Collusion in a 4th STEP?

[Chief911]

I'd like your opinion on this. Maybe I'm still steaming because I lost AA to ATs that crippled me mid/late of a 4th step. But I felt this was obvious collusion. Here's a copy of my email to Party Support, which I'm sure will do nothing with this information.

Collusion on 4th Step 2 Table #160814

I just wanted to report collusion between two players on the 2 table Step 4 game mentioned in the subject. When down to the bubble with 11 players left, the short stack (tuck64) was in the blind with barely over the blind amount. The Button player, redhotballz, said “here I’ll double you tuck” went all in, and then said “got to dodge my live cards though” tuck64 replied “with a 63” telling the whole table his hand while he was still waiting to act. Redhotballz replied “they are alos (spelling, meant also) live” telling tuck that his two cards were live based on redhot’s hand.

If this is not active collusion, I do not know what is. Regardless of the outcome, and what they each had, the fact that one player told another to call, the other player announced his hand, and was told by the other player still in the hand that his two cards were LIVE, is collusion.

I do not pay $535 to play in one of these, to have things like this happen. This is unacceptable. There are plenty of sites out there who would gladly take my money instead of Party. I would like a refund of my entry, or have my 11th place prize bumped up to a 10th place prize. I would also like to know what discipline action is taken against these two players.

Thank you.

Nick
Party Poker User: Chief_911

---------------------------------

Am I overreacting? No one at their table seemed to mind.

Nick

[Daliman]

Easy call. Definitely collusion,(IF they were telling the truth). Although likely only can be pinned on the first pusher.

[Chief911]

The thing is, I agree that it can be pinned on the initial pusher, who had about 6k. But the BB short stack who had 95 left, and would have been allin in the SB afterwards because blinds were 100/200, announced his hand, and sounded like he was not intending on calling.

I'm curious as to what Party Support (I use the term support lightly) will say.

Nick

[rjb03]

Obvious collusion. Curious to see the reply. Keep us posted. Was he so short stacked he had to call? And what about the other blind? Just curious, not that these questions should alter their policy.

Edit: reread to answer my first question.

[Sidekick]

I don't think you are over reacting. It's an obvious case of collusion. The player stated that he would willingly double up the BB.

I admit he didn't go about it well if he wanted to guarantee doubling up the BB, but they are communicating cards, talking about whether their cards are live, etc.

How Party could not find this to be a clear case of collusion would be beyond me. It will be interesting to see what Party does (if anything) about it. But, given other posts by folks who have spotted collusion and reported it, I wouldn't expect much from Party.

I wish you luck in having this resolved in your favor.

[Irieguy]

Party's response will look something like this:

Dear Chief_911,

Thank you for contacting PartyPoker support, we appreciate your input. If you could send us the tournament number you have a concern about, we will gladly look into it.

Michelle Gupta
PartyPoker Support Representative


PartyPoker Support,

I already told you the tournment number, it was the subject of my first email. Here it is again _________.

Nick
Chief_911



Dear Chief_911

Thank you for contacting PartyPoker support, I apologize for the misunderstanding about your concern regarding 4th step tournament number 160814. If you could please tell me the screen names of the players involved in the incident, I will be happy to look into it.

Karen Gupta
PartyPoker Support Manager


PPS,

I already told you the names, but here they are again....
Why does it seem like you don't even read the emails I send?

Nick



Dear Nick,

Thank you for contacting PartyPoker support, and again, I apologize for the misunderstanding. If you could please tell me your account name, I will look into the matter as quickly as possible.

Roger Gupta
PartyPoker Support Leader



Roger,

You guys suck. I already gave you all of the information necessary to look into this and there is clear colusion going on... don't you care?

Nick
Chief_911



Dear Nick,

Thank you for contacting us again, and I apologize for the misunderstanding. I have investigated the tournament number in question and spoke with the technical support manager. It appears that there were no problems with the server during the tournament. We will therefore not be able to refund your entry fee.

Thank you for your continued patronage.

John Williams
PartyPoker Support Supervisor

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]
Party's response will look something like this:

Dear Chief_911,

Thank you for contacting PartyPoker support, we appreciate your input. If you could send us the tournament number you have a concern about, we will gladly look into it.

Michelle Gupta
PartyPoker Support Representative


PartyPoker Support,

I already told you the tournment number, it was the subject of my first email. Here it is again _________.

Nick
Chief_911



Dear Chief_911

Thank you for contacting PartyPoker support, I apologize for the misunderstanding about your concern regarding 4th step tournament number 160814. If you could please tell me the screen names of the players involved in the incident, I will be happy to look into it.

Karen Gupta
PartyPoker Support Manager


PPS,

I already told you the names, but here they are again....
Why does it seem like you don't even read the emails I send?

Nick



Dear Nick,

Thank you for contacting PartyPoker support, and again, I apologize for the misunderstanding. If you could please tell me your account name, I will look into the matter as quickly as possible.

Roger Gupta
PartyPoker Support Leader



Roger,

You guys suck. I already gave you all of the information necessary to look into this and there is clear colusion going on... don't you care?

Nick
Chief_911



Dear Nick,

Thank you for contacting us again, and I apologize for the misunderstanding. I have investigated the tournament number in question and spoke with the technical support manager. It appears that there were no problems with the server during the tournament. We will therefore not be able to refund your entry fee.

Thank you for your continued patronage.

John Williams
PartyPoker Support Supervisor

[/ QUOTE ]

Classic [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[boedeker]

well apparently my chat has been banned for 10 days. hope youre happy.

[Chief911]

You're lucky it wasn't on Stars, where they actually do something about stuff like this. If you are expecting me to feel sorry for you because you had your chat banned, I dont. The kid wasn't going to call with 63o. Obviously that would have been stupid, but he wasn't. Thus his "with 6 3"

Bottom line is, you colluded, and the end result was me bubbling out, costing me $535. I'll trade you 10 days of no chat for $535. Sound fair?

Quit your bitching and pull your head out of your ass next time.

Nick

[citanul]

I wasn't there until like one minute after this occurred, but something tells me that a) pretty much any time that you have 63, you assume your cards are live and b) he was going to call.

I don't remember how many players were left at this time either, I think it was 11, and there were a few short stacks. I don't think that you can directly blame boedeker's play and or chat for your bubbbling out.

From the time I got there, he went all in EVERY hand on his table, when he had the table covered. Thus, he was trying his best to bust someone. It appeared that you folded every hand until you were all in on the big blind. This may have been reasonable, but probably was not optimal considering other factors.

I'm not sure if chatting about your hand while you are heads up is explicitly against party's rules. It probably is. However, I really can't feel that this is collusion. I am especially concerned by those people who believe that if he had been lieing about his cards, then it would have been ok, but since he told the truth, it was fine. Players CONSTANTLY talk about their hands. The VERY typical move is the re-steal and then announcement of having a pair in your hand while the other person is considering a call. I see this perhaps 10 times a day.

I can't think that you would have a problem here if boedeker had had say, 66, and the guy got the same chat, called, and lost with the destroyed hand. You'd probably have typed something like "lol" in the chat box.

Boedeker/redhotballz can be a bit of a jackass at the tables, as can many players, but I don't think that he was aware of any rule that would prohibit you from talking about your hand while the hand is heads up and you are all in. Is this prohibitted in live play? Are you allowed to talk about your hand while you are last to act and considering calling an all in player, heads up? Live? Is he just not allowed to respond? That seems like, live, a huge freeroll on the part of the person who has the turn to act, since he's allowed to say anything he wants and you aren't allowed to react in any way.

Anyway, I think that the idea that you should be refunded your entrance is pretty ridiculous. I think that redhot got approximately the punishment he deserved, perhaps he should have had a longer chat suspension.

my 2 cents,

citanul