradL's big score and this is why Druff is posting this.

Is that how this got brought to your attention Druff?

Can you transfer the money to other ppl after the horse ships you the money, Druff? I guess the only way I could think getting around this (besides having the horse just withdraw the full amount) is to just take the $250K and trade it in small increments to someone on FTP/Other sites, and then get that money out. That is, if Stars lets you do that.



Right. I am sure if Vanessa Rousso wins big off of a Chad Brown stake, she can prob transfer him money no problem w/o the VPP rule, as well as get those funds quicker, than the avg player.



And they can use that "reason" to make you play so they can collect the rake on their site. I almost see this as a kind of "tax" put on by Pokerstars to not only discourage player transfers, but also to profit off of it.

In the end, it goes back to Druff's old saying: "These poker sites can do whatever they want with your money, for whatever reason, without discourse, regulation, or penalty." They really don't need to give a shit.

sfbullshit

Won't this also lead to uber chip dumping now?

If pokerstars had similar policies to Bodog I would understand their position. If they allowed no player to player xfers, I would better understand their position.

But allowing players to xfer money to each other (as you all know, I use ChipMeUp frequently to sell pieces) lends for staking, trading $ with others for cash or for $ on other sites.

If Pokerstars allows transfers, then they are taking a stance allowing staking. if they allow staking how can they not allow the winning staker to cash out?

Further more the staker is usually a very well known, high limit, long term Pokerstars account - in this case there is no reason to clear VPPs in order to cash out large sums.