Have your ever committed collusion?

[ruffcut68]

NO.... and thanks for the definitition.
Why collude when it is not required?

 

[OneMoreBust]

Sounds like a massive rationalization to me. It may not have been outright collusion, but you were definitely soft playing him because it was dad, on the last of his bankroll.

Was there an agreement he would do this, and his dad would visa versa?

Im allowed to fold a hand to someone to let them take the pot without it being secretive (not that I would even for my own dad, im a shark (edit see below for the one exception I could think of )

 

[OneMoreBust]

In my home poker games we are all friends. One guy always had HORRIBLE luck. This was a friendly game where buyin was $5, and only a few reloads are ever needed each night (usually by this unlucky guy)

He is a good player, but would keep running into trips with two pair, full hous vs flush, etc..

So he went all in once, and I had the nuts, I folded. It was just money between him and I, he could have re-bought for like $20 if he wanted to, so me giving him the $9 pot didnt hurt anyone else. (edit I have a chart somewhere, I was up like 150 on our games, while everyone else was below or just above even)

I dont consider that collusion because we never had a secret agreement and it definitely wasnt for an illegal purpose... as far as being deceitful... didnt seem that bad


Edit: Oh and if you tell the third person in on an all in to check it down, that is not very secret.... if you talked with him before the game and said, anytime someone is all in, check it down, then that would be collusion in my opinion.
As far as I've noticed, unless there is a lot of money in a side pot, or someone hits the nuts, most people check down, though Ive knocked two people out at once before when the side pot had enough to warrant some action and some guy tried to steal it instead of checking down.

 

[Jack Daniels]

Was there an agreement he would do this, and his dad would visa versa?

Im allowed to fold a hand to someone to let them take the pot without it being secretive (not that I would even for my own dad, im a shark (edit see below for the one exception I could think of )

Soft playing a friend for relative is unethical at a minimum. Pregame agreement is irrelevant.

For example...say I'm in a tourney with three people left, my friend is all in, I have him covered, and I have the absolute nuts. If I call his all in I will bust him. But he's my friend and I don't know this other guy. I'd rather give my friend a fighting chance and I fold. That is unethical. It doesn't matter if we talked before hand or not. Conspiracy does not always require that the right hand know what the left hand is doing. By making that play, I have affected that third player (whether he knows it or not) by taking away a guaranteed top two finish when I soft played the nuts and folded for my friend. This is why you always hear the statement that there are no friends at the poker table. This situation could also be construed as chip dumping if someone were to request seeing both hands. That could get you tossed without any profit if you were in the money. So is it really worth it? Play your game the same way you would against any opponent. It's that simple.

In my home poker games we are all friends. One guy always had HORRIBLE luck. This was a friendly game where buyin was $5, and only a few reloads are ever needed each night (usually by this unlucky guy) - See above. I understand your point here, but no one I play poker with benefits at the table just because we are friends.

He is a good player, but would keep running into trips with two pair, full hous vs flush, etc..

So he went all in once, and I had the nuts, I folded. It was just money between him and I, he could have re-bought for like $20 if he wanted to, so me giving him the $9 pot didnt hurt anyone else. (edit I have a chart somewhere, I was up like 150 on our games, while everyone else was below or just above even)

I dont consider that collusion because we never had a secret agreement and it definitely wasnt for an illegal purpose... as far as being deceitful... didnt seem that bad

Edit: Oh and if you tell the third person in on an all in to check it down, that is not very secret.... if you talked with him before the game and said, anytime someone is all in, check it down, then that would be collusion in my opinion. - it doesn't need to be before the game and it doesn't need to be secretive. Checking it down in this situation is an unwritten rule. However saying it out loud at the table (especially if the other person acknowledges it) is in fact collusion. You are conspiring with another player to not bet at each other in the hopes of increasing your chance of eliminating another player.

As far as I've noticed, unless there is a lot of money in a side pot, or someone hits the nuts, most people check down, yeah, this is typically the case. But that is the distinction too. I realize it is a very fine line, but if the side pot is dry and no one is talking about it, then it isn't collusion. It really is one of those unwritten rules. Give it a try in a live game and see what happens (although I'd suggest a casino game and not a private home game)...

 

[OneMoreBust]

Soft playing a friend for relative is unethical at a minimum. Pregame agreement is irrelevant.

For example...say I'm in a tourney with three people left, my friend is all in, I have him covered, and I have the absolute nuts. If I call his all in I will bust him. But he's my friend and I don't know this other guy. I'd rather give my friend a fighting chance and I fold. That is unethical. It doesn't matter if we talked before hand or not. Conspiracy does not always require that the right hand know what the left hand is doing. By making that play, I have affected that third player (whether he knows it or not) by taking away a guaranteed top two finish when I soft played the nuts and folded for my friend. This is why you always hear the statement that there are no friends at the poker table. This situation could also be construed as chip dumping if someone were to request seeing both hands. That could get you tossed without any profit if you were in the money. So is it really worth it? Play your game the same way you would against any opponent. It's that simple.

I guess my problem is, I don't see why it isn't my right to softplay who I want to. To fold what hands I want to, and to bet what hands I want to IF and only if we are talking about cash games... It is my money Im handing over.

Collusion in my mind implies working with/together. If the second party is none the wiser, I dont see how that could be considered collusion.If there is no agreement, no reciprocation, and no give and take going on, it is just one person with their own agenda...

Maybe in a tournament this person isnt even my friend, but I want to keep them in because they are the easier player and Im hoping they will get lucky against the other guy and I will have an easy heads up.

I just find there to be too many "what if" scenarios when trying to judge someones fold to say that soft playing/playing a hand in any other way than to win it is collusion.

Gotta look at the big picture, not just the one hand.

 

[talkpkr2me]

A long ago forum challenge was set up to play "team" v's "team".....Now ahead of time,my team set up some ground rules to help us from eliminating each other too soon..Now this didn't apply when we were heads up or at final table...Anyway,for instance,say myself,another team member and a member from a "rival" forum were in a hand together...To keep from taking your team member out while trying to take the pot from an opposing player we had agreed that if a raise was made the other person would re-raise or another pre-arranged "sign",signifying that I should fold because he definately had the hand etc etc....Now is that considered collusion??...Premeditation?..If so,I guess I too am guilty.