Not so implicit collusion

I'm quite new to poker and unsure about matters of ettiquette. I would like to know what the feeling is about the kind of behaviour that I have witnessed.

Once I saw someone write "check him down" before the post-flop betting started after a small stack went all in.

On another occasion a player was using his timebank to decide whether to see an all-in from the small stack. The player between the guy making the decision and the small stack cheerfully declared "I'll fold".

Finally tonight after I had bet on the flop against another player while the small stack was all-in. Before the turn came the other player typed "Whatever happened to checking down".

To me these appear to be examples of out and out cheating. As I understand the practise of checking down is only acceptable if it isn't discussed. Am I right to be outraged by this type of behaviour or am I just overreacting to what is seen as a bit of gamesmanship and all part of the rough and tumble of poker.

[jdl22]

Welcome to the forum.

The first two examples are clearly cheating. Telling someone to "check it down" is simply collusion. It is fully acceptable to simply check it down and this often happens since both players want to, but communicating this is against the rules. Similarly communicating what your action will be before it is your turn is against the rules.

The last example is probably bad but depends. Did a player fold and then ask the question? If so (and the only guy left was the all-in guy) it would be ok, but if there is still action in the hand it is not acceptable to talk about the hand while it is in play.

edit: it's ok to put it here, but you should probably post poker etiquette and rules questions in the Poker Theory forum

you don't have to believe everything a player types, obviously "out of turn" typing isn't binding. so if a player says he'll fold and doesn't, i'm not quite sure how the site would handle it. of course you should be a little upset and should report it and see what the site says. rules on angling, and table talk through chat might be different from B&M.
also, are you referring to a tournament or a cash game?

[csuf_gambler]

um implicit collusion is a concept totally different then cheating. it has nothing to do with "collusion"

[Ro-me-ro]

Implicit collusion is fine. However what you have reported is clearly not implicit, but has crossed the line (in some cases) to explicit collusion.

Report it; at a minimum the players involved will get a dressing down in correct tournament etiquette, and who knows, if they have done it in the past you may even get advanced in the standings! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Rom

Thanks for your reply. As I thought this kind of behaviour is plain wrong. I didn't report any of these because I wasn't the victim myself and was a bit unsure and didn't want to make a fool of myself. I'll know for future reference.

[ QUOTE ]
The last example is probably bad but depends. Did a player fold and then ask the question? If so (and the only guy left was the all-in guy) it would be ok, but if there is still action in the hand it is not acceptable to talk about the hand while it is in play.

[/ QUOTE ]

No he hadn't folded when he made his comment. There were 2 rounds of betting to go and he was still in.

[ QUOTE ]
edit: it's ok to put it here, but you should probably post poker etiquette and rules questions in the Poker Theory forum

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry wasn't really thinking, my reasoning was that as it happened on the internet then this was the section though I do take your point that this is a more general question.

[ QUOTE ]
you don't have to believe everything a player types, obviously "out of turn" typing isn't binding. so if a player says he'll fold and doesn't, i'm not quite sure how the site would handle it. of course you should be a little upset and should report it and see what the site says. rules on angling, and table talk through chat might be different from B&M.
also, are you referring to a tournament or a cash game?

[/ QUOTE ]

It was an SNG. The player in question did fold, my problem was that this declaration was made to help the player who was taking his time to make a call thus disadvantaging the guy who had put all his chips in

[ QUOTE ]
um implicit collusion is a concept totally different then cheating. it has nothing to do with "collusion"

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand that distinction, the collusion in these cases were more than explicit. I was just a bit unsure how seriously these types of comments are taken.

I will report such things in future. Can't remember where I finished in the first 2 but I won the last one anyway so reporting him wouldn't have improved my result.

[dlk9s]

That's one nice thing about Paradise Poker. When someone is all-in, all player chat is suspended until the hand is over.