|
|
#1
04-19-2007, 01:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Collusion analysis...
Hi everyone... sorry for making this my first post, but I'm a long-time thread lurker and I could use some analysis help.
I'm (ideally) looking for other 'experts' to help analyze a hand I was involved in. I'd rather not taint the discussion by providing my own analysis, but I'd like some feedback from 3rd parties. I'm not asking for analysis on my own play (a little weak I'll admit) but rather how strong a case I can make that the play was suspicious and collusion was likely. I halted the hand analysis at the point where I made the accusation at a Brick & Mortar. Please note that despite the string raises, all 3 players were quite experienced: Button is at seat #4, blinds are $1-$2 PREFLOP Seat #10 (Wife): approx $700 in chips * Dealt 6c-7c Seat #2 (Dave): approx $185 in chips * Dealt Kh-Js Seat #4 (Husband): approx $800 in chips * Dealt Qs-Th There were one or two limpers Wife calls (was a string-raise to $5) - Wife put a $5 chip in and said 'raise' afterward. - The dealer ruled it to be a string raise. Dave raises to $5 Husband calls 2-3 other players call the $5 There is approximately $30 in the pot FLOP: Jh-9c-2d * Dave [Kh-Js] has top pair [57% to win] * Husband [Qs-Th] has straight draw + 1 overcard [37% to win] * Wife [6c-7c] has nothing [6% to win] Wife bets $30 Dave calls Husband calls Everyone else folds There is now approx. $120 in the pot TURN: (Jh-9c-2d) 3c * Dave [Kh-Js] has top pair [62% to win] * Husband [Qs-Th] has straight draw + 1 overcard [17% to win] * Wife [6c-7c] has flush draw [21% to win] Wife bets $25 (string bets $75) - Wife meant to make it $75. - She placed $25 in the pot, and then placed $50 in the pot. - The dealer ruled it to be a string raise. Dave calls Husband raises to $50 *** Dave halted the action and called for the supervisor Any thoughts? 
|
|
#3
04-19-2007, 01:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Collusion analysis...
I think husband and wife are too dumb to be colluding.
Wife cant make a bet without making a string bet and husband is making a min raise and building the pot for the guy in the lead. This is not collusion, its a couple fish trying to play poker.
|
|
#5
04-19-2007, 01:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Collusion analysis...
Some extra information:
At this B&M, this was a well-above average sized pot for a $1/$2 cash table with max buyin of $200... Husband and Wife were both chip leaders and aggressive.
|
|
#6
04-19-2007, 01:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Collusion analysis...
Yeah, H may have made the $50 bet to fix Wife's error.
However, considering the play, I don't think they sat down with the intent to play as a team, and if they did, unless their play was generally better than this, I'm not sure I'd care.
|
|
#10
04-19-2007, 02:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Collusion analysis...
[ QUOTE ]
It is obvious the K of clubs hit on river and you lost to both of them and got stacked. No way this is collusion. Do you even know what collusion is? Maybe go back to lurking. [/ QUOTE ] well thats not nice, but lemme just say this. you should def push/call all in when it gets back to u and expect two calls. 9+6, so ur like 68-70%, oh and the q so they have 18 outs, ur like 64 or so to win. they are making u 64% of 600 or so on average so u should say thank you. and based on the river action more may [censored] may come come to light. i mean chick isnt c/ring her husband ai is she? u dont have grounds to accuse them of anything yet, but provided this new [censored] u may. but thats what u pay me for, oh and ive talked to my accountant.... FORGET ABOUT THE EFFIN TOE FOR A SECOND! there are ways dude, believe me, u wanna toe i can get u one by 2:30- with nail polish.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
