Definition of Collusion

I stumbled across a post where a player spoke of playing in games with his coach. (I will include quotes here, but the thread was Tournament Late Registration: )

OP said "I am learning a little at a time and have a super player as my coach. We talk/email back & forth quite often. We played in 3 of the same games within the last 5-7 days. I get nervous playing against him, but have done fairly well."

and had a response
"I would not consider doing that too often, it is a form of cheating called collusion and Full Tilt will kick you off and keep your money."

to which I said
"I understand what you are saying here, but would like to know what others think about this. I done see it as collusion based on OPs choice of wording. It doesent sound like they are chating while playing, tho I would guess there is chat going on after the game, so his coach can go through some hand analysis with him. He said he was nervous playing against his coach, so I suspect softplaying is not going on. OP may take a re raise from his coach as a danger signal, as he respects the coaches play, but since I believe they are playing the same games so his coach can spot some leaks, than I suspect his coach would play rough against him as against any other player. Hes not a good coach if he does not exploit weak play and point it out after the game. Since they obviously are familiar with each others playing style, they will make decisions accordingly, but is this not just poker, keeping tabs on how someone plays and then making your plays based on your knowledge? As long as no comunication or softplaying or any other breach of rules is happening, is this still a form of breach of ettiquet? I dont see it so yet."

Now I dont need links to Poker dictionary's or wikipedia, I know the definition. But I dont suspect any pre agreements or anything of the sort, nor do I think the coach would make special plays only for his student or vice versa, nor did I whiff any other practice which reeks of collusion. Maybe it is happening with them, I just dont get that feeling from what I read. I would actually like to play in some games with players I respect (if they will have me) so they could do HA with me later. It would be more enticing than just railing me, as they could win money as well, and still observe me play for later coaching and comments. What do you all think? Of course the danger of being ion a game with the same guy too much can raise suspicion, cant a guy/girl (or sean pilgrim - see his "I wish I was a girl" thread lol) play against his/her mentor as long as play is as aggressive or weak as it would be against any other player?

I'm the one who told him to not do it too often. I was just looking out for a fellow CCer. Read my post on the original thread you were talking about I dont want to double post it in here too.

If they play each other tough, then it is not cheating.

Here is your original quote, since this is a thread made kinda because we (you and I) derailed the other post, albeit with good intentions.
"I would not consider doing that too often, it is a form of cheating called collusion and Full Tilt will kick you off and keep your money."

"Fletchdad, I agree with you that obviously the OP is not trying to gain bankroll during this session, he is doing it for educational purposes. Personally I think this is morally right....but at the same time it IS collusion. I was just warning the OP so his BR does not get taken by Full Tilt.

From Full Tilt Policy

"We take cheating very seriously and will suspend the accounts of any player who is found to be sharing hole card information during a hand, “chip dumping” during ring games or tournaments, or engaging in any other form of cheating.""

What I dont know is if there was sharing of hole cards, chip dumping etc. ( I dont think so) I dont think the skype mentioned was during the game, so simply playing intentionally with a player who can give you advice after the game is over is not "cheating" if no collusion is going on. That is the reason for my thread here, as I looked up "collusion" and am not convinced that "collusion" per se was being practiced here. I appreciate your mentioning this however, cause it COULD be seen as suspicious if two players are on the same game too often. But I also cant imagine that playing intentionally with a better player who is trying to kick your ass and expecting you to keep him from doing so (as well as the other players) but explaining what he did and why he did it after the game as a form of coaching, as long as it is real poker and no noticeable "different play" is observed as collusion. You simply know this one player may attack you cause you are you, I see that - and do that c- often. I attack players who I think can be exploited, as a coach would do, I dont do it for coaching but for profit, but the play is the same...no???

I am not stating anything here as an absolute, I want to know how others see this.


I actually may be being real naive here, and this may be reason for account freezing. I also think it would be a case for saying "hey, its on the up and up" but accts are frozen and it is certainly not fun to get them free again, so maybe give me a heads up here if anyone knows more concrete info.

There was sharing of hole cards and plays, but since this was most likely done after the match, It it not the exact definition of "Collusion". As you said (and i agree) I'm not convinced this was full-out collusion. But isn't sharing hand histories a apart of colluding? Townsend and company got suspending for colluding hand histories of Ilisdur1. However this is a different situation bc obviously Townsend was not Isildur1's coach. As I said before I'm not in any way accusing the OP of colluding. But from the standpoint of a loss prevention employee at Full Tilt, it could very well easily been seen as colluding. There is no way that FTP could know that he and his coach are playing for educational purposes. For all they know they could be skype-ing or on the phone etc. I agree with you that the play on the table and the action will not change BC they have a coach-student relationship. All I was trying to do was help out that CC and warn him of the dangers of colluding so his whole bankroll doesnt go into FTP's pockets.

You both make good points, and I think that really illustrates the dangerous territory that the OP and his coach are occupying. He did say " I get nervous playing against him, but I do fairly well." Does this mean against his coach, or in overall tourney results? Is he being coached during the tournament while his coach is playing? I don't think the other players or Full Tilt would appreciate that. If they want to play against each other, they should play heads-up. Even if they have the best of intentions, there's waaaayyyy too much going on that could look suspicious to FT security.

There are a few ideas that are getting mixed up here I think.

1. There's nothing inherently wrong with playing against people you know, whether they're your friends, a coach, whatever. Doing this frequently does not constitute collusion.

2. Any form of softplay is against the rules. Period. If you can't play against your friend/coach/whatever as hard as you play anyone else on the table because that person is your friend/coach/whatever, that's softplay.

3. It's against the rules to share any hand information w other players during the play of the hand. It is NOT against the rules to discuss a hand after it's been played.

4. It's against the rules to have an agreement w another player to play differently against specific players on the table and/or against each other. This is collusion.

5. Sharing hand histories is NOT collusion. Datamining is against the rules, but is NOT collusion. Sharing hand histories for the purposes of session review/educational purposes is not datamining (if you shared databases, that would be different).

Just a small derail right quick if folks dont mind. Yo slydog. how the rest supposed to sound interested and smart if you keep chiming in? IMO it sucks to repeatedly say.. "ya what sly said" lol.

Obv jk.

I was looking at it like this:
-OP has coach who he expects to improve his game
-Coach knows OP's game
-OP plays against coach in tourney, is "nervous, but does fairly well."
I wasn't as concerned about OP's actions as much as I was about the coach's actions. Wouldn't it be to his advantage to show positive results and continue coaching? If he's doing it for free, then I'm way off, and like I said before, the intentions may be 100% innocent and educational, but something about the situation gets my spidey sense tingling.

Obviously OP from the other thread knows that his coach knows his game. It's the same as anyone playing regularly with anyone else. You get to know how they play. As long as has been stated above that they are not discussing hands during play, "team-playing" against other players, soft-playing, or chip-dumping, and just playing their game, it's not collusion, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Simple: If there is no intent to profit, it's not cheating. A coach does not profit from the outcome of a coached hand. "Improving your game" is not cheating.

Collusion involves 2 or more people sharing profits from illegal play.

EDIT: The closest I can think of unintentional cheating (collusion) is when someone stakes a player, then coaches them while they play to improve their chances of winning since they are sharing the profits.

A good coach would exploit every possible leak in his student's game in order to demonstrate the leaks.

A coach who didn't do this isn't really coaching.

You might be nervous playing against your coach for at least two reasons:

1. They're better than you.
2. You'd be afraid of doing something stupid in front of your coach.

Zang - I really kicked the hornet's nest here! All I'm saying is that the coach DOES profit if his student does well, believes it's because of the training he's receiving, and continues to pay for coaching. If they play against each other in a tournament the coach could help this line of thinking along a little bit by taking it easy on his student, which would be softplay, which would be against the rules. Even if it wasn't that premeditated, maybe something more along the lines of finding himself at the same table with him in a MTT and thinking "Well, this guy's my student and he's only been playing for six months, I could bluff the living crap out of him and relentlessly steal his blinds, but ah well, I'll take it easy on him so he gets some tourney experience," is still not good and less farfetched.

Exactly. If you've been playing online poker for 6 months, as OP states, you should be getting CRUSHED by your coach unless you're a luckbox or the next durrrr.

My original intent was not to argue about the definition of collusion. Most of us understand what constitutes cheating for profit. However, to a Full Tilt Moderator, the actions that the OP and coach did can be called into question. This is why I was simply trying to warn the OP about the possible dangers of him playing with his coach. The last thing I want is for the OP to lose his bankroll bc he was playing with his coach (And the first thing Full Tilt wants is his bankroll (Free profit)). There have been many instances in which friends play with friends etc. They can say that they are not playing any differently towards each other, but I believe it is still a subtle act of collusion. I also agree with scooby doo (relpraggy), that the fact is that the coach is making money either way somewhat unfairly (By bluffing his student to win pots, or by laying down to his students bet so he comes back for another coaching session). So is it "Collusion"? No, not by definiton from Full Tilt's policy. However, there are unfair advantages in this situation, and Full Tilt won't hesitate to take someones bankroll for free. I'm really not trying to start any shit, my original point was to warn Boston (The OP) of what could happen.

Am sure the pros do it, if not a team of players up at the higher limits do it... in a more covert way, in order to keep banking and making a living of it...

OMFG, Online Poker is rigged.

Chatting with anyone outside of the table chat about Poker while also playing in a poker tournament is unethical. Many of you are so self-centered that you figure if you do something, it must be okay. Wrong! All things moral and ethical are inconvenient 100% of the time - it's never about you. It is always about what's in the best interest of others. Every single time. That's the whole point actually. Many things are accepted in the rules but are still unethical. The excuse that others do it is childish, at the very least. You cannot talk to a coach while you are in a tourney.

Im not self-centered. I merely realize the fact that it is ALWAYS about me......

Gonna throw my 2 cents in - agree with Tammy, slycb and Mrsticker's posts above.

There was no reason to think they were colluding and there is nothing wrong with playing on the same table as your coach as long as he is not coaching during that time.

There is no coach I have ever had or known (and I have loads of friends who are poker coaches) who would softplay one of their students to let them win and make themselves look like a good coach lol.

My coach would kick my ass on the table lol.

Sooooo - has your coach ever offered to play in the same tournament as you?

No - why would he? The guy above never said his coach offered to either - the way he said it I would assume it was a random encounter which could easily happen. There is always about a 99% chance that a student plays the same games their coach plays - though a lot of time the coach may play higher stakes.

Both my coach and I play sng's at FT - it is not impossible to imagine we could end up on the same table once in a while. (I hope we don't though cause as I said he would kick my ass lol).

We botrh play mtt's sometimes too - so it is probably even more possible we could end up in the same mtt.

"We talk/email back & forth quite often. We played in 3 of the same games within the last 5-7 days," is what he said.
Look, Dakota, slycb, Fletch, - you have all been cool to me, and I think I'm starting to push this a bit too far. I don't have a good feeling about what's going on with the OP and his coach and I agree with xxSmuggla about giving him a heads up, but at the same time, I don't really know anything about him or his situation so I'm just going to assume he researched his coach well before he gave him any money, is satisfied with his coaching arrangements and everything is on the up-and-up. I run in to the same people at the tables all the time, no reason it couldn't happen to those guys, and as long as they're not intentionally teaming up to put other players at a disadvantage then they're not doing anything wrong.

If the coach offers to play in the same tourney, then there is nothing random about it.

U heard about this. Coluusion

“49 player Chinese cheating scandal on PokerStars Double or Nothing SNGs
A team of at least 49 Chinese players on PokerStars have been caught colluding in Double or Nothing SNGs. As a result of this organised cheating ring, an estimated total of around $750,000 has been stolen from innocent players!”

http://daleroxxu.blogspot.com/2010/0...candal-on.html

Yes, there's a thread here on that topic - I hope you aren't suggesting our member and his coach are engaged in anything of this scale?

No.
But those 49 chinesse gave the definition of collusion and how much money can be stolen by not playing fair