Situation
We are near the bubble blinds are 1k-2k A200
Player A : Raise to 6k
Player B : Raise to 16k
Player C : Raise All In for 19k.
A Fold and B Fold...
Players at the table start to complaining about chip dumping and collusion. Now, you're call at the table...
Again, not enough information.
I would want to know how many chips each player has behind. If the amount needed to call the all-in is small compared to the stack size, then some additional research is needed. You cannot 'FORCE' a player to make a bet (player B I am thinking about), as he may have been on a bluff and got caught with his finger in the cookie jar so to speak.
More info needed.
Quote from: chet on April 20, 2016, 03:18:05 PM
Again, not enough information.
I would want to know how many chips each player has behind. If the amount needed to call the all-in is small compared to the stack size, then some additional research is needed. You cannot 'FORCE' a player to make a bet (player B I am thinking about), as he may have been on a bluff and got caught with his finger in the cookie jar so to speak.
More info needed.
Lets say Player B have 100k in chips
Player C have 19k and is All In.
Martin,
I don't know of any rule that could "force" a player to call, even a small amount. Let's say that Player B was bluffing with his 10K raise. Why would he put another 3K in the pot if he felt he had little, or no chance at winning the pot? I'm not in favor of any rule that would force a player to add more chips to a pot, no matter how many chips he has.
We have had discussions in the past about "forcing" players to call very few people are in favor of it me included. Sometime it is the nature of tournaments and very conservative players where it slows down to a grind. Unless it is clear collusion, which you would need more information, then player C may as well keep being aggressive and win pots.
Quote from: Nick C on April 20, 2016, 03:59:47 PM
Martin,
I don't know of any rule that could "force" a player to call, even a small amount. Let's say that Player B was bluffing with his 10K raise. Why would he put another 3K in the pot if he felt he had little, or no chance at winning the pot? I'm not in favor of any rule that would force a player to add more chips to a pot, no matter how many chips he has.
I 100% agree with you on this.
With it change your decision if it was 100 more ?
If we keep the decision of he's allowed to fold and all the players start screaming that his collusion. What do you do at this point ?
I allow him to fold, to protect his right to not show his weak bluff, if he chooses not to. I bet, you raise...I don't have to call, that's it! It's my money and I'll play the hand my way. :)
That's how I see it.
Collusion is easy, perhaps too easy, to suspect, but just too damn hard to prove.
The best you can do is warn the player, make notes if happens again, and then do something about it at that point.
But even then, beats me what to do about it...
Quote from: Dave Miller on April 23, 2016, 03:39:14 AM
Collusion is easy, perhaps too easy, to suspect, but just too damn hard to prove.
The best you can do is warn the player, make notes if happens again, and then do something about it at that point.
But even then, beats me what to do about it...
Well said, when reading the whole story it shows how hard it is to prove, especially relying on second hand hearsay.