Okay I am going to be really thick here but how do the colluders profit?
If player A is dumping chips on player B then player B may win but the profit is offset by player A losing?
Not a stupid question at all. While it's entirely possible to collude in a cash game, all instances in this thread relate to 'chip dumping'. What you say is true for a cash game - there would be no benefit in chip dumping, since player A winning means player B loses the same amount. However, the same logic doesn't extend to other formats.
The reason for this is that in non-cash Poker, the value of your stack isn't proportional to the number of chips you have.
As an extreme example, if you enter a regular speed £11 DYM, everyone pays their £1 rake and starts with 2000 chips, so everyone's stack is worth £10. If I treble up first hand, are my 6000 chips worth £30 of expected value (EV)? Clearly not, since the maximum I can cash for in the game is £20, so my stack can't possibly be worth £30.
But we've removed 2 x £10 stacks from the game, and the prize pool is still £60 total, so where has that EV gone if it hasn't gone to the guy who won the pot? It's gone to the other players who, by simply folding, are now more likely to finish in the top 3, since it's between the 3 of them to fight for the remaining 2 cashes.
The two conclusions to draw from this are: 1) In tournaments, the fewer chips you have, the more valuable each individual chip is 2) The fewer players there are in the tournament, the more valuable your stack becomes
While this is most extreme in satellites and DYMs on here and forms the basis for any consistent winning strategy in those games, the same phenomenon occurs in any situation that isn't a cash table or a winner-take-all scenario.
The value of chip dumping comes as a result of this non-linear relationship between stack size and the expected value of your stack. As a general rule, the flatter the payout structure, the more powerful chip dumping is, hence DYMs and satellites being the worst affected, while MTTs there really isn't much value in it (besides you'd have to be randomly placed on the same table as the other player first)
Let's say you have the following situation, where seat 1 and seat 2 are friends: Player 1: 7000 chips Player 2: 1000 chips Player 3: 2000 chips Player 4: 2000 chips
Player 1 then loses 900 chips to Player 2 by raise/folding. We've already established that those 900 chips are more valuable to Player 2 than Player 1. However, the total prize pool remains constant, so that value has to be coming from somewhere - And what you'll find is that the value is coming out of other players' stacks without them doing anything.
If you plug this into an ICM calculator, you can see the effects of this for yourself. Here is what happens in the made-up scenario above:
Before
After
Player 1 loses £0.49 of EV, while player 2 gains almost £4 of EV, with the difference coming out of the other players' stacks.
It's worth noting that if players are chip dumping, then it's also likely that they're cheating in other ways, such as deliberately avoiding playing hands against each other, or sharing information about each others' hole cards, enabling them to make better decisions.
Comments
The reason for this is that in non-cash Poker, the value of your stack isn't proportional to the number of chips you have.
As an extreme example, if you enter a regular speed £11 DYM, everyone pays their £1 rake and starts with 2000 chips, so everyone's stack is worth £10. If I treble up first hand, are my 6000 chips worth £30 of expected value (EV)? Clearly not, since the maximum I can cash for in the game is £20, so my stack can't possibly be worth £30.
But we've removed 2 x £10 stacks from the game, and the prize pool is still £60 total, so where has that EV gone if it hasn't gone to the guy who won the pot? It's gone to the other players who, by simply folding, are now more likely to finish in the top 3, since it's between the 3 of them to fight for the remaining 2 cashes.
The two conclusions to draw from this are:
1) In tournaments, the fewer chips you have, the more valuable each individual chip is
2) The fewer players there are in the tournament, the more valuable your stack becomes
While this is most extreme in satellites and DYMs on here and forms the basis for any consistent winning strategy in those games, the same phenomenon occurs in any situation that isn't a cash table or a winner-take-all scenario.
The value of chip dumping comes as a result of this non-linear relationship between stack size and the expected value of your stack. As a general rule, the flatter the payout structure, the more powerful chip dumping is, hence DYMs and satellites being the worst affected, while MTTs there really isn't much value in it (besides you'd have to be randomly placed on the same table as the other player first)
Let's say you have the following situation, where seat 1 and seat 2 are friends:
Player 1: 7000 chips
Player 2: 1000 chips
Player 3: 2000 chips
Player 4: 2000 chips
Player 1 then loses 900 chips to Player 2 by raise/folding. We've already established that those 900 chips are more valuable to Player 2 than Player 1. However, the total prize pool remains constant, so that value has to be coming from somewhere - And what you'll find is that the value is coming out of other players' stacks without them doing anything.
If you plug this into an ICM calculator, you can see the effects of this for yourself. Here is what happens in the made-up scenario above:
Before
After
Player 1 loses £0.49 of EV, while player 2 gains almost £4 of EV, with the difference coming out of the other players' stacks.
It's worth noting that if players are chip dumping, then it's also likely that they're cheating in other ways, such as deliberately avoiding playing hands against each other, or sharing information about each others' hole cards, enabling them to make better decisions.