Might swirtch to wpex; coupla questions?

[smokey]

Looks like a pretty good deal. I'm tired of the "teamwork" that you run into on some of the sites; you'll be playing along, and you notice that some guy knows that the case king is not in play, e.g. how's wpex in that regard?

[DING-DONG YO]

Terrible. And I'm serious.

[RikaKazak]

LOL

how's the tinfoil hat treating ya?

[Brainwalter]

[ QUOTE ]
Looks like a pretty good deal. I'm tired of the "teamwork" that you run into on some of the sites; you'll be playing along, and you notice that some guy knows that the case king is not in play, e.g.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wtf are you talking about?

[Ali shmali]

If i wanted to collude I would probably try it out at wpex first. i wouldn't lose rake when in pots with any partners, the player base is small so playing regularly with the same people would not look suspicious, they take no rake so they probably spend little money on security, and any suspicious players have no means of looking over past hand histories to confirm any suspicions.

i do think you are paranoid though. after 300k hands, I've probably ran into suspicious behaviour a few times and only once did I feel it was enough to warrant an email. you are probably just playing bad poker.

[smokey]

Well, at the risk of sounding... weird, I've played a helluva lot more hands than that over the last forty years, and I play just fine. Years ago if you played for higher stakes, you played in underground games or in Nevada, and believe me, collusion was a fact of life. Everyone knew it, kept their eyes open, and it would actually get to be funny -- you'd go to some game in Cowpie Oregon and the table would be jiggling with all the signals back and forth. Ask anyone from those days.

Yes it happens on-line; no big deal but it's annoying.

[TylerD]

[ QUOTE ]
If i wanted to collude I would probably try it out at wpex first. i wouldn't lose rake when in pots with any partners, the player base is small so playing regularly with the same people would not look suspicious, they take no rake so they probably spend little money on security, and any suspicious players have no means of looking over past hand histories to confirm any suspicions.



[/ QUOTE ]

You've persuaded me, I'll do it.

[primetime32]

[ QUOTE ]
If i wanted to collude I would probably try it out at wpex first. i wouldn't lose rake when in pots with any partners, the player base is small so playing regularly with the same people would not look suspicious, they take no rake so they probably spend little money on security, and any suspicious players have no means of looking over past hand histories to confirm any suspicions.


[/ QUOTE ]

unfortunately these are good points. I still play at WPEX occasionally, but if someone was inclide to collude WPEX wouldn't be a bad place to try it out.

[five4suited]

[ QUOTE ]
Looks like a pretty good deal. I'm tired of the "teamwork" that you run into on some of the sites; you'll be playing along, and you notice that some guy knows that the case king is not in play, e.g. how's wpex in that regard?

[/ QUOTE ]

many thanks for the PSA, OP (and others). [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

[vector2]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, at the risk of sounding... weird, I've played a helluva lot more hands than that over the last forty years, and I play just fine. Years ago if you played for higher stakes, you played in underground games or in Nevada, and believe me, collusion was a fact of life. Everyone knew it, kept their eyes open, and it would actually get to be funny -- you'd go to some game in Cowpie Oregon and the table would be jiggling with all the signals back and forth. Ask anyone from those days.

Yes it happens on-line; no big deal but it's annoying.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to detract from your point, but most multi-tablers play more hands online in a few years than most regular live players play in a lifetime.