Any Of You Poker Players Have Something Similar To This Happen?

jayfly · 11-12-17, 11:25 PM

what was the problem?

Mr KLC · 11-12-17, 11:26 PM

^^^
collusion

dlowilly · 11-13-17, 12:39 AM

It's called chip dumping

If the site has any integrity there will be repercussions after your complaint, especially considering he admitted to it in chat. Whether he knew it was wrong or not, like you said it gives an unfair advantage to the winning player.

Foxx · 11-13-17, 12:42 AM

What was the stack size of the Q2 guy? What percent of all chips and how many big blinds?

If it’s right there in the chat logs that the guy admits it was his father, maybe they’ll investigate their history to see if they have a pattern of chip dumping to each other. It definitely looks bad on the surface.

d2bets · 11-13-17, 01:08 AM

Originally posted by Mr KLC

I was playing on one of those tourney poker sites. Got down to the Final 4 of a 412 person tournament. The chip leader goes all in with a JA. The person in 2nd follows all in with 2Q. 2Q loses, and the chip leader now has an overwhelming stack over the other 2 of us. I find this strange, and post in chat "?????". The chip leader comes back,and actually admits that the #2 guy was his father.

Needless to say, this guy won the tourney, and after 150 minutes, I came in 2nd because I couldn't overcome his stack. It's one thing I lost out on a cash prize, but how I lost it really stings. Already emailed a complaint to the site, but I don't foresee anything happening. Just needed to vent.

If I'm reading this right, the "chip leader" got into it with the worst of it and got lucky. The queens call made sense.

Just because they're related doesn't mean you can conclude collusion. Was there something more about how they played?

Cuse0323 · 11-13-17, 01:09 AM

Originally posted by d2bets

If I'm reading this right, the "chip leader" got into it with the worst of it and got lucky. The queens call made sense.

Just because they're related doesn't mean you can conclude collusion. Was there something more about how they played?

Q2, not QQ.

Kermit · 11-13-17, 01:14 AM

Originally posted by d2bets

If I'm reading this right, the "chip leader" got into it with the worst of it and got lucky. The queens call made sense.

Just because they're related doesn't mean you can conclude collusion. Was there something more about how they played?

If the leader had an Ace and the other guy had a Queen, how did the guy with the Ace get lucky?

slapshot81 · 11-13-17, 01:17 AM

was it pocket queens or queen duece because it makes all the difference going all in with pocket queens make sense going all in with queen duece does not

Cuse0323 · 11-13-17, 01:18 AM

It's obviously a Queen, and a 2. Damn.

dlowilly · 11-13-17, 01:19 AM

Originally posted by Cuse0323

It's obviously a Queen, and a 2. Damn.

Yep

It's Q2 not two Queens otherwise it never would have been an issue

slapshot81 · 11-13-17, 01:25 AM

going all in after a player first goes all in with queen duece is a little shady unless the q2 was super super short with chips and they were suited lol, if it was collusion though u would think they would go for a better spot like aj vs a2 or after the flop when the hands were more in favor aj vs q2 while a fav is no sure thing

unde0087 · 11-13-17, 01:27 AM

KLC, you still did pretty well with a second place finish with that many entries right? Although, definite BS. I mean you know they had to be talking to each other in that situation. Even before that they were most likely telling each other what they had to eliminate loses. It is obvious they wanted to make sure one of them had a huge chip lead to make a first place finish a solid probability. That is why I don't play cards online other than SBR.

slapshot81 · 11-13-17, 01:29 AM

Originally posted by unde0087

KLC, you still did pretty well with a second place finish with that many entries right? Although, definite BS. I mean you know they had to be talking to each other in that situation. Even before that they were most likely telling each other what they had to eliminate loses. It is obvious they wanted to make sure one of them had a huge chip lead to make a first place finish a solid probability. That is why I don't play cards online other than SBR.

if they were talking why would they go all in before the flop be much easier to wait til after the flop or turn to make sure the hand won aj vs q2 is no sure thing

TheMoneyShot · 11-13-17, 01:29 AM

Originally posted by slapshot81

was it pocket queens or queen duece because it makes all the difference going all in with pocket queens make sense going all in with queen duece does not

You only go all in Q2 when playing SBR Poker. Real good hand over AJ.

dlowilly · 11-13-17, 01:32 AM

Originally posted by slapshot81

if they were talking why would they go all in before the flop be much easier to wait til after the flop or turn to make sure the hand won aj vs q2 is no sure thing

That would look even more suspicious unless there was a Q and an Ace on board plus they needed to make sure it was just them in the hand

unde0087 · 11-13-17, 01:33 AM

Originally posted by slapshot81

if they were talking why would they go all in before the flop be much easier to wait til after the flop or turn to make sure the hand won aj vs q2 is no sure thing

They go all in before the flop because they don't want the other two to call. Why the fuk would you want to risk having one of the other players call and hit the flop then go all in? It defeats the purpose of their intention.

ChuckyTheGoat · 11-13-17, 01:40 AM

KLC, it's a valid concern. A few items:

1) Was the Eventual Winner just joking? Sometimes, guys will call Light, if they know the raiser is a maniac.

2) Are the hands documented? You can file a complaint. At least hope to get a refund.

3) On the math end, I've always wondered about situations like this. Let's say the buy-in = $100. Well, two buy-ins = $200. If two colluding players know that they want to shove H2H, all those chips go into one stack. In tournament poker...we know that the Bully Stack has power and that the short-stack is hamstrung.

Main reason for this is that the short-stack normally has little Fold Equity. If they move All-in, a potential caller is usually catching appropriate odds w/ any reasonable holding. Ergo, if an Average player represent an Average Payout share...how much does the Colluder's Average payout go up?

IE, does the 2.00 stack now have an Expected Payout of 2.50? Or more? If that were the case, then colluding strategy would be a +25% scheme. If we allow for Tournament Rake, colluding Strategy would still be worth > +10% Net ROI.

thechaoz · 11-13-17, 01:42 AM

If they don't refund your money take all of it off the site immediately

slapshot81 · 11-13-17, 01:47 AM

Originally posted by unde0087

They go all in before the flop because they don't want the other two to call. Why the fuk would you want to risk having one of the other players call and hit the flop then go all in? It defeats the purpose of their intention.

i'm just saying if they were colluding why not wait for better spot only 4 players left plenty of chances to get heads up aj vs q2 is no sure thing at all

unde0087 · 11-13-17, 01:51 AM

Originally posted by slapshot81

i'm just saying if they were colluding why not wait for better spot only 4 players left plenty of chances to get heads up aj vs q2 is no sure thing at all

How is it not a for sure thing if they go heads up against each other no matter what they have? The two players are basically just passing chips. If they are 1 and 2 in chips it doesn't matter who wins the pot, the winner of the hand is going to have a massive stack against the other 2 players left. It ensures that one of them won't be bumped off by the other 2 remaining players.

ArunSh · 11-13-17, 01:52 AM

This all sounds fishy. First off guy + his father both made Final 4 in a 412 person tourney? That's pretty unlikely but ok not impossible. Secondly as Chucky said above, are you sure he wasn't joking? I've seen that happen many times in poker, when someone gets upset over a bad beat, they accuse the other person of "working for the site" and having it rigged in their favor, and the other person jokingly says "yes I do" or something to that effect and others take it seriously.

Finally, if it was actually the guy's father, and they were blatantly colluding, would they seriously be dumb enough to outright admit it? If they went through all that trouble, somehow I doubt it.

I have a feeling it isn't the case, just too many things seem weird. Guy made a strange call and when people called it out for being shady, he jokingly says "yeah that was my dad" - doubt it was serious. And as Chucky also said, that probably would have been a bad strategy if they were actually colluding. The smart thing to do is for the big stack to try to lean on the other small stacks while leaving their partner alone so both can ladder up. Having the low stack dump, ensuring he can't move up would almost certainly be a stupid strategy. Honestly if I were playing vs them, and they had one player dump like that I would be very glad, it's far less effective than them colluding in a proper way

rm18 · 11-13-17, 02:02 AM

aren't there pay jumps? you want the guy with Q2 to dump chips so you can move up the ladder.

sweethook · 11-13-17, 02:18 AM

so what did 2nd pay ?

Optional · 11-13-17, 02:47 AM

Just last night I made a dumb call with Q5 to get knocked out in 5th for $450 with a huge jump to $2500 coming for 3rd. Still can't tell you why I did it after near 8 hours of grinding to get that far

And played in a live tourney with 300 odd entries where a mother and son ended up on the final table a month or so ago.

Just sayin

badgerguy · 11-13-17, 03:08 AM

What site?

LVHerbie · 11-13-17, 03:50 AM

Would be interesting to do some chip equity calculations - If they are in 1st and 2nd in chips I'm not sure it makes sense to chip dump since you give up the chance of both finishing in the higher positions.

My guess it would make more sense to keep the chips evenly distributed between the two players and soft play each other.

The Giant · 11-13-17, 04:43 AM

I highly doubt two guys are going to collude their way to the final table, and then suddenly confess their sins.

He was likely being sarcastic.

SharpAngles · 11-13-17, 12:32 PM

If collusion bothers you stop playing online poker.

In this case I highly doubt the guy was being serious about his “dad” dumping chips.

MinnesotaFats · 11-13-17, 12:55 PM

Could be Q2 realized he was out of his league and in a H2H situation just tried to catch a card and eliminate a player.

Ive done stupid shit like that before if suited, if its been too long at table or if i know i cant outplay the other guys left. Sometimes assuming a lucky card will float your way is better than a slow death.

jjgold · 11-13-17, 12:57 PM

poker for suckers online

all rigged with friends

HurryUpAndDrink · 11-13-17, 12:59 PM

Chip dumping, complain complain complain

PeterJohnson · 11-13-17, 01:20 PM

They don't care in tourneys as much as cash games

Originally posted by dlowilly

It's called chip dumping

If the site has any integrity there will be repercussions after your complaint, especially considering he admitted to it in chat. Whether he knew it was wrong or not, like you said it gives an unfair advantage to the winning player.

stevek173 · 11-13-17, 01:26 PM

Very good points by a few about collusion, people colluding in cash games more so than in tourneys, and that particular user likely being sarcastic.

Bottom line to KLC is I wouldn't worry about it, especially at tournies and especially at low stakes games.

Up to you, but I don't think it's a big deal for what you're playing.

Sincerely,

The Super User

stevek173 · 11-13-17, 01:32 PM

Reported for profanity and harassment.

She makes it to easy.