Printable View
but no matter what we do, what tables we play, there will always be collusion with Online Poker, either its friends playing a cash table togerther sharing hands, or playing in a SNG together helping each other out sharing hands and dumping chips so they got a better % to cash and make the money or win....its sad but it will be impossible to stop. Wish there was a way to bring an end to it but I highly doubt it. :(
I edited so its easier to read ... I did not change the order of anything ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Zab
So BPM goes allin FIRST! Then the other two discuss stuff!
That's two vs one so it is collusion.
Was it premeditated collusion?... idk ... still collusion nonetheless.
================
Fury and Brew ...
If you can try to wipe everything you know about this hand ... easier said then done but try.
Now put yourself in BPM's shoes.
So you are allin and two people are discussing the hand before they act ... are you happy or pissed?
TYVM... i wish that Zab felt the same way.. according to Zab he does the same exact thing that gimmeabrew does lol.... A true Poker player knows that is cheating hands down, they should not be allowed to play in client... NUFF SAId.Quote:
Originally Posted by bmeelneg
My problem with calling this collusion is that its not like its a tourney and they want to team up to get bpm out so they move up in payouts.Quote:
Originally Posted by bmeelneg
And in theory what they did was wrong but if you look at the hand as a whole nothing wrong really happened. Fury said he had 10's (later said that he thought he was heads up with bpm and didnt know gimme was still in hand). Gimme said hes folding if fury calls. And like i said earlier they have no reason to team up because its cash game so bpm getting eliminated means nothing. So the more likely scenario is that Gimme was angling fury saying he would fold (acting weak in the hopes of getting fury to call). As we see when the cards turned up this wasnt the case becase gimme had nothing, but in a cash game scenario like this you have to presume that gimme is angling fury rather than colluding against a player when it makes no difference if they KO him.
BPM you are trying to strip everything down to the letter of the law and not using ur common sense of what really happened here. And as i stated before if u want to go totally by the rules then when fury said he had 10's his hand would have been killed and u wouldnt have got 2K pts of him. So if ur all about the straight and narrow why not send him his 2K back?
Im sorry but i just cant see how this can be called collusion when neither of them used any of the information the other one gave out. The fact that gimme called with a weaker hand when fury said his hand shows they werent working together and that gimme didnt use the knowledge of fury having a better hand than him to his advantage. Basically what happened was Fury turned his cards up and Gimme acted out of turn.
As you keep claiming to be a "real" and "true" poker player im sure youve seen people turn their cards up before and people act out of turn, are they banable offenses??
Dont get me wrong im totally against collusion in poker. But that is not what happened here.
You can call it what you want. You dont have to call it collusion , but the had was.. I call it straight cheating.. I call it a Cheap attempt to get an edge on me. I call it unfair. i call it what it is: Two players that KNEW EXACTLY what they were doing. He knew they werent heads up Gimme 3 bet the hand and i reshoved, action then was on Fury. Fury did not act until about 10 seconds after what Brew said. I will gladly give the 2k points back if zab bans the kids from client.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prawney
You dont have to call it " collusion" Call it CHEATING. exactly what it is. people are not allowed to talka bout a hand while stil in action and discuss thier strategy prior to acting. This is the second time this has happened to me. The First time was much worse, and Rckt has come out and said he was blantally wrong and apologized and promised to never do it again.
I cant beleive you think nothing is wrong here.
If you explain to me where in the hand either of them got an edge over you or acted any differently then they would have if nothing was said then ill agree with you that something is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigphatmike
Mrfury did not want to call, he opened then gimme and i had postion on him, after gimme re raises then i shove, he doesnt really want to call thats why he tells his hand outloud to gimme. Gimme then pulled another level of dickishness by stating that he would fold if he called , After stating his hand outlod to gimme and I while this is the biggest pot of the Poker table, Fury then shoves because he now knows he has gimme beat.
Never discuss cards in the hand, that is just plain cheating. So technically, I would consider it cheating. It's not far from colluding though.
I believe there is such a thing as unintentional collusion which would hold a completely different definition than the one zab stated and the client would be the most likely place for it as these guys talk about a lot of hands in there to try and throw each other off..
gimme didnt even do anything but react to fury trying to get him to fold .. in the big picture that prolly helped mike out .. but what fury did was no better than colluding imo because thats exactly what he was trying to do .. change the outcome of the action with his words regardless of whether or not it was in private like a real act of collusion would have been done