A very public and no-holds-barred row has broken out between struggling online poker operator Lock Poker.eu and its now former network Revolution, with accusations and counter charges being bandied about by both sides and doing neither party credit.
Player complaints about agonisingly slow payments have been levelled at the two companies for most of this year.
Early on Tuesday Lock Poker announced that due to repeated contractual breaches by Revolution it had left the network and was going it alone, using different software it dubbed “LockPoker 2.0”, which some observers claimed bore a resemblance to the old Poker.com software.
That was followed by allegations that Revolution was re-routing Lock players to a new “Pure Poker” skin, which promised to redeem Lock Poker funds if players remained on the network.
Lock reacted to this by informing some poker information sites on its grounds for complaint against Revolution, and warning that it had submitted a complaint about the network to the Curacao licensing authorities.
Using aggressive language, the poker site operator threatened that it would not hesitate to hold Revolution principals liable for damages resulting from the release of “false or misleading” information.
Bewildered players caught up in the drama and locked out whilst the antagonists were slugging it out were advised by Revolution:
“Due to Lock’s ongoing financial issues, the poker service to Lock was terminated. We apologize for the inconvenience. Pure Poker is offering you a chance to redeem your Lock player balance immediately.”
Players were assured that Pure Poker had unblemished operational experience going back 14 years “…catering to niche players globally. In addition to playing with the same proven software.”
That surprised many observers who were unfamiliar with the brand or its relationship to Revolution.
Lock Poker accused Revolution of forcing an automatic download of a competing software product when its players tried to log on, and that the network was publishing false and misleading information.
The operator further accused the network of deceptive practices aimed at taking over its players and damaging its business.
Continuing the attack, Lock told information websites that its complaint to the Curacao licensing authority detailed “51 instances of unscheduled downtime and an additional 81 service failures” as grounds for its decision to break ties with Revolution.
Other beefs included rakeback and software disputes, and the failure of a dispute resolution process enshrined in the original contract.
Lock claimed it provided 75 percent of Revolution’s traffic
Lock has a varied network history; just on eighteen months ago this operator left the Merge Gaming Network for the Cake Poker Network (see previous reports). Cake subsequently rebranded to Revolution, and there were widespread rumours that Lock owned the network; speculation which Lock has repeatedly denied.