Collusion?

[bigphatmike]

@prawney : all these little arguments are intertwined. and Yes, it was still a colluded hand. I was All in, and they discussed thier hands and thier strategy out loud after i already acted they were still left to act. I dont think the hand should be dead, even if i lost the hand. i think they should not be able to play client if they ca not follow the rules Ie every RULE should be enforced.

[Prawney]

@prawney : All these little arguments are intertwined. And yes, it was still a colluded hand. I was all in, and they discussed thier hands and thier strategy out loud after i already acted they were still left to act. I dont think the hand should be dead, even if i lost the hand. I think they should not be able to play client if they ca not follow the rules ie every rule should be enforced.

lolololololol

I mean you yourself said that gimme had the nuts for him so never folding. So him saying he would fold was obviously with intent to keep fury in the pot. Nothing to do with you. People are allowed to use talk at the table to entice action. So they werent discussing strategy. Gimme was using talk to get mrfury to stay in the hand. It had nothing to do with you being in the hand. They werent discussing their hands to strategise against you.

I really dont see how you dont get this. Especially given that you point all this out in your arguements but dont seem to be able to connect the dots in the right way. While at the same time ur trying ur hardest to connect the dots in the wrong way and show collusion