Hyptothetcial SNG situation - Ethics Question

[augie00]

Let's say you are down to 3 players, ITM. The players are the hero, a complete idiot, and a known and skillful player. This is a normal SNG, 100/200 blinds, and you have a large chip lead. Let's assume the stacks are as follows:

Hero: 7000
Idiot: 1500
Good Player: 1500

Idiot moves all in from button, good player folds, you have 2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif3 /images/graemlins/heart.gif. Would it be unethical to call, hoping to double up the idiot, giving you a better chance of playing him heads up rather than the skillful player?

You do not know the idiot personally, have never played with him before, and will try to beat him badly when it gets to heads up.

I am not interested in the strategy aspect of this question, but rather the ethics question.

[steaknshake925]

i think its completely ethical and normal

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not interested in the strategy aspect of this question,

[/ QUOTE ]

Good, because that strategy is super dumb.

[ QUOTE ]
but rather the ethics question.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not unethical.

[DasLeben]

The hell with ethics. Not that I would intentially double the bad player here, but if I had a chance to ensure I'd get HU with the donk and bust the skillful player in 3rd, I'd do it and say "THX 4 UR $$$."

[citanul]

nothing unethical at all. you believe you're doing something that is +ev for you, and you're not doing something different based on anything that is not related to the play of poker.

citanul's rule of poker ethics:

if all it is is [censored] a guy out of money by playing poker, it can't be unethical.

if you mix in any non poker thing, like say, telling the guy before he pushes that you have 23 and want to double him up, that's unethical.

citanul

[Meatmaw]

[ QUOTE ]
if you mix in any non poker thing, like say, telling the guy before he pushes that you have 23 and want to double him up, that's unethical.

[/ QUOTE ]
Does that imply any table talk is unethical? I have trouble differentiating the cases where you say "Call, I have 23 and want to double you up" to induce:

1) a call b/c you have AA
2) a call b/c you have 23o and want to double him up.
3) a fold b/c you have 23o and want to psyche him out
4) a call b/c you have AA and want to make him think you have 23o but are trying to make him think you have AA.
etc.

Along these lines, I have trouble differentiating a spoken play like this from saying things like "Come on, call me." to egg someone on or vice versa. I don't see how one can necessarily determine collusion from this w/o establishing a pattern of it over an extended number of hands.

So, I can see an argument to ban all table talk and chat etc, but I'm not clear how this would necessarily be illegal or unethical or against the rules any more than "Go ahead, call me. I have AA." taunting.

Thoughts?

[The Yugoslavian]

How is this an ethics question?!?!?! /images/graemlins/confused.gif

Hell, you can do whatever you want during an STT...even stand up and urinate on the table if you gottabit of Fillmaff in ya....just don't explicitely collude with other players at the table.

Implicit collusion (which this isn't, btw) is always fine and 'ethical,' however you're using that word.

However, in general your solution to all ethical questions concerning poker should be to find a hot, skanky, sort of fat (b/c fat chicks need love too, right?) chick who won't break the sex chair...and then put it to good use. All of your poker dilemmas and/or life's mysterys will be solved following this advice.

Yugoslav
PS...the strategy involved in your above post is like.....umm....it makes the sex chair cry, /images/graemlins/tongue.gif.

[citanul]

there are rules governing table talk. therefor, table talk may or may not be "ethical or unethical" but the rules of the game are there to tell you if it is "illegal or legal."

[Ogre]

Its not unethical, its just horrible stategy

[augie00]

I am well aware that it is horrible. I was just curious if you guys thought that "teaming up" against another player by making a completley incorrect decision against the other is unethical.

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
I am well aware that it is horrible. I was just curious if you guys thought that "teaming up" against another player by making a completley incorrect decision against the other is unethical.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if you are implicitly teaming up. For instance, on the bubble a lot of players will check down the board vs. a short stack to increase the chances of knocking him/her out and everyone making the money. This is fine if done without discussing it. If, however, someone said 'I'm going to call here...but please check down the board so we can knock XXX out' and the other guy said 'sounds good...let's check down'...that is explicit and pretty much cheating.

As far as a situation where ethics are involved...Paul Phillips has been going on for a while about the difficulties that arise when many players own a piece of each other in a major tournament...ethically, should one of those players play a curical hand differently to give their friend a better chance of winning? Well, owning pieces isn't against the rules...and, as long as they don't discuss it at the table or tip each other off with signals...there isn't cheating involved. But, that doesn't mean it's unethical to dump chips to your friend on your own to keep him/her alive or engage in other such tactics.

Yugoslav

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
there are rules governing table talk. therefor, table talk may or may not be "ethical or unethical" but the rules of the game are there to tell you if it is "illegal or legal."

[/ QUOTE ]

I was wondering about this situation the other day (name changed to protect the possibly innocent party):

***** Hand History for Game XXXXXXXXX *****
50/100 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament YYYYYYYY) - Fri May 27 XXXXXXXXX 2005
Table Table 000000 (Real Money) -- Seat 1 is the button
Total number of players : 7
Seat 1: Hawk_48 (1415)
Seat 2: walsh112 (10)
Seat 3: bigblock420 (1090)
Seat 4: dfscott1 (1440)
Seat 5: winchester12 (994)
Seat 6: TABLETALKER (2541)
Seat 10: poundollard (510)
walsh112 posts small blind (10)
bigblock420 posts big blind (50)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to dfscott1 [ 4h, As ]
dfscott1 folds.
winchester12 folds.
TABLETALKER folds.
poundollard calls (50)
Hawk_48 folds.
walsh112 is all-In.
bigblock420 checks.
Creating Main Pot with $30 with walsh112
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 2s, Jd, 3h ]
bigblock420 bets (150)
TABLETALKER: check
TABLETALKER: god damnit
poundollard raises (300) to 300
bigblock420 calls (150)
** Dealing Turn ** : [ 6c ]
TABLETALKER: check it out
bigblock420 checks.
poundollard bets (160)
poundollard is all-In.
bigblock420 calls (160)
** Dealing River ** : [ 3c ]
Creating Side Pot 1 with $1000 with poundollard
** Summary **
Main Pot: 30 | Side Pot 1: 1000 |
Board: [ 2s Jd 3h 6c 3c ]
Hawk_48 balance 1415, didn't bet (folded)
walsh112 balance 0, lost 10 [ 6h Qc ] [ two pairs, sixes and threes -- Qc,6h,6c,3h,3c ]
bigblock420 balance 580, lost 510 [ Ks Jc ] [ two pairs, jacks and threes -- Ks,Jc,Jd,3h,3c ]
dfscott1 balance 1440, didn't bet (folded)
winchester12 balance 994, didn't bet (folded)
TABLETALKER balance 2541, didn't bet (folded)
poundollard balance 1030, bet 510, collected 1030, net +520 [ Js Ad ] [ two pairs, jacks and threes with ace kicker -- Ad,Js,Jd,3h,3c

Wouldn't this be considered collusion? I said as much and the guy said that since he wasn't in the hand, he could say whatever he wanted.

Edit: Ok, Yugo slipped his post in while I was typing. Does the fact that no one responded (or obeyed him) make any difference?

[valenzuela]

I say " call" all the time and stuff like " hes pusing u over " all the time, Am I an unworthy latin?

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
I say " call" all the time and stuff like " hes pusing u over " all the time,

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. Other than the "1 player to a hand" rule, which we know is not enforced (nor enforceable), all that's happening is coaching, until someone says "ok."

[ QUOTE ]
Am I an unworthy latin?

[/ QUOTE ]

Only you can answer that. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[valenzuela]

I table-coach all the time on the bubble..." why risk our asses "person with short stack name here" is about to bust". Of course I say that when the idiot is analyzing waht to do with his QJ.

[microbet]

I don't usually have time for it, but I think, by far, the most productive table chat is to just be friendly with people.

[Voltron87]

not unethical at all. just really stupid.

[skipperbob]

Having Yugo discuss ethics is like asking Jack Ruby for tips on long-range target shooting

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't usually have time for it, but I think, by far, the most productive table chat is to just be friendly with people.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed. I always try to be super friendly if I ever do end up chatting at the table.

[valenzuela]

rule number 34 of low buy-in sng: BE FRIENDLY BEFORE THE BUBBLE.

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
Having Yugo discuss ethics is like asking Jack Ruby for tips on long-range target shooting

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll go toe to toe with you on the subject of ethics any day of the week. In fact, if you ever want to engage in most forms of argumentation for money....just let me know when and where and can you get there sooner, /images/graemlins/tongue.gif.

SHIP IT OLD MAN!

Bwahahahahahahahahhaha!?

Yugoslav