Obvious Collusion - Pokerstars

[Shaqalicious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[] evidence of collusion

[/ QUOTE ]

[x] forgot to put a space in checkbox

[/ QUOTE ]

[x] checkbox in reference to someone else's checkbox

[rafiki]

lol good read, would read again

lol bitterments

[Obfuscation]

[disjunction]

Nobody would ever collude in an online tournament. There is no point trying to police this because the online tournament community does a great job at policing themselves. OP is nuts for even mentioning the words "cheating" and "online tournament" in this same sentence.

[AJackson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Def no collusion here, I guess I was just heated about bubbling.

It was so sick, belongs in BBV though, or the trashcan.

[/ QUOTE ]

trash

[/ QUOTE ]

[Vegaas]

I wouldnt call it obvious. However those that are discounting it completely are also foolish. This was a satellite, not a standard tournament. The big stack gains nothing from doing this.Nothing. From the hand history, the big stack calls the all in after liverspot goes all in. One hand proves nothing and in this case it is a decent play to try end the tournament. If this were to continously happen, then it becomes suspicsous.

The OP states that the big stack started shoving every hand, it would make sense for collusion. If I am the big stack and my friend is the SS and we are at the bubble of the tournament. If I push every hand I am greatly increasing his odds of making it in. I either A) get someone else to call and have the chance of busting them so you get in, or B) have you call with a very strong hand where you double up.

Lets not be so harsh to OP. I definitly wouldnt call it obvious, but I think there is some suspicous play at least.

[FireStorm]

This is easily one of the worst threads ever. I actually thought of using the Sandler line prior to seeing it posted.

[BradleyT]

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldnt call it obvious. However those that are discounting it completely are also foolish. This was a satellite, not a standard tournament. The big stack gains nothing from doing this.Nothing. From the hand history, the big stack calls the all in after liverspot goes all in. One hand proves nothing and in this case it is a decent play to try end the tournament. If this were to continously happen, then it becomes suspicsous.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd do this as big stack simply to make my opponents pay dearly for being the donkeys that they are and not following proper satellite strategy.

[Daddys_Visa]

The bigstack was probably just having a blast bullying the table. Even by pushing all-in for a while, he barely affects his own chances of bubbling.

I think "spite" is a way more likely possibility than collusion. Maybe the 2nd or 3rd short stack had pissed him off earier in the tournament and was trying to get them to bubble, I have seen that more than once. To try to call this "Obvious Collusion" is laughable.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

Here is why it almost certainly wasn't collusion:

Seat 1: ImNotSoGood (15654 in chips)
Seat 4: CACIATORE (39687 in chips)
Seat 5: RickyReardon (74982 in chips)
Seat 6: LiverSpot (766 in chips)
Seat 7: vikihris (13366 in chips)
Seat 8: the_rotter77 (106525 in chips)
Seat 9: hubla1 (14520 in chips)

rotter has a massive lead. Even if he loses an all-in pot to Ricky, he will still have over 35 times the chip stack of Liver. rotter is just bored or tired, and wants to get this game over with. Furthermore, rotter figures that if he pushes in every hand, nobody can possibly call, except for Liver, who has to call eventually, even if simply because the blinds will have him all-in preflop. rotter simply figures that he wants to race against Liver, spotting Liver the best hand, because Liver is going to have to win at least 3 such flips before he's not the shortest stack anymore. If he does manage to do this, that's still OK for rotter, as he has stolen so many blinds and antes in the process that he has made the other stacks even shorter.

I'm not saying that this is a smart strategy, just a possible one. Of course, rotter's mistake is not paying attention to the fact that he should instead just let the entire group gang up on Liver this hand and greatly increase the chances of ending it now.

Just based upon the hand history and nothing else, I'd say there is only a minor chance that collusion occurred. However, you still did the right thing in reporting it to PokerStars support. They might not have just this isolated hand to look at, but other evidence of collusive activity between rotter and Liver from other tables and other tournaments. That earlier inconclusive evidence might match up with this evidence, and then be enough to "convict" these two of cheating. So, it is always a good thing to highlight anything fishy and email it to support, even when you know it is not enough to "prove" anything.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)