Reported 2 players @ Full Tilt for collusion

[Wonka22]

One thing that SHOULD happen is that this story goes into a suspicious persons file and should someone else report it, then at least there is this initial report, I'd rather you hear nothing, and he hears nothing, and then a week later after 3 or 4 people report him, you somehow find out this guy has his acct. frozen.

 

[DawgBones]

I have played and lost to majestic...makes me wonder ty for the heads up

 

[Brann6]

Don't know about FT but Stars has refunded me money two different times when I reported suspected collusion. Once in a ring game and once in a SNG.

 

[Poker Orifice]

Um... it's a buck. How much would it cost them to take the time to do an 'investigation'?? Keeping the shortstack alive did obviously have it's advantages. too bad you didn't set a trap for the dick, and double up thru him.

 

[JAMILE1]

I don't know if it's collusion but it definitely is not good etiquette. Maybe if you sat out to, the shortstack woulda busted before you? Hope you get a response to your email, would like to see what FT says.

 

[azbo]

It's not even in question that this is collusion. When he said "now you have some money" he admitted he was aiding another player to advance in the standings.

That said, you could have easily defeated this by limping on the sitout's blinds. If he raises then the short stack will fold and they can't gain any chips. It costs you chips but guarantees the person sitting out is gone. You could complain that being forced to defend like this is screwing you (because it sort of is) but you were already trying to limp up to second instead of picking a good spot to try and double up and play for first. One double from 2300 and you're more than half his stack and he has to get a lot more cautious lest you trap him.

If you're willing to limp just to move up in the money in any tourney then you're really not playing to win. I certainly understand the financial benefit of doing this but you're no longer playing the game at this point and you're no longer a wolf just a sheep.

 

[eNTy]

but you were already trying to limp up to second instead of picking a good spot to try and double up and play for first. One double from 2300 and you're more than half his stack and he has to get a lot more cautious lest you trap him.

If you're willing to limp just to move up in the money in any tourney then you're really not playing to win. I certainly understand the financial benefit of doing this but you're no longer playing the game at this point and you're no longer a wolf just a sheep.

I wasn't really limping a lot, maybe once or twice, but that was just to show how he reacted to it. And of course I was playing to win but with the cards I was getting and the fact that normally when a sit out has ~400 left with blinds 240/120 or something it shouldn't take long for him to bust. I didn't figure out till after the fold to his all in blind that something fishy was going on..

 

[buckster436]

did you get the reply from FT yet??? im interested as to what they say, collusion or not, im glad you reported it, maybe FT will watch them guys in the future,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, buck

 

[tke001]

One major problem is proving collusion. Some of that could have been just circumstance or tactical in re-raising you. You really shouldn't have allowed yourself to be blinded away like that without making a stand before you got down to 500 chips.

 

[eNTy]

did you get the reply from FT yet??? im interested as to what they say, collusion or not, im glad you reported it, maybe FT will watch them guys in the future,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, buck

Nope, and I have a feeling it's gonna take a long time before I get one.
If I ever get one at all.

 

[confuzd67]

Why in a nine player sit N go would you sitout? I am thinking maybe two accounts.

 

[clvjmv]

No one knows what the big stack had when he folded at that point so it is really difficult to say. Would you call with 7 2 -6 2 etc even if it was only a small amount more? I know that i would certainly fold because i would not want to chips up a short stack that isint actively playing. So without knowing his hand at that particular point wich seems to be a main point of focus i dont think anyone can definitely say one way or the other.

 

[PokerDave]

No one knows what the big stack had when he folded at that point so it is really difficult to say. Would you call with 7 2 -6 2 etc even if it was only a small amount more? I know that i would certainly fold because i would not want to chips up a short stack that isint actively playing. So without knowing his hand at that particular point wich seems to be a main point of focus i dont think anyone can definitely say one way or the other.

Thats just gibberish. It's such a small amount, you have to call with any hand because you're getting the right price. and even if you do lose to the short stack/sitout, it doesn't matter he still won't play a single hand, and he'll eventually get blinded off. The problem is he didn't call, and he was saying things in chat that could be interpreted as colluding, or could just be interpreted as securing 1st place by eliminating the only dangerous player left.

 

[eNTy]

No one knows what the big stack had when he folded at that point so it is really difficult to say. Would you call with 7 2 -6 2 etc even if it was only a small amount more? I know that i would certainly fold because i would not want to chips up a short stack that isint actively playing. So without knowing his hand at that particular point wich seems to be a main point of focus i dont think anyone can definitely say one way or the other.

Also I have rarely if ever seen him raise the other persons blinds.
He seemed quite intent on chipping him up.

And if you just need to complete your blind in order to bust some one out why wouldn't you ? I mean you're practically doubling him up just folding your sb anyway..

 

[jr19]

ths definantly looks like collusion

 

[ugotkicked]

I'm thinkin must have been some really bad card play in the final 3,or 2
whatever.

 

[jdeliverer]

I understand that this issue could be viewed both as collusion and as a legitimate tactic: but I am very confused as to why you let it happen. If he was being blinded out, why didn't you ever simply do a minraise from the button? Either the big stack would fold and the sitter would go heads up against you, or he would raise you big and the sitter would go heads up against him. Then he's got a 50% chance to stay in each time you do this (one random hand vs another random hand) or less if you have a good hand.

I don't really get why you let this happen, but an annoying tactic nonetheless.

 

[wuzzle]

It was obviously collusion, and I'm sure you your going to get a standard response about the polices and will investigate...blah, blah , blah, but you'll never know the real outcome because it's also policy not to devulge their actions concerning the other party due to privacy concerns. And because you did place in the money, there will be likely no further communication from FT concerning the matter other than their initial canned response.
The most that may happen to him is a email from FT about the investigation and an explanation about FT policies concerning collusion. After the investigation they may suspend his account a few days if FT believes this was a blatant act of collusion, but I doubt that that will happen. I think he'll get a warning unless this is a reoccurring practice.
I've had similiar situations happen and after filing a complaint, nothing much really happened and was never informed of the final outcome. I followed up and asked about the outcame and was told they couldn't devulge the final disposition concerning the other party because of privacy concerns. But after I investigated the process and disposition, I learned that it also "policy" to take a very passive approach to these 1st offense situations, unless it is a large scale operation.

 

[hockeyaddict]

I think its just a big misunderstanding or something like that but you should of been reraising when the other guy was reraising. By folding to every reraised you showed weakness. That and that was a horrible bad beat 37o vrs kq.

 

[witl69]

I have to say that fi I had been in your shoes and was waiting On a premium hand to make my final stand so to speak I would of waited to picked up a pocket pair or at least an ace with a big over card ... but I guess as they say hindsight is 20/20

 

[eNTy]

I understand that this issue could be viewed both as collusion and as a legitimate tactic: but I am very confused as to why you let it happen. If he was being blinded out, why didn't you ever simply do a minraise from the button? Either the big stack would fold and the sitter would go heads up against you, or he would raise you big and the sitter would go heads up against him. Then he's got a 50% chance to stay in each time you do this (one random hand vs another random hand) or less if you have a good hand.

I don't really get why you let this happen, but an annoying tactic nonetheless.

Tbh I hadn't really thought of that. But then again if he did reraise almost every time, which I believe he would have, I would've still been blinded down a lot.
And at a double rate if I'm min raising all the time.
Plus Inscore77 was whispering to fold everything until 2nd place was cashed .

And I will take KQ vs 37 any day, even it's not an ace or pair. I had 800 chips left at that point ..

 

[ammo12180]

whether collusion or not why didn't you do an all in on a semi decent hand during the sit outs all in? then worst case scenario is you lose but get second place because the sit out was forced all in before you were.

 

[Pothole]

whether collusion or not why didn't you do an all in on a semi decent hand during the sit outs all in? then worst case scenario is you lose but get second place because the sit out was forced all in before you were.

Very good point, though always easy with hindsight.

 

[dexter smith]

thank you

notthat this is directly related to the post, I just wanted to thank this post, because i did not know what collusion meant, and now i do, so thank you. alot of things make more sense now, things that i have read in other posts.

 

[antizzle23]

i like what king curtis said
i would consider that collusion
that aint right and i hope something happens to them