Possible Collusion?

[Georg]

Hello to All!

I hope this is the right forum for rule questions.

Final Table of a small (60 players) tournament. 4 Players left. 2 frequent players and good friends are in SB and BB. The blinds are 8000/16000. Everybody folds SB has 18000 total and moves all in. His friend in BB has about 140000 total and folds. It was only 2000 to pay the all in with 140000 behind. I was not called to the table and only heard it a few hours later from a dealer. Surprisingly nobody complained. However if I would have been called by another player, I would have ruled that it is soft play and would have given a penalty to the BB (probably one round of the button).

What is your opinion on this?

Georg

[chet]

Georg:  I am not aware of any poker rule that 'requires' a player to call another players action.  In this case, the action by the SB player is not a raise, because it is much less than a full bet.  Without knowing more details it is unfair to assume collusion by the BB player.  The BB player may be familiar enough with his friend to know that he has a "huge" hand to push, he may not.  We don't have any idea what hand the BB player held.  One can argue that he should have called with ANY two cards, but do you want to give the SB player more chips if you have a very poor or weak hand? 

For these reasons, I would have a hard time assessing a penalty for soft play.  I would totally SUPPORT a warning for actions which could be soft play with clear notice that a repeat would result in a penalty.  Hope this helps.

[MikeB]

Final Table of a small (60 players) tournament. 4 Players left. 2 frequent players and good friends are in SB and BB. The blinds are 8000/16000. Everybody folds SB has 18000 total and moves all in. His friend in BB has about 140000 total and folds. It was only 2000 to pay the all in with 140000 behind. I was not called to the table and only heard it a few hours later from a dealer. Surprisingly nobody complained. However if I would have been called by another player, I would have ruled that it is soft play and would have given a penalty to the BB (probably one round of the button).

What is your opinion on this?

Georg

Hi Georg: Earlier this year there was an e-mail discussion about the definition of soft play. From memory, this is where that discussion was left: ".... when a player holds at least the non-exclusive nuts in a one-way game or the exclusive nuts in a high-low split game, and does not take aggressive action in turn, AND their failure to take aggressive action sends the hand immediately to showdown... it is always slow play. Any other situation may be ruled slow play in the judgement of the appropriate staff...."

That was the gist of it, I'm not quoting it quite as elegantly as we had it then. Anyway, it does raise the point that slow play is subject to interpretation, and you have chosen in this case to call this slow play. I would say that's 100% within your authority as a TD. NOW, would every TD rule that way? Probably not, just like every judge doesn't rule exactly the same in every case. BUT, there's probably a dollar amount at which the majority of TD's would rule against this player. Is it $1, or $100, or 1000 or 2000 in this case, that's a matter of their own judgement as is what penalty to apply... you have that latitude, IMO.

[Georg]

Thank you for your answers.
As Mike put it, the real question is the definition of soft play. I believe that it really helps to know the players and the situation on the table to make such a decision.

Georg

[pokerfish]

Hi,
This situation is also a good time for the TD to announce about soft playing. If he is watching the table, this might be a time to move in an see the cards of the BB privately. Any hand is callable but it is the players right to not call. That said, suppose he had a no-brainer? This clearly could be a penalty but at the least, should be an opportunity by the TD for the lecture about your obligation to bust every player.
Jan Fisher
cardplayercruises.com

[LeScribe]

this might be a time to move in an see the cards of the BB privately//cardplayercruises.com]cardplayercruises.com[/url]

And not even privately, if I'm right.

An other player, not involved in the hand can ask to see the cards going to the muck if he suspects a collusion or, in this case, a "chip dumping".

[pokerfish]

A player may not ask to see a mucked hand that has not called the action. He may, however, request that the TD inspect it for irregularity. For the dealer to properly expose a hand that has been mucked, it must have completed all action whether it be bet, raise, call, or check.
Jan Fisher

[LeScribe]

Really ?
I heard/read something about that, maybe 2 years ago, to avoid collusion.
Am I wrong ?

[Chief45]

chiming in here a bit late, but I'd call soft play and possibly collusion.

heads up between the blinds ?  ok.
SB is short stacked. ok.
SB goes all in for 2k over the BB. ok

What player would not accept those odds ?  heads up, against the short stack, 4 people left total and would not put 2k more, not even 2% of his chip stack, into a horse race on an even chance to eliminate a player. ?

Soft play for sure.
collusion probable. 

Chief45  -  Doug Jones - DnR Tournaments.

[pokerfish]

Sorry, I don't yet know how to make a quote but the answer to the comment "may any player ask to see any hand that isn't called" in suspected collusion is absolutely no. What you may do is call the TD. Could you even imagine if players could demand turning over other players' hands in the name of collusion? Where would that end? It would become a "pissing" contest and create bad will and slow down the game and give an edge to players who aren't entitled to it. You could cite the "collusion" card anytime you were curious about a hand. In order to ask to see a hand (which we hugely prefer players don't do) the hand must have completed all action (including check, check on the river.) If collusion is suspected, it always is best to call the TD>
Jan Fisher
Cardplayercruises.com

[LeScribe]

Ok, ok, I agree with the exact rule. That could lead to every one asking for every hand if not well defined...

Maybe my mistake came from a house rule or a proposition of a new one.
(or maybe I'm turning mad, that can also be sowewhere true...)


Sorry 

[pokerfish]

Hey, There's no reason to be sorry. IMO, if I think someone is colluding and mucking a hand to pass chips, I'll tell the TD. The TD may examine any hand at any time... players can't for the obvious reasons. Hope this makes sense. As for being "mad"? I've been for a long, long time!

Jan

[LeScribe]

Lol ! 

I'm sorry because I don't want to make more confusion with my wrong answers...

I'm actually not a full-time TD, as I still have my day-time job (computer IT in hospitals around France and Europe), and became a TD by reading a lot and learning from you, Jan, Linda, Matt, Bob Ciaffone

I run tournament since 5 years now, from time to time.
I began with 5 friends on a kitchen table and went to 1.500 players (in the same room  ) without dealers for the France Poker Tour.

By the way, in order to visualize the persons we're talking with, we maybe should make a presentation post somewhere in the new forum, no ?

[pokerfish]

re: By the way, in order to visualize the persons we're talking with, we maybe should make a presentation post somewhere in the new forum, no ?

My photo is on my header here.... also, the photos from the past TDA meetings have us all in them. For further photos, that is a good idea. I'll suggest it to the webguys!

[LeScribe]

re: By the way, in order to visualize the persons we're talking with, we maybe should make a presentation post somewhere in the new forum, no ?

My photo is on my header here.... also, the photos from the past TDA meetings have us all in them. For further photos, that is a good idea. I'll suggest it to the webguys!

Of course, for you (Jan, Linda...), it's not mandatory : you were already known before the forum !