I agree it gives casual players the perception of being cheated here,s a copy of the email they sent meJustin,Thank you for your report regarding players who play as teams in Heads-upSit & Go's. This is understandably concerning to many players, as generallyany team work in Poker is strictly prohibited and unfair to other players.These particular tournaments however, are the exception. In Heads-Upknockout tournaments, there is no way for players to gain any equityadvantage by playing as a team. To understand why this is so, we need tolook at the two significant attributes of these tournaments: Heads-up playand Knockout structure tournaments.Heads-up play.This aspect is quite easy to comprehend. When playing Heads-up you have onlyone opponent involved in all your hands. There are no opportunities for holecard sharing, squeeze play, pot building, whipsawing, stack balancing or anyof the other tactics which colluders can employ at a multi-handed table.Knockout Structure.The knockout structure of our heads up tournaments is that same you wouldfind in any Grand Slam Tennis event or NCAA basketball tournament.  Unlike around robin, or other tournament formats, every match is equally valuable toboth players competing. This attribute eliminates any potential conflict ofinterest or incentive for a cooperative strategy. To illustrate this,included below is an equity breakdown of the possible team strategies thatcan be employed in a typical $5 buy in - 4 man Heads Up Sit & Go tournament(ignoring rake).1. Two players (A and B) playing as a team enter and are drawn in the sameopening match.In this case, the team is guaranteed to have 1, and only 1, player in thefinal. Having 1 player in the final is worth $10 (1 in 2 chance of winning$20). This strategy is equivalent to the team just entering a single $10 HU match.Total team entry cost: $10Total team equity: $102. Two players (A and B) playing as a team enter and are drawn in separateopening matches.The team has 4 possible outcomes from the first round:A wins B winsA wins B losesA loses B winsA loses B losesThe team has a 1 in 4 chance of having both players progressing, at whichpoint they are guaranteed the first place prize money of $20. Equity: 25% x $20 = $5The team has a 2 in 4 chance of having just one player progressing to thefinal. Having 1 player in the final is worth $10 (1 in 2 chance of winning $20).Equity: 50% x $10= $5The team has a 1 in 4 chance of having no players make the final. Having noplayers make the final is worth $0.Equity: 25% x $0 = $0Total team entry cost: $10Total team equity: $10 ($5 + $5 + $0)3. Three players (A, B and C) playing as a team enter. Obviously, two ofthem will be drawn in the same starting match (A and B), giving them aguaranteed seat in the final. The third (C) will be in a starting match withanother opponent.The team has 2 possible outcomes from the first round:C winsC losesThe team has a 1 in 2 chance of having both seats in the final, at whichpoint they are guaranteed the first place prize money of $20.Equity: 50% x $20 = $10The team has a 1 in 2 chance of having just one seat in the final.  Having 1player in the final is worth $10 (1 in 2 chance of winning $20). Equity: 50% x $10 = $5Total team entry cost: $15Total team equity: $15This equality of ‘total entry cost’ and ‘total equity’ extends to anystrategy, of any number of players in any sized Heads-Up Tournament with aknockout structure.  A team could enter 127 players in a 128 playertournament and their equity would be exactly equal to their entry cost, nomatter how they were drawn.I hope this explains our reasoning for not prohibiting the practice ofplaying heads-up knock out tournaments in teams. If you have any furtherquestions, please let us know.Regards,Anders KPokerStars Support Teamhope this helps gl at the tables jus