Can't see the light

[rafiki]

Just to chime in, the smaller the player pool, the EASIER it is to cheat. I certainly don't collude online, but that's not to say I never have. When I was a newb we thought it would be fun to collude on msn. We quickly found that it was somewhat pointless since having another spot open for another opponent was often more useful. Now I dont' really play online enough to care either way.

But if people are going to collude, it's much better for there to only be a few tables. This way the poker sites algorithms for catching players playing together has very little success. If you always sit with the same people, they can't really link you. I imagine that if 2 expert cheats wanted to do this, they could mix it up a little, only colluding in scenarios that make sense (3 and 4 betting to fold out hands). Doing this in an omaha game for instance is pretty lethal. I'd certainly be on the lookout for people trying it.

[emerson]

[ QUOTE ]
Just to chime in, the smaller the player pool, the EASIER it is to cheat. I certainly don't collude online, but that's not to say I never have. When I was a newb we thought it would be fun to collude on msn. We quickly found that it was somewhat pointless since having another spot open for another opponent was often more useful. Now I dont' really play online enough to care either way.

But if people are going to collude, it's much better for there to only be a few tables. This way the poker sites algorithms for catching players playing together has very little success. If you always sit with the same people, they can't really link you. I imagine that if 2 expert cheats wanted to do this, they could mix it up a little, only colluding in scenarios that make sense (3 and 4 betting to fold out hands). Doing this in an omaha game for instance is pretty lethal. I'd certainly be on the lookout for people trying it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perfect example. What gets me is that many players don't even consider themselves dishonest when they do it. They openly talk about it like we see here. They wouldn't be bragging about money they took from the cash register when the cashier was looking away. But they think that in poker that this is just a clever tactic to help get an edge.

I've talked to several people in live games who said they were good consistent winners online. Eventually, during the course of the conversation, it would always come out that they had some sort of partner.

When I see internet discussions about collusion people are putting up hand histories and looking for evidence. They seem to think that only very obvious team work with both players in the pot constitutes collusion.

When playing against very strong opponents, you are not going to get an edge through the continuous use of fancy plays. You will only get an edge by consistently making better decisions than they do in marginal situations. There is no way you can make better decisions than others who have more information than you do.

[kahntrutahn]

[ QUOTE ]
There is no way you can make better decisions than others who have more information than you do.

[/ QUOTE ]

I beg to differ. Just because 2 people collude does not make them a favorite. In fact, I regularly play in a game with a team of colluders. They are easy to identify via statistical tracking/playing tendancies/the fact they always come in pairs to the game.

I know they exist, others in the game know they exist. However, we don't care because they do not use the information of multiple cards/ability to whipsaw/etc well enough to overcome the fact that they suck at LHE.

Thus, even with their added edge of collusion, we all still play them because A) we know and adjust, B) they suck even with the edge.

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[emerson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is no way you can make better decisions than others who have more information than you do.

[/ QUOTE ]

I beg to differ. Just because 2 people collude does not make them a favorite. In fact, I regularly play in a game with a team of colluders. They are easy to identify via statistical tracking/playing tendancies/the fact they always come in pairs to the game.

I know they exist, others in the game know they exist. However, we don't care because they do not use the information of multiple cards/ability to whipsaw/etc well enough to overcome the fact that they suck at LHE.

Thus, even with their added edge of collusion, we all still play them because A) we know and adjust, B) they suck even with the edge.

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Good thing you took my quote out of context. We are not talking about limit holdem players that suck. We are talking about tough, high stakes games. Yes, an expert player can beat weak cheaters. He can't beat strong players who are cheaters.

[DeathDonkey]

Custom - only because you asked...I've played with you on WPEX and I think you play poorly. I've seen you open limp in the CO 4 and 5 handed too many times to count. I've seen you passively call down with top pair many times where I thought "wow that is the nuts vs soandso". My notes on you are "too loose passive preflop and weak tightish postflop - poor hand reader".

-DeathDonkey

[ALLEN BOND]

[ QUOTE ]
Custom - only because you asked...I've played with you on WPEX and I think you play poorly. I've seen you open limp in the CO 4 and 5 handed too many times to count. I've seen you passively call down with top pair many times where I thought "wow that is the nuts vs soandso". My notes on you are "too loose passive preflop and weak tightish postflop - poor hand reader".

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

Treated.

[kahntrutahn]

[ QUOTE ]
Custom - only because you asked...I've played with you on multiple sitesand I think you play poorly. I've seen you open limp in the CO 4 and 5 handed too many times to count. I've seen you passively call down with top pair many times where I thought "wow that is the nuts vs soandso". My notes on you are "too loose passive preflop and weak tightish postflop - poor hand reader".

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]


FYP

[AndyatSD]

Hi Custom,

I'm not trying to be offensive, I'm just replying to your thread because you're asking.

I'm probably not very good, and I don't really think I play a very conventional style at the 1/2 and above games. In fact, long term I may be even a loser, who knows. But even with that, I think you are due for a solid review of your game. I'm @ work so I don't have access to my player notes, but I know I clearly pegged you as 'someone I'd like to sit with'. Now I know that I'm probably on every 2+2 Expert's fish list as well, but if a fish thinks you're a fish, there's a strong probability that you're in trouble.

For what its worth, I've played with you on 50/100 and 100/200 some as TanShuiWen. I took a 5 month break, and you seem to be a newcomer (or changed screennames) on the high stakes limit scene. If you provide past screennames, I'd be happy to share other player notes I've had with you. If you're a newcomer to the scene, I suggest you drop down.

Also, for what it's worth on the collusion topic. I know several of the 100/200 regulars well as personal friends - but we don't collude. We don't send each other the hands we have over MSN. We don't remote desktop and see each others screens. We don't talk on the cell phone while playing.

Sometimes I think it's sad that amateurs like myself have more integrity and respect for the game but at the end of the day I realize that some people are out there to make a living. Do I think colluding is going on in higher limit games? Probably. Do I care? Not really, I play for fun and poker is not a life-changing factor in my income.

Good luck, hope there comes to be a light at the end of your tunnel.

~andy

[HOWMANY]

Custom, I suggest 30/60 Stud hilo on Stars. Or whatever 15/30 Hold Them game I am sitting in.

[Custom02]

I appreciate some of the comments from the likes of DeathDonkey and AndyatSD, i think my game has not improved at the pace of the overall progression of the game and has turned me from a good (not huge) winner into a break even or slight underdog in some of the games i've been sitting in recently. In addition the recent poor run has certanly added to the problem by taking me off my a-game further still by underming confidence. I understand what donkey means about my weak tight play post flop (i've always found the Wpx games to be full of chronic bluffers though so maybe i'm passively calling down top pair more than elsewhere and more than i should be-rather than raising the flop and being greeted with a fold from a hand that was drawing almost dead).
As for the last comment saying i should go play 30/60 stud- just grow up you friendless clown.
Either way, i'm 25 and poker is certanly not what i want to do with my life so in a way this downswing may be for the best as the money i've made from cards over the last few years has hindered my motivation in the world of proper work which is ultimately where i want to excel so the fact i will ignore cards for some time to come will proably be advantagous.
Have you ever had a 500bb downswing donkey? just curious, you're obviously a good player and i wonder in terms of odds how unusual it is.