[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
" It is an accepted strategy and generally accepted as ethical..."

...and clearly collusive.

I'll say it again. It is a distinction with only a tiny difference.



[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. In the hand both players are adopting a strategy to maximize their expectation. Experienced players often don't follow it early in a tourney because there isn't as much positive expectation from knocking a player out as there is from winning the pot and getting the other player out improves their chances of winning the pot. They may also not follow it later in a tourney when they hold a monster, as the odds of knocking out the all-in player by themselves are already very high, and the possibility of getting more chips in the pot is more valuable than having another player in with a chance to knock out the all in player.


The fact that both players employing a check down strategy see it as a postive expectation play and hope that together they have a better chance of knocking out the all-in player than either would alone doesn't make the play collusive, any more than using the ref to screen out your defender puts you in collusion with the ref--as long as you don't discuss, signal, or agree with the other player to employ the strategy.

Discussing such a strategy is clearly collusive and violates the one player to a hand rule among others. The distinction is not at all insignificant or meaningless.

--Zetack