Collusion

[TomDwan44]

I was in a tournament a few years ago. It was 3 handed, and I was ahead by so much, around 5-6 times 2nd in chips. The guy 3rd in chips had so little. The blinds were really high. The 3rd in chips guy pushed, and we all called. 3rd place had so little in chips, that even if he won, he would be pushing again shortyly afterwards, and having to do it a 3rd time if he wont hat one too. So at this point, I didnt care about 3rd in chips, my whole attention was on the 2nd guy in chips. on the turn, I flipped 2 pair, but there was a str8 draw on the board. I bet huge to get the 2nd in chips out of the pot. He got pissed off, talking about how its standard for no one to bet to get the 3rd guy out of the tourney. I've been playing my entire life, so of course I know this. I did not care at all if the 3rd guy doubled up. His double up amount was so small to my chip stack, extremely small, it didnt matter if he doubled up 3 times ina row, I'd have been so far ahead. I ended up winning the hand and it became two handed, but the guy just continues to rage about me betting him out of the pot. Was I wrong? Is there a point where between 3 players ,one guy is ahead by so much, it doesnt matter to not bet out the other guy and let the 3rd guy double up? My main goal was to not let 2nd place get any chips whatsoever. 3rd place was so low, it meant nothing.

 

[fundiver199]

You did the right thing. Its somewhat standard and frankly common sense to not try to bluff your opponent out of the dry side pot in a situation like this. But you were not bluffing. You were betting for value and to protect yourself from getting outdrawn.

 

[foran]

first the objective is to eliminate short, second to get chips from the other, but without bluffing.

 

[rock0001]

i think its absurd that the player who is 2nd in chips whines because you wanted to take the pot, in fact you played well because you apply icm by putting pressure on the 2nd biggest stack who is less willing to risks his entire chipstack when another player has a much lower stack than his.

 

[andrezito38]

for me you played correctly, the third in chips didn't matter, the second was that you couldn't increase the stack and the bet was for value and protection, the game is yours and you play as you see fit.

 

[63burner]

no colusion, you were playing on your terms..

Poker is best without being clouded by input from outside sources, like opponents at your table.
You were playing your game, doing what works for you, not your small stack opponent. Better to play your standard game and be ITM than being a donor in the loser's lounge.

 

[karl coakley]

I don't really agree with the 2nd player. With a 3rd short stack in a pot it is widely accepted that you check the hand down, but this is if you don't have a hand (ie. Bottom pair). If you hit 2 pair I think a small bet puts the other players on notice that you have a significant hand. They should simply fold or you are starting a side pot.

Seems like you did the right thing.

 

[colino17]

Don't bluff an empty side pot as it will just give the bottom stack a chance to triple up, but betting value is fine.