Re: PM me
 

There have been threads posted in the past where regulars here who are friends have posted about IMing each other about a big fish or two making a high limit game very attractive, then jumping into the game together. I suspect stuff like this is more common than most would think.

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sh1t. I talk to tons of people while at the same tables. We often tell our hands AFTER the other has folded. It's fun sweating...i dunno. But when we're both in a hand together it's balls to the wall full game without any correspondance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you ever give advice to each other while in a hand? You've mentioned in the past IMing each other about juicy higher-limit games w/ big fish to jump into together. In those scenarios, when not in a hand together, are you talking about hands during play?

Specifically, bk, I am wondering if you would ever do something like this: Schneids folds preflop. You bet the river and get raised - might you ever ask "yo schneids, does this clown ever bluff raise?"

[/ QUOTE ]

A while back there were some questions as to how the "one player to a hand" rule applied online. At that time I recall you being on the side that said "it does not" and it seems like what you describe above would be acceptable?

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sh1t. I talk to tons of people while at the same tables. We often tell our hands AFTER the other has folded. It's fun sweating...i dunno. But when we're both in a hand together it's balls to the wall full game without any correspondance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you ever give advice to each other while in a hand? You've mentioned in the past IMing each other about juicy higher-limit games w/ big fish to jump into together. In those scenarios, when not in a hand together, are you talking about hands during play?

Specifically, bk, I am wondering if you would ever do something like this: Schneids folds preflop. You bet the river and get raised - might you ever ask "yo schneids, does this clown ever bluff raise?"

[/ QUOTE ]

A while back there were some questions as to how the "one player to a hand" rule applied online. At that time I recall you being on the side that said "it does not" and it seems like what you describe above would be acceptable?

[/ QUOTE ]

bicyclekick and schneids are playing in a high limit game together while on IM (I use their names because they have talked about playing together and IMing and I would like to get their opinions on this.). Schneids folds pre-flop. bk bets the 4-flush river and gets raised.

1) Schneids, does this guy raise the river with Jack or Queen?

2) Schneids, I have the King, what do you think I should do against this guy?

3) Schneids, did you have the Ace?

Do you think any or all of these questions are OK?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how this can lead to collusion even when none is intended.

As far as I'm concerned, if Schneids weren't playing at the table, ANY QUESTION would be OK.

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
There have been threads posted in the past where regulars here who are friends have posted about IMing each other about a big fish or two making a high limit game very attractive, then jumping into the game together. I suspect stuff like this is more common than most would think.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do this on a daily basis.

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]


A while back there were some questions as to how the "one player to a hand" rule applied online. At that time I recall you being on the side that said "it does not" and it seems like what you describe above would be acceptable?

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously, there is no "one player to a hand rule" online.

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sh1t. I talk to tons of people while at the same tables. We often tell our hands AFTER the other has folded. It's fun sweating...i dunno. But when we're both in a hand together it's balls to the wall full game without any correspondance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you ever give advice to each other while in a hand? You've mentioned in the past IMing each other about juicy higher-limit games w/ big fish to jump into together. In those scenarios, when not in a hand together, are you talking about hands during play?

Specifically, bk, I am wondering if you would ever do something like this: Schneids folds preflop. You bet the river and get raised - might you ever ask "yo schneids, does this clown ever bluff raise?"

[/ QUOTE ]

A while back there were some questions as to how the "one player to a hand" rule applied online. At that time I recall you being on the side that said "it does not" and it seems like what you describe above would be acceptable?

[/ QUOTE ]

bicyclekick and schneids are playing in a high limit game together while on IM (I use their names because they have talked about playing together and IMing and I would like to get their opinions on this.). Schneids folds pre-flop. bk bets the 4-flush river and gets raised.

1) Schneids, does this guy raise the river with Jack or Queen?

2) Schneids, I have the King, what do you think I should do against this guy?

3) Schneids, did you have the Ace?

Do you think any or all of these questions are OK?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how this can lead to collusion even when none is intended.

As far as I'm concerned, if Schneids weren't playing at the table, ANY QUESTION would be OK.

[/ QUOTE ]

NONE OF THOSE QUESTIONS ARE OK!!!!!

not during the play of the hand. even if bk is at a different table and schnieds is in the process of playing a hand.

you should logically have no objection to two players at the same table talking not about the play of a hand in progress. if bk folds and schnieds raises schnieds can tell bk, "i got ako" bk could then say "gl"

thats it until after the hand. at the end of the hand bk can then say "hey, that guy bluff raises the river, you shouldn't have folded."...or "why didn't you bluff 3 bet like i woulda done [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] -- DONK style"

after the hand that is fine. during teh hand it is not.

to clarrify: if bk comments on schnieds hand during the play i dont care if he's in timbucktoo at the time and happens to be getting clear wireless reception that only allows him to use AIM, its wrong.

-Barron

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
NONE OF THOSE QUESTIONS ARE OK!!!!!

not during the play of the hand. even if bk is at a different table and schnieds is in the process of playing a hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you think that is wrong?

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
NONE OF THOSE QUESTIONS ARE OK!!!!!

not during the play of the hand. even if bk is at a different table and schnieds is in the process of playing a hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are high. Trying to enforce some sort of "one player to a hand" rule online is beyond retarded.

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


A while back there were some questions as to how the "one player to a hand" rule applied online. At that time I recall you being on the side that said "it does not" and it seems like what you describe above would be acceptable?

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously, there is no "one player to a hand rule" online.

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally agree. I was just interested in getting clarifiation from Diablo because I was missing one critical point about his argument.

Re: PM me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
NONE OF THOSE QUESTIONS ARE OK!!!!!

not during the play of the hand. even if bk is at a different table and schnieds is in the process of playing a hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are high. Trying to enforce some sort of "one player to a hand" rule online is beyond retarded.

[/ QUOTE ]

Learn how to respond to the right poster, moron.