Is this colllusion?

[AncientPC]

A quick side note, I just won a free entry into the Party Quartermillion Sunday tourney. (Yay me! /images/graemlins/laugh.gif) Do I have to play this upcoming Sunday or can I choose any Quartermillion Sunday tourney at a later date?

So basically it was down to 3 tables, about 40 people left. Even though I had an above average stack, I was still the second smallest stack at table and that sucked ass. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

However, I had the other two tables open and I noticed on one of the tables they started working as a team.

They didn't attempt to hide it, they were just blatantly talking about in the chat window.

All they did was check / fold every single hand until they were ITM, then everyone went all in on the next hand which I thought was pretty gay.

Should I report this? I mean since they've already won their seat and it's not like Party can redistribute their seats I'd just be an ass if I did. Plus, it's not like it really affects me either since I've already won my seat.

[AncientPC]

Never mind, just got an e-mail from Party Poker:
[ QUOTE ]
Congratulations on winning a Quarter Million Guaranteed qualifier.

You have been registered to the Quarter Million Guaranteed tournament to be held on January 30th 2005 16:30 EST.

[/ QUOTE ]

Guess I can only use it for that one tourney.

[IggyWH]

It's definitely collusion... I'd report it but I doubt anything would happen. I doubt there wouldn't be a question in your mind about reporting this though if you didn't make the bubble.

[AncientPC]

Yeah it's reported. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Niediam]

Talking about it in the chat window is a bit iffy as far as collusion goes. It would be closer to collusion if they were trying to talk other players in folding. The fact that they were folding every hand is definatly not collusion and is considered a standard play in such a situation.

[AncientPC]

But there was not a single raise, not a single blinds steal attempt. There never was a short stack who pushed all in with a good hand, they just kept check / folding every hand.

[Niediam]

Wise for the big/medium stacks to do it but poor for short stacks who will be blinding out before the cut. There is nothing wrong with folding if it is to your benefit. There are several situations where it is proper to fold AA preflop in tournament play. Are those players cheating by doing so?

[AncientPC]

When a shortstack pays the BB and that puts him all in, and then table's biggest stack in SB folds that's collusion. It doesn't make sense for SB to behave that way.

[Niediam]

It is most definatly not collusion. Just look at the definition of the word (taken from dictionary.com): A secret agreement between two or more parties for a fraudulent, illegal, or deceitful purpose.

Do you think the small blind is doing this to help the short stack or the big blind? I think not. He is folding because he wants to make the top forty players and knows that he if just folds he is guarenteed to do so. There is no benefit in fishing 1st in the tournament so that is no longer the goal of the players. You are trying to say its cheating when a player folds because it benefits him. That doesn't make much sense.

[AncientPC]

Arguing semantics is pointless. Perhaps it wasn't so secret, but they were openly cooperating through the table chat and cooperation is against Party rules.

Second of all, it is in his best interest to complete and take a shot at knocking out BB. It only costs him half a SB (and he's the big stack), and it places him 1 spot closer to ITM.

[IggyWH]

Read a whole post before you start jumping on dude...

"They didn't attempt to hide it, they were just blatantly talking about in the chat window."

This wasn't just a case of tight playing, they discussed what they were doing. That is in fact collusion.

[Niediam]

[ QUOTE ]
Arguing semantics is pointless. Perhaps it wasn't so secret, but they were openly cooperating through the table chat and cooperation is against Party rules.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that is this is very suspect. Depending on what exactly was said I'd say that such chat could be considered 'improper' all the way to blatant cheating.

[ QUOTE ]
Second of all, it is in his best interest to complete and take a shot at knocking out BB. It only costs him half a SB (and he's the big stack), and it places him 1 spot closer to ITM.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you quite understand the situation. The ONLY way he could not earn the invite is to play hands. Think of it this way. Lets say somebody came up to you and offered you $100. The man was just like 'Take the money, I don't want it.' Then before you took the money a second man came up to you and offered to flip a coin with you and if you won he would give you $100 - but only if you turned the first man down. Why would you even consider accepting the second man's offer? It just doesn't make any sense...

[AncientPC]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you quite understand the situation. The ONLY way he could not earn the invite is to play hands. Think of it this way. Lets say somebody came up to you and offered you $100. The man was just like 'Take the money, I don't want it.' Then before you took the money a second man came up to you and offered to flip a coin with you and if you won he would give you $100 - but only if you turned the first man down. Why would you even consider accepting the second man's offer? It just doesn't make any sense...

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you even play SNGs or MTTs? Is this how you play as a big stack?

[Niediam]

I understand that the table chat may have been collusion and have said so in multiple posts. However, this branch of the topic is dealing with the actual folding of the hands and not the chat.

[Niediam]

I certainly do if I'm only playing for a seat and I'm guarenteed to win the seat if I do so.

[arod4276]

Nied , you are a fool if you dont feel that is collusion.. How could it not be ,,, they are gaining an unfair advantage over the other tables not engaging in the practice. arod4276

[RunDownHouse]

Two things I think you're failing to consider properly, Nied:

While its true that the big stack is guaranteed a spot if he folds everything, he most likely is not risking anything significant by calling an all-in BB. Its not like he has to "play" the hand in the sense of putting bets in on future rounds. His only risk is in the initial amount. Which leads to...

The amount he will have to contribute is not, in this case, a significant amount. Your analogy about the $100 is pretty awful, since that $100 was the full amount of the example's "chips." If BB was all-in, meaning he likely did not have enough for the full BB, then the amount the SB has to put in is less than half of a small bet. If the SB was the big stack, this amount of chips wouldn't affect his chances of getting a seat, and he clearly should call.

[r3vbr]

Yeah it's collusion but you can also look at it as co-opetition. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Niediam]

There is no reason to start being rude reguardless if I'm right or wrong... that is not what these forums are for. Please explain how it is 'unfair' to fold a hand in a poker tournament when it is to your advantage to do so?

[IggyWH]

[ QUOTE ]
There is no reason to start being rude reguardless if I'm right or wrong... that is not what these forums are for. Please explain how it is 'unfair' to fold a hand in a poker tournament when it is to your advantage to do so?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're still missing the fact that they talked about doing this in the chat!!! You keep on wanting to leave out that point when that's the main selling point to this whole argument.

If it was purely tight play, while stupid for a big stack not to call an all-in BB, some people play like that. If that was all that happened, I would say no, it wasn't collusion, it was just dumb play. When you use the chat though and make it known that no one will attempt to knock another out, that is collusion!

[Niediam]

I have said in atleast three different posts that I thought the chat very well may be collusion depending on exactly what was said. What I am saying is NOT collusion is folding a hand (even if its AA, a fraction of a bet, etc) if you believe doing so is to your benefit and not specifically against rules.

[IggyWH]

[ QUOTE ]
I have said in atleast three different posts that I thought the chat very well may be collusion depending on exactly what was said. What I am saying is NOT collusion is folding a hand (even if its AA, a fraction of a bet, etc) if you believe doing so is to your benefit and not specifically against rules.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's stupid that you even started this argument though. You want to take out a big chuck of APC's story and then argue with him over the rest. The only reason I think APC continued to argue with you was he knew the information you decided to leave out, the collusion going on using the chat.

[Niediam]

I'm honestly starting to believe that you havn't even read the entire thread. I originally made two points which were 1) that the chat may be collusion depending on what was said and 2)that the actual folding of the hands was a standard play in this situation and was not cheating. The original posted there said that the folding of the hands itself, even if there was no chat, was collusion and that is what this branch of the thread is talking about.

[AncientPC]

I'm fine with your take on #1.

About #2 though, if you have a 20BB stack and it will only cost you 1SB (you've already put in 1SB as well) to knock a player out you would not do it? You would not call off 1/40th of your stack to have a chance at busting out a player?

[IggyWH]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm honestly starting to believe that you havn't even read the entire thread. I originally made two points which were 1) that the chat may be collusion depending on what was said and 2)that the actual folding of the hands was a standard play in this situation and was not cheating. The original posted there said that the folding of the hands itself, even if there was no chat, was collusion and that is what this branch of the thread is talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're reading things you want to read because he never came out and said such a thing directly. Like I said before, you left out part of the story where it seems (to me at least) that APC can't (since he seen it happen) so you got into an argument that was stupid.

[Niediam]

I might call even though I probably wouldn't even be paying attention to my cards. Or perhaps the person in question thought he was in a worst situation than he actually was in. Some sites even have a box that you can check in a tournament which auto-folds every hand (I know Paradise has this - I can't remember off hand if Party does or not). But my point isn't really all that based upon if it is +EV for him to call or not. Just that it's his right to fold if he feels it is the best decision.

[flair1239]

You have to report this to Party. They were actively and intentionally colluding. It is cheating, and is not fair to the people who busted out on the bubble. They should all be stripped of their seats and have chat privliges revoked.

If they are doing it here some of them are doing it in other places. There should be zero tolerance for this.

[Player12345]

there is no question this is collusion. i don't know what party will do but you have to report it so these players have a warning on their account. it is really important to get the warning there so next time they can boot them right away. it does not matter if they do anything about yesterday. it is important for tomorrow.

please tell us what they said. i play in these all the time and i want to know how they handled it. thanks

[AncientPC]

I e-mailed tournament@partypoker.com last night and still have not received a reply (how surprising).

[Player12345]

i never used that addy. i always used alerts@partypoker.com for all-in and collusion reports. is that the addy for tournament abuse issues?

[AncientPC]

I e-mailed alerts right after getting your post and they replied back pretty quick:

Dear Hero,

Thank you for contacting us.

We understand your concern regarding players that intentionally stall in tournaments. This is an area that we are currently working on improving.

There are a few things that we can do to minimize the stalling;

1) Reduce the time to act,
2) Go hand for hand further from the money at more opportune times
3) Reduce the time to act even further and install a "time bank" where players use their time more effectively. All of these things we are currently working on.

With that said, even after we implement as many things as possible to help curb it, there will always be an amount of time that is given to each player to act. Each player is allowed to take the time that they feel they need.

We understand that it can be frustrating when players elect to use their time each hand, but it is something that is afforded each player and they can rightfully use that time. We do notice that the player (ROCKMARD) has been announcing his intentions to stall and encourage others to stall as well. We agree that this is against the established poker etiquette and amounts to violation of the same.

Based on your report and subsequent investigation on review of the game play and the chat transcripts, we have:

1) Sent player a warning, stating that such actions are not encouraged in this card room and further action might be initiated if similar actions are repeated.
2) Flagged his account to periodically review the playerýs activities.

Keeping in view the seriousness of the We have also informed the players that any repetition would lead to closure of their accounts and permanent ban from our site. We have flagged these accounts and are continuously monitoring their game play.

We keep all suspicious activities logged in a notes section on the account. If he repeats this action, we will have the details of the hand you were involved in as further evidence and will take more drastic action if necessary.

We thank you for the report; we appreciate it, as keeping the games honest is our highest priority.

If you have any further questions, comments or concerns, please contact us at alerts@PartyPoker.com and we will be more than glad to assist you.

Best regards,

Nicholas Bradman
Investigations Team
alerts@PartyPoker.com

__________________________________________________ _______

I think this is pretty fair, short of removing their seats (seeing as how a lot of them were big stacked it's difficult to justify that they wouldn't have placed anyway).

So basically, Party issues a warning, next time bannage.

[Player12345]

i don't think i expected any different response but at least the one dude gets the bannage for sure next time. thanks for showing this to us. party has a long way to go in this area but they have come a long way imo.

[Mackas]

[ QUOTE ]
Talking about it in the chat window is a bit iffy as far as collusion goes. It would be closer to collusion if they were trying to talk other players in folding. The fact that they were folding every hand is definitely not collusion and is considered a standard play in such a situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its one thing for players to be playing it safe, its another completely for them to reach a tacit verbal agreement in the chat window to check/fold into the money. I'm glad you reported it. Maybe someone will at least warn the individual players for the future. [EDIT - spot the person who got so worked up when he read this that he didb't read the rest of the thread before replying - sorry!]

If this were allowed it would be in everyone's interests at a table to do the same thing in any satellite once you got down close to the bubble. It could for example mean two smallstacks freerolling into a place while 4 medium stacks are forced to fight and gamble for a place at a different table.

At its worst it could mean satellite tourneys becoming ridiculous - all remaining tables would do the same close to the bubble and the thing wouldn't end until the blinds were so big that the blinds were putting people all in. If the blinds/antes capped at a certain level the tourney might never end.

I do think this is blatant cheating, more than a bit iffy, and if I was shortish stacked at another table I'd be going ballistic if shorter stacks or same sized stacks at another table were getting a free ride.

[Niediam]

The original poster never actually wrote what was said in the chat. Based upon what he has said I'd agree that it was probably cheating but there is a world of difference between the followin two examples:

1) Everybody folds to the small blind who folds and shows AA. People at the tables are like "Whoa, why did you fold aces?!?!?!" and the small blind replies with "I can fold into a slot."

and

2) A big stack(s) saying things to the table like. "Hey everybody who has atleast XXXXX chips, there is no reason to play hands, you can just fold into a slot! Don't be stupid!" or "Guys, don't try and double up the short stacks! Just let them get blinded out!"