Interesting ethics question

[veggies]

Another post that isn't sure if this is the right forum.

I am playing in a Bi-weekly home game tourney with the same 10 guys each tourney. We are playing a 20 tourney series that awards points for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. 3 points for 1st, 2 for 2nd, 1 for 3rd.

We have all decided to only pay the top 2 places, and the third place money will be put into a fund that will award the top point getter an entry into the BC poker championships ($2700).

The winner of the entry, if he cashes, will get 60% of his winnings. The remaining 40% will be split between the other 9 of us.

The ethics question is as follows;

Since each of us have a piece of the action of the winner, if one of us is mathematically eliminated from being able to win the seat, is it ok to alter your game to influence who might win.

At this point, there is a clear leader in points but I don't think he is the best candidate to play in the big tourney. There are still a few guys who could catch him that I feel would give all of us a better shot at making a little extra money. If I made it heads up with one of them, would it be wrong to chip dump so that they would get more points?

I'm not the type of person to soft play anyone so don't get the wrong impression, I'm just wondering if having a stake in the winner of our series should have an effect on how I play, or anyone else.

Please answer the poll as well as posting your reasons for your answer. I have already talked about this with almost everyone in the tourney and we all seem to agree on the answer. I say almost everyone because 2 people missed tonight, including the points leader but I know he will find out that I don't think he is the best choice, so everyone knows/will know about my question.

Thanks for the replies.

[tarheeljks]

[ QUOTE ]
is it ok to alter your game to influence who might win?[quote/]

that's called collusion, which is unethical.

[SmartBugger]

Poker isn't a team-sport ..... this is not ethical at all.


Infact, if you sit down at some large tournmanets.... people may ask you if another player (in the tournament) has a part of your action. Some pros "trade" each other 2-3% of their action.... but once its over 5%.... some consider there is a good chance of collusion and hence, would like to know about it.

[Dangeresque]

It's not just unethical, It's not good decision making. You're leaving a lot of money on the table in each of those tournaments that you're currently playing just to chip dump to improve the chances of someone you have a 5% stake in. Say the better player has an improved expectation of a half of an entry fee, that's <$60 of EV for you. There is no way that a group of tournaments where third pays $135 (2700/20) is going to be worth tanking just to influence that $60, I'm sorry. Not only is it unethical for a home game, it's really a -EV decision.

[Albert Moulton]

It's unethical to chip dump the way you describe.

However, if it were to get head's up, I suppose you could just forfeit the game, and explain your reasoning to the others.

There is no rule that forces you to continue play if you want to conceed defeat, at least no rule that I know of. Of course, the current leader might be a little miffed. But resigning openly would be much better than colluding to influence the outcome of a game by chip dumping.

IMO, you should just play your best and let the real winner, even if he's not the best player, go to the tournament.

[mvdgaag]

Dumping your chips to someone else would be a form of collusion. Unethical in my book.

[Zetack]

Everybody else has it right, but here's a way to think of it that might help.

Suppose you had a 10% stake in one of the other players at the table in the tournament you were both playing in. Suppose you knew you couldn't win, (say you had to leave in five minutes) Would it be ethical to dump your chips your horse?

Or to make in even more analogous to your situation, again, you can't win, now suppose you had ten percent of two different players, one of whom is a much better player than the other, would it be eithical to chip dump to the better player, knowhing he's much more likely to make it through the remaining, say, 15 players in the field, than the worse player?

Essentially, that's what you're talking about doing.

When you enter one tournament, the payouts are the prizes. Obvously, trying to influence who wins any particular payout, by softplay, hardplay, chip dumping or any other method would be unethical. Here, one of the prizes of your series of tournaments is the tournament entry. Just because you have a stake in the entrant, doesn't give you a right to try to influence who wins this prize any more than in would any other prize.

Each player, no matter their skill level, deserves a level playing field to win the prizes, and, presumably, this even playing field is part of the reason they would consent to part of their entry being held out of the prize pool. If they knew they weren't going to be give a fair chance to win the entry, would they even play in the league?

Plus you're effecting who wins the immediate tourney, which is unethical in itself.

[FooSH]

[ QUOTE ]
Dumping your chips to someone else would be a form of collusion. Unethical in my book.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not collusion as long as you don't discuss it with any other player.

You are simply making decisions to maximise your EV.

It would be nicer, however, to organise a stratergy discussion for the big tourny where the stronger players could coach whoever was entered.

[veggies]

Thanks for the replies. I agree that it's a bit shady to alter my play to change the outcome. About the only time I would do it (assuming that it wasn't unethical) would be if I made it heads up with someone I thought better suited and it was looking like I would be coming in second and he agreed to chop.

Just thought it was an interesting question since part of the prize is a stake in someone in a much larger tourney.

If you are wondering, last night I ended up making it heads up with someone I think might be better off in the big tourney, and I won despite being behind in chips going into HU play.

[PantsOnFire]

Look at it this way. Is there a player who would take offense to you playing in such a way? If the answer is yes, then you have a problem.

Think of the common implicit collusion of checking it down against an all-in player. The all-in player really can't be offended at this. However, if one of the other players is unaware that checking it might be the best way to go and the third player reminds him before the flop, then the all-in player has a beef.

Perhaps you should look at your entire league structure so that such a situation as you describe cannot occur.

You should only be playing to win. If winning does nothing for you and you start playing for some other outcome, then there is a problem in the structure.