Should I report this guy to Full Tilt Poker?

The more I think about this, the madder I get.
This guy Dialex was talking the whole game. Anouncing his All-Ins before his turn, egging people to fold or call, etc.
He got really lucky on a couple of hands with amazing river suckouts, but that's not the point. These pocket 5's were the best hand I saw the entire game and I was getting blinded out. I had to make my move, and was hoping for a loose call from Dialex. Unfortunately I got action from a real hand as well. I was dead on the flop and Baseball was probably going to check or raise nomatter what Dialex said.
Don't get me wrong, I was happy for the raise and Dialexes comments were completely self serving; but he had no way of knowing eather of our hands. Baseball could have had AQ for all he or I knew. If that had been the case and Baseball had listend to him and just checked and I got drawn out on by Dialex, I would have been pissed.

Full Tilt Poker Game #1082784995: $5 + $0.50 Sit & Go (7353720) Table 1 - 40/80 - No Limit Hold'em - 10:32:35 ET - 2006/10/09
Seat 1: Four Dogs (630)
Seat 3: divot23 (2 480)
Seat 5: Art245 (1 545)
Seat 6: Dialex (4 455)
Seat 7: baseball007 (3 090)
Seat 8: greenblood (1 300)
Art245 posts the small blind of 40
Dialex posts the big blind of 80
The button is in seat #3

Holecards:
Dealt to Four Dogs [ ]
baseball007 calls 80
greenblood folds
Four Dogs raises to 630, and is all in
divot23 folds
Art245 folds
greenblood: NICE CALL
Dialex calls 550
baseball007 calls 550

Flop:
[ ]
Dialex checks
Dialex: why call?
Dialex: 3 way
baseball007 has 15 seconds left to act
Dialex : he's gonna triple up
baseball007: i got this 1
divot23: lol
baseball007 bets 1,930
Dialex folds
baseball007 shows [ ]
Four Dogs shows [ ]
Uncalled bet of 1,930 returned to baseball007

Turn:
[ ] [ ]

River:
[ ] [ ]
baseball007 shows a full house, Kings full of Tens
Four Dogs shows a full house, Kings full of Fives
baseball007 wins the pot (1,930) with a full house, Kings full of Tens
Four Dogs stands up

SUMMARY:
Total pot 1,930 | Rake 0
Board:
[ ]
Seat 1: Four Dogs showed [ ] and lost with a full house Kings full of Fives
Seat 3: divot23 (button) didn't bet (folded)
Seat 5: Art245 (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 6: Dialex (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 7: baseball007 showed [ ] and won (1 930) with a full house Kings full of Tens
Seat 8: greenblood didn't bet (folded)

Yes, report the SOB,, hes not supposed to do that>>>>>>>>>buck

I wouldn't bother - you were all in, and the outcome wasn't changed by the chat - it's not like he was telling opponent to check you down. Unless he's actually saying what cards he has preflop, he's not doing anything wrong apart from being an arse.

If he was announcing his intentions out of turn, that`s a clear rule infringement and should be reported.

Having said that, there doesn`t seem to be anything irregular in the bit you`ve actually quoted.

Rob, he was telling the other player to check it down. That is a violation.

I have to agree with reporting him.

I normally brush off someone who says something like 'check it down to eliminate this guy' because they may not realize the fact that it's both a violation of collusion rules aswell as just plain bad etiquette, but this guy sounds like an ass.

If he was acting the way you said he was, I say report him.

Where? Did you miss out that line?

Dialex checks
Dialex: why call?
Dialex: 3 way
baseball007 has 15 seconds left to act
Dialex : he's gonna triple up
baseball007: i got this 1
divot23: lol
baseball007 bets 1,930
Dialex folds

He didn't use the words "check it down", but I'ts pretty clear to me what he's saying. And no, in this case it didn't matter whether he checked or called, but I sure as hell didn't know that at the time and neither did he.

Why did you call, now you've given him a chance to triple up? That's how i interpret it, so just on that i wouldn't report it in case Full Tilt agree. I'd let it go, he's probably a 400lb, 35 year old virgin that lives with his mom.

No Rob, this dialogue preceeded the bet. It's not "why did you call?" but rather, "why are you thinking about calling?".
Either way, I'm not reporting the guy. I'm hunting for him. This chump was actually giving away a ton of information with all his BS. Early in the game he announced from the BB that he was going all-in and sure enough, he did and won with pocket jacks.

I don't think I'd bother, but I can understand why you're upset. I think goading people and being annoying is basically just jerky behaviour, but trying to influence the play of others at the table -- let alone revealing your hole cards -- is at least quasi-collusion.

From everything I've read, I think his behavior is questionable at best (or like Beriac said, quasi-collusion).

In the long run, nothing I see was an out and out ethical violation. Although irritating/annoying. But I can sit at a table, live or online, and make statements about whether I'm thinking about going all in. I can even fake it to an extent. In live play, I can grab my chips out immediately when I see you reaching for yours. If you see me you may second guess your bet if you think I'm calling no matter what. But that isn't unethical.

Just like if you're contemplating a call and I tell you to lay it down. You don't know if I'm telling you the truth. I may be trying to entice the call by showing strength and security in my hand. You think I'm weak and call and it turns out I was strong. That isn't unethical. In a three way, it is the same. Especially if the sidepot is dry, if my hand is medium strong and i can get the other one who's not all in to lay his down, then I have a better shot of winning the pot against the all in player.

It isn't worth reporting to me. It wasn't blatant enough for them to act on.

Announcing an All-in before your turn is probably a violation. It is not the same thing as a blind all-in where your heads-up and you announce your intentions before you've seen your cards. In that case, you become officially obligated to follow through with your bet reguardless of the cards you're dealt. However, as obnoxious as that table talk was, it was mostly counterproductive for him and provided the rest of the table with some fairly accurate information.

Instructing another player at the table on how they should play a hand is clearly a violation. This was not some trash talking designed to confuse or intimidate another player. This was attempted collusion, and there's no doubt in my mind that Full Tilt Poker support would see it that way too.

Now, we're not talking WSOP final table here. This was a $5.50 S & G and you can expect this sort of behavior at these limits. If this was for serious money or, if his comments had negatively altered, for me, the outcome of the hand I'd report it in a second.

There was a guy railing at a tourney I was playing in last night, who hadn't even been playing, but he kept making comments like "straddle... desperation bet" when a short stack went all-in under the gun. Annoying as hell. I think observer chat is a good thing overall and can be entertaining, but maybe people just don't realise that commenting on a hand in play (kibitzing) is against the rules on most sites. Probably if you explain that to them they'll refrain.

Had a guy last night on the final table of a $20 MTT. Top six and he got busted as the guy rivered his flush. Good news for all us other 5, but the abuse he gave to this guy was incredible for a full half hour.

It got so bad that the guy it was directed at went onto the stats tab to get away from it.

The railer was really intimidating this guy, to the extent that his big stack dwindled and he went out in 4th place.

We warned the player about being reported (I say we, but it was actually one of the others) but he was not interested.

It is quite entertaining in a perverted way as you said Bombjack just a little unfortunate sometimes.

The railers at the CC Main Event were funny so I have experienced sides in 2 days.

Did I miss something in the OP? I don't see anywhere that anyone announced all in. But seriously, discussing intentions is only debatable when put in its full context, not situational snipits.

This is just your interpretation that it was attempted collusion. I seriously doubt Full Tilt Poker would agree with you. He did not tell the other guy to lay his hand down. He did not divulge his hand. And he did not make a bet declaration in chat prior to his turn, based on OP. So again, if I had a medium strength hand, as before, same point still holds. You can't look at what happened in the outcome of the hand and say that since he flopped a full house then his chat was telling the guy to lay his hand down and it was collusion. Talk about results oriented.

Finally, the limits are irrelevant. You'll see questionable play at any level. You'll see gray area play and stretching of the poker ethical boundries at every level. But stretches and bends are not breaks and only breaks are violations. Everything else is either an angle or an edge to be leveraged. That might not sound pretty, not everyone plays that way, and not everyone condones it. But that doesn't simply make it wrong because some don't like it.