Collusion ruling

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't consider enforcing the rules to be an angle.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is typically what most angles consist of.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not think of most angles being asking for enforcement of the rules. When I think of angles, I think of betting or checking out of turn, picking up your chips pretending to bet then checking, waiting a long time to bet and looking to your left, hiding your cards or chips, etc. Offhand I can't think of one angle that involves enforcing of the rules, certainly none that I have ever personally encountered.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, the vast majority of angles come from SELECTIVELY applying rules in ways that go against the spirit or the best interests of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess we play in different kinds of games then, because I have never seen this kind of thing happen.

I don't play tournaments at all so I'm not aware of what normally goes on in them, but I think the OP was severly wronged and that it is not an angle for him to want the violator to be punished. Killing the violator's hand would be a much lighter punishment than would be my preference. Ideally, he should be ejected from the tournament, regardless of whether he knew that was the rule or not. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point is, he was all-in and already had a call before the original angle happened. If ANYTHING occurs, at the pleading of the OP, to somehow instantly win this hand without a showdown, that is an angle and not in the spirit or best interest of the game. He didn't go all-in hoping they'd collude so he could angle, as he said, but he did see an opportunity where he hoped he could triple up with no risk (which is laughably against the spirit of the game) and tried to take advantage. Thats an angle.

The main problem is that there isn't a GOOD solution inbetween these two outcomes. Ruling the hands dead and giving OP the pot is absurd, and definitely cannot happen. Unfortunately, a verbal warning or even a ten minute penalty to the colluders doesn't really repair the damage either. This causes some of you to want some greater justice, and apparently is blinding you to the fact that trying to get their hands killed would be a huge angle and almost as big of an injustice as simply doing nothing.

[chillrob]

FWIW, I definately don't think the other player(s) at the table should have their hand killed or suffer any other penalty. Just the one who made the suggestion.

You are right, no penalty can really repair the damage perfectly - the reason I want to severely penalize the suggested colluder is mostly for deterrent value.

[QuadsOverQuads]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually I am of the opinion that this offense should be immediate disqualification.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree 100%.


q/q

[whymelord]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't consider enforcing the rules to be an angle.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is typically what most angles consist of.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not think of most angles being asking for enforcement of the rules. When I think of angles, I think of betting or checking out of turn, picking up your chips pretending to bet then checking, waiting a long time to bet and looking to your left, hiding your cards or chips, etc. Offhand I can't think of one angle that involves enforcing of the rules, certainly none that I have ever personally encountered.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, the vast majority of angles come from SELECTIVELY applying rules in ways that go against the spirit or the best interests of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess we play in different kinds of games then, because I have never seen this kind of thing happen.

I don't play tournaments at all so I'm not aware of what normally goes on in them, but I think the OP was severly wronged and that it is not an angle for him to want the violator to be punished. Killing the violator's hand would be a much lighter punishment than would be my preference. Ideally, he should be ejected from the tournament, regardless of whether he knew that was the rule or not. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point is, he was all-in and already had a call before the original angle happened. If ANYTHING occurs, at the pleading of the OP, to somehow instantly win this hand without a showdown, that is an angle and not in the spirit or best interest of the game. He didn't go all-in hoping they'd collude so he could angle, as he said, but he did see an opportunity where he hoped he could triple up with no risk (which is laughably against the spirit of the game) and tried to take advantage. Thats an angle.

The main problem is that there isn't a GOOD solution inbetween these two outcomes. Ruling the hands dead and giving OP the pot is absurd, and definitely cannot happen. Unfortunately, a verbal warning or even a ten minute penalty to the colluders doesn't really repair the damage either. This causes some of you to want some greater justice, and apparently is blinding you to the fact that trying to get their hands killed would be a huge angle and almost as big of an injustice as simply doing nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm OP and this did not acutally happen to (not yet) but I did witness it and tought, that would really pi#$# me off it I was the all-in. So, just trying to know in advance if I can seek anykind of relief for it.

The short stack was called, on the flop bet a player started to bet but before he commited the other player suggested the call-down. The short stack did not complain, I mentioned somthing about this was wrong and I think I detected that the person who suggested it knew absolutely what he was doing was wrong, but nothing happend and they all checked it down. Short stacked was knocked out about 5 or 6 places from the money. Turned out the winner was the guy who started to bet, so in this case it didn't make a difference, but it was still wrong.

[whymelord]

While I will not be doing it, the consensus here seems to be that it's a freebee cheat. Anyone can get away with suggesting a call down at least once per tournament without any serious consequences

[psandman]

[ QUOTE ]
Short stacked was knocked out about 5 or 6 places from the money. Turned out the winner was the guy who started to bet, so in this case it didn't make a difference, but it was still wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

From the info you gave us we can't know that it didn't make a difference. What if the "check it down player would have raised or bet on the turn, maybe the winning player would have folded."

You should have asked for a floor here. This is the sort of selective enforcement that some would say constitutes angle shooting.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
While I will not be doing it, the consensus here seems to be that it's a freebee cheat. Anyone can get away with suggesting a call down at least once per tournament without any serious consequences

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I kind of think thats the case, unfortunately, but only because all of the alternatives are worse than this. In a perfect world the floor would remember this guy, and if he tries to do it again next week he would be immediately penalized and perhaps no longer welcome to play there, but even that almost certainly wouldn't happen.