Collusion?

[Mr Rick]

My first trip to Foxwoods and it takes 2 1/2 hours to get into the only table of 10/20 LHE game last Friday (2/2/07). Within 3 hands I see these two guys, sitting next to each other, at the other end of the table get HU on the flop and lay down their cards face up - checking down. I turn to somebody and ask whats up with that and he tells me they are friends so it doesn't matter... I am uncomfortable but don't want to alienate the table within 5 minutes of arriving - especially because there is no other 10/20 table - so I say nothing. About 30 minutes later one of those two guys bets, the other raises and what I took to be a Foxwoods regular named Bernie (I think) folds. The buddy calls and they check down without opening their hands. Bernie starts making a fuss and the one guy says WTF I had AA - which he shows. I never saw the other guy's hand but assume it was legit. The floor gets involved and Bernie says its unfair - because even if they aren't cheating its less likely that one of them will bust out and be replaced by a fish. And then I open my mouth because I don't like it and because I'm an idiot. I say I don't believe that they are intentionally cheating but that even if its unintentional it amounts to collusion because they will be more likely to bet/raise because getting HU with each other makes it cheaper to get to SD. The floor looks at me like I'm talking Greek, Bernie is happy to have an ally but doesn't care what I am saying and nobody else even remotely acknowledges the issue of unfairness if the two buddies are not outright cheating.

The floor ultimately rules no violation occurred but whispers to the dealer to notify him if they bet/raise again (I am in seat 1 so I hear this).

Any thoughts? By the way I call myself an idiot here because in one fell swoop I let the table know I think about complex things, I couldn't control myself from blurting out my feelings, my happy go lucky table image is hard to restore (Altoids anybody?), and I've got two guys who could in fact be colluding and are very likely regulars themselves, mad at me.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
By the way I call myself an idiot here because in one fell swoop I let the table know I think about complex things

[/ QUOTE ]

You're giving the table to much credit for being that observant. All that you stated was you want a fair game. I don't see anything wrong with voicing your opinion on that.

They probably weren't conciously cheating. Lots of players will check it down HU. Sucks, but they do. Just watch for them jamming, then checking down more than what would be normal. Like if say, they did it in most pots they were in together.

Probably nothing, but keep an eye on it.

And who cares if they're mad at you? Screw 'em.

b

[rrb]

[ QUOTE ]
The floor looks at me like I'm talking Greek,

[/ QUOTE ]

lol - Welcome to Foxwoods!

Nice job, Speak up! As soon as the both start to check it down, Ask to see both hands (even if they do it voluntary). What they are doing is wrong.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By the way I call myself an idiot here because in one fell swoop I let the table know I think about complex things

[/ QUOTE ]

You're giving the table to much credit for being that observant. All that you stated was you want a fair game. I don't see anything wrong with voicing your opinion on that.

They probably weren't conciously cheating. Lots of players will check it down HU. Sucks, but they do. Just watch for them jamming, then checking down more than what would be normal. Like if say, they did it in most pots they were in together.

Probably nothing, but keep an eye on it.

And who cares if they're mad at you? Screw 'em.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree with this post 100%

[bav]

You are correct that people shouldn't do that. But the practical truth is neither you nor the floor can effectively stop them. Even if one kept betting, the other could fold and his friend can just hand him $20 under the table (or keep track of it and settle up in the parking lot). If folks want to softplay each other, they're going to.

But it's ok to point out that what they're doing is annoying. They could at least sorta hide their semi-collusional softplay.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The floor looks at me like I'm talking Greek,

[/ QUOTE ]

lol - Welcome to Foxwoods!

Nice job, Speak up! As soon as the both start to check it down, Ask to see both hands (even if they do it voluntary). What they are doing is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the sort of situation the IWTSTH exists for and it is not an abuse of the rule to ask to see the hands when these guys check down.

[AngusThermopyle]

Get a life.

[ QUOTE ]
get HU on the flop and lay down their cards face up - checking down.


[/ QUOTE ]

They showed you their hands. You fail to say "neither player had anything" or such. So I assume they had legit hands. What is the big deal.
You fail to mention if they re-raised a bunch of people out. So I assume this Grand Conspiracy netted them a little more than the blinds. Big whoop.



[ QUOTE ]

About 30 minutes later


[/ QUOTE ]

So the next "crime" took place a half hour later?


[ QUOTE ]
one of those two guys bets, the other raises and what I took to be a Foxwoods regular named Bernie (I think) folds. The buddy calls and they check down without opening their hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok. Now you have a third player involved as a 'victim' of the Gang of Two. And they don't reveal their cards this time. This is the one time you might have a complaint. But as pointed out, you automatically get to see the winning hand and can use IWTSTH to see the other. And one had AA! Could Bernie beat that? Don't you think that the bet-raise actually saved Bernie money and cost the Collusion Team money?


[ QUOTE ]
its less likely that one of them will bust out and be replaced by a fish.


[/ QUOTE ]

Moronic. If Friend A goes bust and Friend B tosses him a couple of benjamins, he stays in the game.




[ QUOTE ]
it amounts to collusion because they will be more likely to bet/raise because getting HU with each other makes it cheaper to get to SD.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if Bernie had had the nuts? The Team loses at twice the rate.

Checking down HU with a friend is not collusion. Grow up.

[Mr Rick]

[ QUOTE ]
And one had AA! Could Bernie beat that? Don't you think that the bet-raise actually saved Bernie money and cost the Collusion Team money?

[/ QUOTE ]
I never saw Bernie's hand but what I think happened was that he was priced in for one bet but got forced out for two. It may have saved him money in this instance (because if he hit his hand by the river I believe we we would have heard about it - but then Bernie did go on tilt so maybe he had hit his hand...).

And I assume, Angus that you are playing with me and realize that just because Bernie saved money this time doesn't mean that he or someone else might have been forced out of a winning hand if their behavior continued. The "subconscious colluders" never went after the same pot after that, and I left some 5 hours later.

So which one were you? The loose guy who called raises pf with 64s? Or the big guy with glasses and 3 racks worth of chips in play who splashes when he calls?

Thanks for all of the responses guys. I will make it a point if this happens again to exercise my rights to see all hands. And to keep it in perspective.

[AngusThermopyle]

[ QUOTE ]
The "subconscious colluders" never went after the same pot after that, and I left some 5 hours later.


[/ QUOTE ]

Nearly 150 hands and they never both had a hand? Amazing coincidence. Maybe just that, coincidence.

[ QUOTE ]

So which one were you? The loose guy who called raises pf with 64s? Or the big guy with glasses and 3 racks worth of chips in play who splashes when he calls?


[/ QUOTE ]

If I were to be on a "team", you wouldn't notice me or my partner. You wouldn't notice a thing "wrong".

collusion:

: secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose

[SplawnDarts]

Wow, more stuff not to get worried about.