Would it be collusion...

[Jack Daniels]

Having someone look at your cards in a tourney you're playing and telling you what to do when is unethical and a violation of the simple, basic poker rule of one player to a hand. Just because something is largely unenforceable by the poker sites, doesn't make it allowable or ethical, that's just non-sense. Sure there will always be the scumbag that cheats or tries to, and playing two or more people to a single hand is unethical and cheating. It's that simple.

If the coach is truly just sitting there and not assisting in any way at all, then it's no longer a one player to a hand rule issue. Being told after a hand what happened there and how it could have been done differently is not unethical and it is no different that recording the whole session and handing the video to someone else to review after the fact. There is no grey area in this.

 

[OzExorcist]

Isn't this how Jamie Gold, with the help of Mr. Chan, basically won the main event?

There's a bit of a difference. While Jamie Gold may have been coached before the event or during breaks, he didn't have anyone looking at his cards over his shoulder and telling him what to do while he was at the table.

The live equivalent of what's been proposed here would be someone getting up from the table, saying to their coach on the rail "I have X-X, what should I do?". Live, that'd be a clear violation of the rules and they player would be penalised.

Note that Lee Childs (at least... I'm pretty sure it was Lee Childs) went very close to violating this rule a couple of times during the Main Event final table this year, by getting up from the table and talking through the hand with is dad. He didn't actually tell him what cards he held, and his dad didn't give him any specific advice, but it still probably would have been grounds for one of the other players to object.