[teddyFBI]

[ QUOTE ]
The play is cheating because there is no way it could have benefited him were there not an implied arrangement to split the money at a later time. He intentionally made a bad play in order to have an opportunity (implied) to split money that he had no chance of winning fairly. That is collusion, and it is cheating.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you can point out where the arrangement was to split the money, I'd be interested. As far as I can tell, there was no such arrangement. Just one guy who liked to help his friend take down a big pot. (as i wrote above, if i were "Dave", I'd probably pay my buddy back the $80 he put in on river...which I admit, only further sullies the situation)