Collusion?

[Sherpa]

From Cardplayer:
"As the $2,500 Short Handed event kicks off today, we're already seeing the effects of fewer opponents at each table. At one of the tables, three of the five players have yet to show up, which is proving to be beneficial to the other two. Before each hand, the players are flipping a coin to see who's going to steal the blinds. Time's ticking for the absent players."

Wouldn't this be considered collusion? WTF?

[bwana devil]

[ QUOTE ]
From Cardplayer:

Wouldn't this be considered collusion? WTF?

[/ QUOTE ]

wow. that's horrible.

glad CP printed that. i assume they know it's wrong (but it's hard to tell) and are printing the info for readers to make their own conclusions.

bwana

[PokerSlut]

[ QUOTE ]
wow. that's horrible.

glad CP printed that. i assume they know it's wrong (but it's hard to tell) and are printing the info for readers to make their own conclusions.


[/ QUOTE ]

Having been in this situation at short-handed (due to absent players) tourney tables, I have to say it really sucks to play straight-up poker when you are out of position, and it really rocks to have position on the only other player at the table. I think flipping a coin is actually more fair than the guy on the left picking up 80% of the pots.

[bwana devil]

i can understand this could be a good solution and the player out of position would be at a disadvantage.

but unless there is something in the rules that explicitly says the players may handle short handed tables in this manner, i dont see how this doesnt fall under a collusion violation.

bwana

[Big Orange]

If true, that's appalling. Someone should wake up the T

[TravestyFund]

[ QUOTE ]
From Cardplayer:
"As the $2,500 Short Handed event kicks off today, we're already seeing the effects of fewer opponents at each table. At one of the tables, three of the five players have yet to show up, which is proving to be beneficial to the other two. Before each hand, the players are flipping a coin to see who's going to steal the blinds. Time's ticking for the absent players."

Wouldn't this be considered collusion? WTF?

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Glenn]

Yeah it's collusion, but poker's too popular now for people to know the rules.

[popesc]

The thing that keeps poker "honest" is the fact that every participant attempts to act in their own best interest. The player with position is losing with this arrangment, and is an idiot. But regardless, they are both cheating.

Of course, the generally penalty is sitting out for 10 to 30 minutes, which wouldn't be effective when all the players at the table are involved.

If I was the third person to the table and found out what they were doing, I'd call the floor over immediately, hope they both get a long penalty, and then convince the dealer they don't need to shuffle.