Is this collusion?

[Frozen]

Semi-hypothetical situation:

$200 Party sng. Blinds are 150/300

Player A has 1500 chips
Player B has 1500 chips
Player C has 1500 chips
Player D has 5500 chips, and is in the big blind.

Preflop, player A bets 1499, Players B & C fold. Player D (big stack) calls.

On the flop, Player A types into chat: (quote) If you leave me one, you'll be able to bully them. Leaving me one increases your chances to get 1st. It's in your own best interests.

What do you think?

[Frozen]

Bump (Now stein free!)

[Piers]

People giving advice at the table, either good or bad can be irritating but is not generally unethical.

If D takes A’s advice and does not put him all in, you best move must be to congratulate him on his good play and add him to your buddy list.

If A bets his last chip and D folds, now you start thinking about collusion. However if A and D were really colluding I think D would just let A steal his blind wherever possible.

[Daliman]

Well, i'm assuming this is frozen fish, (this is darkstargasm), but stated as such, your hypothetical is pretty flawed in reasoning, as player D would have little to no opportunity to profit further from bullying, as the 2 other 1500 stacks are outside the blinds the next round, and the single chipper is in the BB w/ big stack in the SB. Only IF player A wins the blind battle can D use to to his advantage at all, and it could turn out worse if B or C wakes up with a big hand.

[fnurt]

This is a little different, but not very, from suggesting to someone that they check it down to knock out the all-in player. In both cases you are trying to persuade someone to do what is in his best interest, as well as yours, to the detriment of the rest of the table. That's different from trying to talk someone into a call or fold, for example, because that's just table talk between the two of you.

[HavanaBanana]

To discuss tactics with another player still in the game like this is unethical, and should not be allowed.
It is the same as a player who is out of the current hand telling a big stack to call a small stack allin because he got the odds to do so.

It is not collusion, as player D got nothing to do with it (if they both are discussing it, it would be collusion)
Now, let's say player D did what player A was suggesting, it would still not be collusion, as doing what player A suggested was an option D had anyways, and player A suggesting it should not make that an option that D can not use.

Party should make it clear that giving this kind of advice to other players might cost you your whole buyin and prizemoney, but they are not clear about that at all, and odds on them doing something about this is very very high.

Maybe you can get them to revoke his chat if you write them more than 10 times.

Personally I never let this kind of comment affect me (if I was D) if I was B or C I would however shout and yell.


ToT

[Frozen]

Good post, HB. I was totally wrong about you when I kinda flamed you a few months ago. Peace.

[Frozen]

Yes, I'm Frozen_Fish, and perhaps I didn't phrase the question perfectly, but you get the idea. For arguments' sake, just change the above scenario so that B & C are first to act, and A is small blind and D is (still) big blind. IMO, this does not really change the ethics aspect, which is all I'm trying to gauge.

[Warik]

I don't see anything wrong at all.

Player A is gone next time the blinds show up. Player D doesn't have to do what he says. It'd be collusion if player D calls and then folds for 1 chip on the flop, which would be stupid to do anyway.

It's stupidity, but not collusion.