Gotta say it is unusual play, but neither player had the nuts and they may be absolute nits. DYM's play differently to normal stt or mtt's. Def keep an eye on it but don't get too consumed. Most players are genuine.
In Response to Re: collusion : where does he state anybody's all in? i must be reading this whole thread wrong, from what i can see he dosent mention how many players are left or at what stage the game is at, he just says someone has checked back the nut fullhouse in 2 of his games today? Posted by THEROCK573
Calm down young man or old man whichever may be the case
I was giving an example of why a player would or might check down, not a the exact reason for it happening in OPs 2 instance, cause like you said we don't have enough information, but by giving an example to the OP of where or when this sort of thing may happen, then he may better understand if that is what has happened in his own case.
Rather than critiquing forum members that have responded to OP's issue and are clearly only trying to help with the limited information we have been given, Why not respond to OP and enlighten him to your vast knowledge & wisdom?
In Response to Re: collusion : The situation that he described usually occurs when one player is all in with 4 players remaining. Posted by tom_mull
thats not how im reading it, obviously if someones all in then its common sence to check it down and elimante him/her but this could be level 2 for all we know 2 people have bust early and the other four remaining all have a bit of play left. i give up with this thread anyway, its all ifs buts and maybes. i feel dizzy and my mince and taties is ready.
any chance of the hand history please original poster. would make life a whole lot simpler.
In Response to Re: collusion : Calm down young man or old man whichever may be the case I was giving an example of why a player would or might check down, not a the exact reason for it happening in OPs 2 instance, cause like you said we don't have enough information, but by giving an example to the OP of where or when this sort of thing may happen, then he may better understand if that is what has happened in his own case. Rather than critiquing forum members that have responding to OP's issue and are clearly only trying to help with the limited information we have been given, Why not respond to OP and enlighten him to your vast knowledge & wisdom? Posted by POKERTREV
im very calm and im 27 so neither young or old. were do i critsize you i merely ask you a question, is it the time of the month or are you normally this moody?
Everyone can bat this back & forth forever, but it will not resolve a thing. Nobody on the Forum has sufficient evidence to prove or disprove anything. Even the 2 HH's won't be enough, as we simply don't know why they checked. There are any number of legit reasons, as well as, possibly, genuine collusion.
It can ONLY be resolved by sending the necessary information - ALL of it, not selective bits - to Customer Care, & they'll pass it to Security/Fraud guys.
I'll send it to them, too, as I've already stated.
I can understand OP's angst, but nobody on the Forum is in a position to fairly judge the matter.
Critique is a method of disciplined, systematic analysis of a written or oral discourse. Critique is commonly understood as fault finding and negative judgement
Regarding your age......
With the limited information I have, which is "Your Name" = TheRock573 - I could assume you are 41 years of age "THE ROCK" aka wayne Johnson - age 41 Born May 2nd 1972 - an actor and semi-retirerd wrestle
ps. I am in a mood btw
Hope you enjoyed your Mince & Tatties Mmmmmmm - I love mince & tatties
What is collusion? Collusion is often equated with cheating, but they are very different things In a reasonable assessment of the examples given, the players colluded. To argue otherwise is sophistry. But they did not cheat. Posted by BigBluster
I think you will find collusion most certainly is cheating.
In Response to Re: collusion : I think you will find collusion most certainly is cheating. Posted by HiJoker
When two players, with nothing said, check it down to eliminate a player on the bubble of a satellite, they are working together i.e they are colluding, by any English definition of the word. But they are not cheating.
In Response to Re: collusion : When two players, with nothing said, check it down to eliminate a player on the bubble of a satellite, they are working together i.e they are colluding, by any English definition of the word. But they are not cheating. Posted by BigBluster
If nothing is said, they are not colluding. There must be an explicit agreement between the two parties to work together for it to be collusion.
Standard definition - "secret agreement for a fraudulent purpose" - there was no secret agreement. They both simply used sound poker theory.
In Response to Re: collusion : If nothing is said, they are not colluding. There must be an explicit agreement between the two parties to work together for it to be collusion. Standard definition - " secret agreement for a fraudulent purpose" - there was no secret agreement. They both simply used sound poker theory. Posted by HiJoker
Secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy in order to deceive others.
Deceit: Craftiness is a 'Synonym' of deceit.
Craftiness: Cunning
Cunning:
crafty and shrewd, esp in deception; sly ⇒ cunning as a fox
made with or showing skill or cleverness; ingenious
Gives a slightly different perspective into how it can be classed as 'not cheating' whereby two people check it down to the river without communicating is a course of 'cleverness' if it has the ability to knock another opponent out or means they do not risk losing chips whilst there are 1 or more very short stacks.
The fact that 2 or more players are "Likely" do it, does not give rise to collusion.......
Collusion only becomes so if 2 or more players have agreement between them to do so prior to the event happening.
If there is no prior agreement to do so then then it is only "Likely" to happen.
Likely adj - anticipated, apt, disposed, expected, in a fair way, inclined, liable, on the cards, possible, probable, prone, tending, to be expected.
I have often "checked" in these spots hoping that another player will be poker savvy enough and is "Likely" to do the same, but on occasions this does not happen because no agreement was ever in place, but it was "likely" that it would.
I'll give you an example of I why I would of checked in those games like the supposed colluders did: I've made a mistake in another game I have running, I've got myself really short, but a hand has come up where I can come right back but it requires concentration. So I'm only returning to the other game to quickly check a hand I should almost certainly win, and then return to the one I'm concentrating on.
I'll give you an example of I why I would of checked in those games like the supposed colluders did: I've made a mistake in another game I have running, I've got myself really short, but a hand has come up where I can come right back but it requires concentration. So I'm only returning to the other game to quickly check a hand I should almost certainly win, and then return to the one I'm concentrating on. Posted by thefa1lacy
Yup, those of us who multi-table have all done that.
Yet another reason to confirm that we just don't know why they played as they did, but what is certain is that on the evidence presented, that was not adequate evidence of collusion, not even close.
Just witnessed a most blatant unashamed level of colluding in a DYM and will report to CC. First was drawn attention to them when guy just called showdown despite having the nuts - thought just a miss click or mistake after one too many beers or multi-tabling, however some absolute (not even trying to be subtle about it) blatant chip dumps i.e. folding when first to act several times when they were only in a pot together and the other guy had become short stacked made me realise what was going on, also not really an indication but they were from the same location to. I’m in no doubt – maybes they don’t realise it’s a breach of the rules? I mentioned noticing what was going on in the chat but got no response.
To finish with a positive and to put into some perspective … this is the first time I’ve knowingly witnessed this happening in the 1,312 games I’ve played + I still cashed as one of them ended up losing; colluding and still loses ; crime doesn’t pay!
How about when the timer counts down before the start of a game displaying a notice advising a warning around collusion and fair play?
Can seriously not believe how much debate has come from this - makes quite laughable reading.
I am sure that there is a minute amount of attempted cheating going on. But as stated a fair few times - Customer Care are armed with all the information and will be able to look into any matter. CC will have access to all the hands played and could bring up betting patterns and tables where they play with the same person. One huge advantage to not being able to change display name over and over.
Think this one should be put to bed and the CC team will resolve as always! You may never know the outcome - but they will act responsibly
Good luck in the future - 99% of people are good - don't let the suspected 1% get you down - just avoid games if see them in
Just witnessed a most blatant unashamed level of colluding in a DYM and will report to CC. First was drawn attention to them when guy just called showdown despite having the nuts - thought just a miss click or mistake after one too many beers or multi-tabling, however some absolute (not even trying to be subtle about it) blatant chip dumps i.e. folding when first to act several times when they were only in a pot together and the other guy had become short stacked made me realise what was going on, also not really an indication but they were from the same location to. I’m in no doubt – maybes they don’t realise it’s a breach of the rules? I mentioned noticing what was going on in the chat but got no response. To finish with a positive and to put into some perspective … this is the first time I’ve knowingly witnessed this happening in the 1,312 games I’ve played + I still cashed as one of them ended up losing; colluding and still loses ; crime doesn’t pay! How about when the timer counts down before the start of a game displaying a notice advising a warning around collusion and fair play? Posted by WAOOGA
Time to contribute to this thread. How do you do those things?
Comments
I was giving an example of why a player would or might check down, not a the exact reason for it happening in OPs 2 instance, cause like you said we don't have enough information, but by giving an example to the OP of where or when this sort of thing may happen, then he may better understand if that is what has happened in his own case.
Rather than critiquing forum members that have responded to OP's issue and are clearly only trying to help with the limited information we have been given, Why not respond to OP and enlighten him to your vast knowledge & wisdom?
Everyone can bat this back & forth forever, but it will not resolve a thing. Nobody on the Forum has sufficient evidence to prove or disprove anything. Even the 2 HH's won't be enough, as we simply don't know why they checked. There are any number of legit reasons, as well as, possibly, genuine collusion.
It can ONLY be resolved by sending the necessary information - ALL of it, not selective bits - to Customer Care, & they'll pass it to Security/Fraud guys.
I'll send it to them, too, as I've already stated.
I can understand OP's angst, but nobody on the Forum is in a position to fairly judge the matter.
Critique is commonly understood as fault finding and negative judgement
Regarding your age......
With the limited information I have, which is "Your Name" = TheRock573 - I could assume you are 41 years of age "THE ROCK" aka wayne Johnson - age 41 Born May 2nd 1972 - an actor and semi-retirerd wrestle
ps. I am in a mood btw
Hope you enjoyed your Mince & Tatties Mmmmmmm - I love mince & tatties
Definition of collusion:
Secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy in order to deceive others.
Deceit:
Craftiness is a 'Synonym' of deceit.
Craftiness:
Cunning
Cunning:
Gives a slightly different perspective into how it can be classed as 'not cheating' whereby two people check it down to the river without communicating is a course of 'cleverness' if it has the ability to knock another opponent out or means they do not risk losing chips whilst there are 1 or more very short stacks.
Collusion only becomes so if 2 or more players have agreement between them to do so prior to the event happening.
If there is no prior agreement to do so then then it is only "Likely" to happen.
Likely
adj - anticipated, apt, disposed, expected, in a fair way, inclined, liable, on the cards, possible, probable, prone, tending, to be expected.
Yet another reason to confirm that we just don't know why they played as they did, but what is certain is that on the evidence presented, that was not adequate evidence of collusion, not even close.
Just witnessed a most blatant unashamed level of colluding in a DYM and will report to CC. First was drawn attention to them when guy just called showdown despite having the nuts - thought just a miss click or mistake after one too many beers or multi-tabling, however some absolute (not even trying to be subtle about it) blatant chip dumps i.e. folding when first to act several times when they were only in a pot together and the other guy had become short stacked made me realise what was going on, also not really an indication but they were from the same location to. I’m in no doubt – maybes they don’t realise it’s a breach of the rules? I mentioned noticing what was going on in the chat but got no response.
To finish with a positive and to put into some perspective … this is the first time I’ve knowingly witnessed this happening in the 1,312 games I’ve played + I still cashed as one of them ended up losing; colluding and still loses
; crime doesn’t pay!
How about when the timer counts down before the start of a game displaying a notice advising a warning around collusion and fair play?
I am sure that there is a minute amount of attempted cheating going on. But as stated a fair few times - Customer Care are armed with all the information and will be able to look into any matter. CC will have access to all the hands played and could bring up betting patterns and tables where they play with the same person. One huge advantage to not being able to change display name over and over.
Think this one should be put to bed and the CC team will resolve as always! You may never know the outcome - but they will act responsibly
Good luck in the future - 99% of people are good - don't let the suspected 1% get you down - just avoid games if see them in
How do you do those things?
What things? Please elaborate