[scottyy11]

not sure how many of you are following this case..............but something i find extremely telling in this case is the following from noble responding to the customer

"
In response to your query Isaac, we would like to let you know that we value you as our customer and we really appreciate the way you patronize us. However, we regret to inform you that the decision would be final and we cannot pay you the jackpot claim.

Hope this clarifies your concern but if in case it doesn’t please let us know.

It is a pleasure having you as a member. We look forward to being of
service to you again." quote from noble CS


now let me think about this..............hmmmmmmmmm you are a cheater but it is a pleasure having you as a customer. Does that not seem odd to anyone else. If this guy is a cheater shouldnt they tell him to take a hike you crook and not welcome. I am not saying this guy is or isnt a cheater, but noble seems to be saying we welcome cheaters as a valued member of our site .........something dont add up and i look forward to your site posting the results of the review mikey

[QuickLearner]

I am following it. It's pretty tangled, but it seems like either Noble has clear evidence or the're just trying to dodge the payout. I don't really believe the latter because it's a network promotion rather than just a Noble promo, and others have won and been paid.

The player's posts seem a little sketchy but I'm willing to wait for the evidence showdown.

As far as your (accurate) point about the language they used in the email, I think it may bae a case of nobody noticing how stupid the standard boilerplate is when attached to a message about possible cheating. I guess their CS people got trained by the same outfit responsible for Party Poker Customer Support training.

[prrmike]

Here is an update as to the outcome of our independent review:

Let me start off by saying that it wasn’t my function to make a decision in this matter. Noble already made theirs. As a mediator, my job is to review their evidence to see if they had the necessary proof to back up their claim. Contrary to what some have claimed on this forum, Noble has indeed been forthcoming with me and has responded to any requests I made and have been available in the event I had additional questions. They never rushed me, nor did they ever try to sway my opinion.

After a comprehensive review of materials, it is clear they have more than enough proof. If this were a court of law, a jury presented with the same evidence would’ve taken 5 minutes to reach a unanimous decision on behalf of Noble. To be completely sure, I did my own investigation and came to the same conclusions Noble did. This player’s claim is riddled with flaws. A few examples: 2 accounts sharing the same IP address, several others living in the same building and 23 players out of the 30 (excluding Isaac’s 6 entries) in the entire tournament series came from the same specific region. Let’s say you held a series of online tournaments over the course of 3 weeks, and out of a possible 30 entrants, 23 came from Tennessee. The odds against that alone occurring naturally are stunning.

And there is additional evidence I agreed not to divulge in order to respect Noble’s security protocol. As a result of this, 22 accounts have been blocked. They also had this to say about not ever paying out the $100,000 prize: “. . . this jackpot has been won 7 times across the network with Noble player SODERLIND winning the $100,000 in March 06. We have paid well in excess of $1,000,000 in jackpot prizes associated with this event alone across the network.”

By the way, the findings were not solely my opinion, other members of our staff viewed the evidence on their own, and we compared notes only after each had concluded their review. We did not go into this lightly, nor with an allegiance to either side. We merely functioned as fact finders.

We were asked to perform an important function: validating the trust that online players place in the sites that host the games. As we went through the evidence, we realized how sad a situation such as this is. No matter which side had the evidence to support their claim, hard feelings would surely result. The only positive thing that came out of this was that players called for a poker site to prove their case, and the site responded.

My thanks to Wilheim and everyone who added their voice to the discussion and helped push this issue forward.

Best,
Mike

[scottyy11]

thanks for the update its a shame there are players like this................but I dont think this type of jackpot is a good idea as it can lead to this and can always be open to interpetation.