Question about what looks like shady behavior

[Proofrock]

I don't play a lot live, but I'm curious about how prevalent the following scenarios are, as well as whether there are any good recourses.

$10/20 limit Hold'em game at Northern Quest Casino in Spokane -- I'm in town with my girlfriend visiting relatives. $10/$20 is the biggest game they spread at this casino and it runs a few times a week. More than half of the players at the table seem like they're regulars. As such, there seems to be a lot of overly "friendly" play, such as the following:

When in a hand heads up with a friend, roughly 3-4 of the players would routinely expose their cards and check it down.

Several players would occasionally muck face up when there were a few friends still left to act (they got verbal reprimands, but that's it).

One player gave another player at the table some of the chips he had in play.

These things seem pretty common and nobody else objected -- is there any reason that a player can object to these plays? it seemed a little shady, especially when a group of 3 close regulars sat next to each other and were constantly talking quietly about ??? throughout hands (both in which they were involved and weren't).

The one play that seemed closest to collusion was as follows:

2 regulars are in a hand with an obviously weak player who is easily manipulated by common tells. Regular #1 bets, Weak guy calls, Reg. #2 raises, Reg #1 3-bets, as weak player is getting ready to call Reg #2 makes a show of getting his 4-bet ready. Weak player folds, Reg #2 just calls, the two regulars then proceed to turn their hands over and check it down.

Assuming I play a decent and winning TAG game, can I expect this this behavior hurt me? If so, what's the best way to handle it in the future? This is the only live game nearby that's spread higher than 3/6, so I'd like to keep playing in it, but I got sort of a bad vibe while playing.

[RR]

I would not allow this stuff to go on. I don't see it hurting you, I just wouldn't allow it becasue it gives the appearence of collusion.

[punkass]

I see your example as a clear case of collusion. They may not have planned it beforehand saying "hey, we both raise until we're the only ones left", but I'd think the example would be classified as collusion.

[Proofrock]

So, if it looks like collusion, what's the best way for me to handle it as a non-regular player who plans to play in the game once or twice a month? Wait till I see something and then make my complaint to the dealer?

[DrVanNostrin]

[ QUOTE ]
2 regulars are in a hand with an obviously weak player who is easily manipulated by common tells. Regular #1 bets, Weak guy calls, Reg. #2 raises, Reg #1 3-bets, as weak player is getting ready to call Reg #2 makes a show of getting his 4-bet ready. Weak player folds, Reg #2 just calls, the two regulars then proceed to turn their hands over and check it down.

[/ QUOTE ]
What did they have? Was it worthy of 3 or 4 bets in on the flop based on the way the game was playing? Did action like this happen multiple times?

[Proofrock]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2 regulars are in a hand with an obviously weak player who is easily manipulated by common tells. Regular #1 bets, Weak guy calls, Reg. #2 raises, Reg #1 3-bets, as weak player is getting ready to call Reg #2 makes a show of getting his 4-bet ready. Weak player folds, Reg #2 just calls, the two regulars then proceed to turn their hands over and check it down.

[/ QUOTE ]
What did they have? Was it worthy of 3 or 4 bets in on the flop based on the way the game was playing? Did action like this happen multiple times?

[/ QUOTE ]

It was reasonable I think -- one of them had a draw, the other one had an overpair, but as soon as the bad player folded they flipped their hands over and checked it down before any more cards were dealt. No more bets went in either before or after the draw hit.

The only other specific example I remember now was sort of similar but also reasonable: One of the guys limps preflop, I raise with KK, other guy calls in SB, limper calls. Flop is 235 with 2 to a flush, SB donks, limper raises, I 3bet, SB caps, limper calls. Turn is an offsuit 6, SB leads, limper raises, I fold, they flip their hands and the SB's 53s checks it down with 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (straight draw + flush draw on the flop) on a blank river.

I would say more like soft-playing heads-up than obvious intentional angle-shooting collusion, but it's hard to say how much that influences the action prior to it being heads-up -- since the result of getting it heads-up is that the hand will be checked down, doesn't this necessarily influence the way the hand is played by both parties, even if there isn't an explicit agreement to collude before hand?

Oh, and it's not like they just decide for the future streets to go check/check as it happens -- it was always and unspoken "flip cards, check down" as soon as it got heads up.

[zepthiir]

I would either bring it up with the regulars that you dont think that style of play is fair on the rest of the table and see if you get a result.

Alternatively you could just bring it up with the floor that you have concerns about collusion and see what they do.

It may well be that they are not intending to angle shoot or collude and are just trying to keep it friendly between regulars but I still dont think it is acceptable. If you are heads up with any of them do they offer to just turn the cards up and check it down?

[punkass]

If there's that many regulars, I think you're SOL.