Re: Potowatomi collusion
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Simply raising blind preflop isn't colluding.
[/ QUOTE ]
It can be. A while back a poster complained about an online game where a whole table was playing kill the TAGs. There were two TAGs at the table IIRC. Everytime a TAG took the BB the table captain predesignated a player to autoraise preflop. They rotated the raises so that no one took it all the time.
The player who raises blind incurs negative EV but this is distributed across the entire table and not merely to the BB. The TAG is losing money because he can never play his blind for free. The rotating aspect ensures that those EV losses are distributed fairly to all the other players even though the autoraiser is losing on a particular hand.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm curious as to how one raises blindly online. Online is a much different situation than live. Especially in regards to collusion and sharing information.
[ QUOTE ]
teaming up to attack the kill blind (really all the blinds) is collusion even if it's announced in advance. It places the kill blind at an unfair disadvantage compared to the other players at the table.
[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree. Many times it's 2 people doing it regardless of who is in the blind. Just because you posted a blind doesn't mean you can expect any more special treatment/consideration than anyone else at the table. They're raising them blind too. Ever play in a blind capped to showdown game? Are you saying that's an unfair game? C'mon.
It is advantageous to the players yet to act to know that players are raising blind preflop.
Complaining that players are raising blind preflop after announcing in advance to everyone that they are doing so is ridiculous.
b
|