Tuan Le is being accused of cheating....

[Smasharoo 0]

First of all, dyslexia doesn't make people spell aversarial with an 'a' instead of an 'er.' Second, what kind of analogy is that? You sound like the South Park version of Johnny Cochrane. "look at the monkey, look at the monkey."Actually, what dyslexia does is make it imporrisble for me to NOTICE that I've mispelled something. I really am dyslexic and could go into a legnthy discussion about how impacts processing of visual information, but I'm not going to.I just think it's funny when you flame someone about making spelling errors and then tell them that you're a professional writer and that you are the greatest thing to ever happen to this world. I think it's funny when people make things up that never happened because they're not bright enough to generate any real critisizm.Hahahaha.Funny stuff.I've never flamed someone for speling.Grammar or misusing words maybe, spelling, no.

[yeffy 0]

When you yourself has provided a definition where softplaying may very well be collusion. You're joking, right?The fact that something *can* be something doesn't mean it *is* something. That's why we have both of those words instead of just *is*.My point was that people softplay other people they have stakes in *constantly* frequently without any sort of agreement between the two players.

Not joking, I just wanted to understand the world according to Smash. Earlier in the thread you were insulting people for saying it was collusion and using terms like "moron". But then as your own argument morphed you were beginning to imply it can be a form of collusion. Very confusing.I find it hard to believe that two people who have an interest in each other would make it all the way to a televised final table without having a discussion related to this. And therefore it would be a stretch of logic to assume if there were softplay tactics being used that one party had no prior knowledge of the possibility of employing such strategy. Therefore it would be a massive stretch to adamantly deny that in this case softplay would not be a form of collusion.On another note: If these arrangemnts are out in the open there is a lot less potential damage to the game. When Daniel and Minh Nguyen arrived at a final table together at the WSOP, Daniel told everyone at the table that he had staked Minh into the tournament to avoid any question of foul play.

[Smasharoo 0]

Not joking, I just wanted to understand the world according to Smash. Earlier in the thread you were insulting people for saying it was collusion and using terms like "moron". But then as your own argument morphed you were beginning to imply it can be a form of collusion. Very confusing. It's not confusing at all.I think you'll find I didn't insult anyone who didn't specificaly insult me first, and that I have consistently made the point that softplaying is wrong, is cheating, and isn't collusion. Which it isn't. It frequently occurs as a result of collusion and it frequently occurs without collusion.Therefore it would be a massive stretch to adamantly deny that in this case softplay would not be a form of collusion. Couldn't agree more.Doesn't make sofplaying collusion.

[ChkDeezNuts 0]

dys·lex·i·a ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ds-lks-)n. A learning disorder marked by impairment of the ability to recognize and comprehend written words.Well...that explains Smasharoo's involvement in this thread.

[goldenteemaster 0]

IMOConspiracy: plotting/reaching an agreementCollusion: Acting on the agreementI think they're the same thing only one is the planning aspect and the other is putting the plan into action.

[jeff_536 3]

LOL, I hope you have a good proof reader for your best sellers Smash!Yeah, I'm dyslexic.I should really come up with some sort catch phrase when people point out that I've made a spelling error. I wonder if you people point out that cripple are in wheelchairs and make jokes about it!God knows I do...

First of all, dyslexia doesn't make people spell aversarial with an 'a' instead of an 'er.' Second, what kind of analogy is that? You sound like the South Park version of Johnny Cochrane. "look at the monkey, look at the monkey." I just think it's funny when you flame someone about making spelling errors and then tell them that you're a professional writer and that you are the greatest thing to ever happen to this world. Lastly, I did find your small print quite funny.

What's even funnier, of course, is when people spell adversarial wrong when they're flaming someone for spelling adversarial wrong.

[Makavelli 0]

This topic is bring out the big guns. Any comments from DN, Harman, Helmuth, Arieh, or any of the other pros who have posted here?

Dude, Harry friggin' Demetriou just posted!

[Smasharoo 0]

Well...that explains Smasharoo's involvement in this thread.What a horribly innacurate definition of dyslexia. Explains how you could be so confused about word usage.Oh wait, it does't. You posted the corect definition and STILL screwed it up.Hahaha.In the very same post.HAhahah.Man that still kills me.

[minorityreport 0]

Tuan and Hasan's arrangement is not new to poker. Their partnership arrangement was neither "nauseating" nor detrimental for the game; agreements as such are reality for people who play poker for a living and have no other source of income. (On a tangent, I suppose true "corporate" sponsorship will eventually phase out traditional stake agreements--where players risk the chance of going up against fellow horses, stakers, or backers in the same tournament.) However abrasive Smash is at times, he has made the most sense regarding this issue throughout this thread.The hands shown are inconclusive as to softplaying; and the use of the word "team" is a misnomer. This is poker we're talking about for crissakes.

[JFarrell20 1]

Can we please stop arguing about what this WORD means, and what that WORD means?People on this website always get hung up on terminology, and fail to see the implication of the word. I know there are a lot of law students on here, but come on.We need to stop getting strung up on words, and learn to decipher intent of meaning.Even if they only paid 1st place, there could still be cheating.Say 50 people enter a tourney and it pays first place only. 40 of the people are "in" on the scam and participate in re-raising the other 10 players out of pots as much as they can until they're all gone. Say the 40 players each own 2.5% of the winner. Once the 10 scamee's are gone, everyone left is a winner of some sort. After that, it doesn't matter who wins. Watch as everyone moves all-in except for 1 chip and then they all fold on the flop to one player to speed things up. lol. It's just another way to maximize your profit margin.As is reading and comprehending legitimate poker strategy books.Is that cheating?

[GhostfaceKillah 0]

6 pages and 90 percent was on the meaning of one word......Quite intense

[HarryDemetriou 0]

This topic is bring out the big guns. Any comments from DN, Harman, Helmuth, Arieh, or any of the other pros who have posted here?

Dude, Harry friggin' Demetriou just posted!

This is too big and too important a topic to simply ignore and is obviously of great concern to a large number of people.Perhaps Daniel himself will comment in time as no doubt he was indirectly involved via his association with Hassan Habib (if indeed he had a piece of him this year) but then again maybe he would prefer not to comment at all as anyone commenting on this subject either way appears to be in a no win situation.As for my own comments I will always speak out on subjects like this and actually posted on this subject elsewhere prior to this thread starting here and also on another site.Linen needs to be washed in public be it dirty or otherwise and burying your head in the sand or not having an opinion doesn't help.This is an important issue that needs to be discussed and I for one am saddened that Paul Phillips has taken so much stick over this for expressing an honest opinion openly.

[whippedspoon 0]

I can guarantee you that Smash won't even agree with this but I'll say it anyhow...One of the absolute guarantees in this forum...If Smash posts on a topic, the thread will soon be completely off topic and be all about him. And he'll blame it on everyone else.

[GhostfaceKillah 0]

Excellent post Harry and feel free to continue voicing your opinion......Its always welcome............and Paul Phillip's opinion is also more than welcome.....This is indeed a very serious topic. However the people of this forum really need to get down to the important details and not argue over the meaning of the word collusion. :roll:

[LAPoker 0]

This topic is bring out the big guns. Any comments from DN, Harman, Helmuth, Arieh, or any of the other pros who have posted here?

Dude, Harry friggin' Demetriou just posted!

This is too big and too important a topic to simply ignore and is obviously of great concern to a large number of people.Perhaps Daniel himself will comment in time as no doubt he was indirectly involved via his association with Hassan Habib (if indeed he had a piece of him this year) but then again maybe he would prefer not to comment at all as anyone commenting on this subject either way appears to be in a no win situation.As for my own comments I will always speak out on subjects like this and actually posted on this subject elsewhere prior to this thread starting here and also on another site.Linen needs to be washed in public be it dirty or otherwise and burying your head in the sand or not having an opinion doesn't help.This is an important issue that needs to be discussed and I for one am saddened that Paul Phillips has taken so much stick over this for expressing an honest opinion openly.

I would like to hear what Daniel has to say about the issue as well.

[DeNuts1 0]

This topic is bring out the big guns. Any comments from DN, Harman, Helmuth, Arieh, or any of the other pros who have posted here?

Dude, Harry friggin' Demetriou just posted!

This is too big and too important a topic to simply ignore and is obviously of great concern to a large number of people.Perhaps Daniel himself will comment in time as no doubt he was indirectly involved via his association with Hassan Habib (if indeed he had a piece of him this year) but then again maybe he would prefer not to comment at all as anyone commenting on this subject either way appears to be in a no win situation.As for my own comments I will always speak out on subjects like this and actually posted on this subject elsewhere prior to this thread starting here and also on another site.Linen needs to be washed in public be it dirty or otherwise and burying your head in the sand or not having an opinion doesn't help.This is an important issue that needs to be discussed and I for one am saddened that Paul Phillips has taken so much stick over this for expressing an honest opinion openly.

very well said

[ghoti7four 0]

The thing I find funny (I only read the first two and last pages so this may have been said already)... is that people apparently believe that there is some inherent good or integrity in the game itself. Poker is a game where you take money from someone else: friend, stranger, or little girl playing way outside her bankroll. There are many reasons why personal integrity can be important (without even having to get moralistic, you may value integrity), but you need that integrity intact in order to continue to get games. There is a certian degree of trust necessary in poker. However, there will always be a tenuous relationship between honesty and poker--seeing as how the game requires and rewards dishonesty and those rewards are cash. The game itself is not noble and never has or will be. Most people probably aren't either. If you happen to value integrity it will probably serve you well and known cheaters will probably have a hard time finding a game they can play in but: collusion or co-conspiring or cheating will never spell the end of the game, (which by the way even thrives in places where it is illegal) . I am the type who would be much more concerned about corporate sponsorship, regulation, and what not taking it full force out of the hands of the players... Just look at what Hasbro did to Scrabble. (thats for Smash)

[Smasharoo 0]

This is an important issue that needs to be discussed and I for one am saddened that Paul Phillips has taken so much stick over this for expressing an honest opinion openly.I think it's more the not without merit thought that he's simply muckraking.He's also in a position to be self righetous having les bankroll concerns than most tournament pros and thus little need to mitigate short term varience.Paul is against stakes being exchanged at all, which is fine and really a valid point, but one much more easily argued from his vantage point. Any opportunity to foster the impression of impropriety around the practice he'll take with relish. Matias Anderson's offhand quote from last years WSOP comes to mind where Anderson verbalized a practice many pros engage in constantly.I still struggle to see what can be done to stop this, although one would think that making tournament payouts less topheavy would considerably help./shrug.

[HarryDemetriou 0]

HarryDemetriou

"There were numerous plays at the final which when considered in conjunction with the various cross percentage ownerships of some of the players could lead you to very questionable conclusions and a feeling of wanting to puke."

To late Demetriou!

I actually posted this on April 28th under the tournament poker section prior to this thread being started and prior to that on another website.

[DeNuts1 0]

HarryDemetriou

"There were numerous plays at the final which when considered in conjunction with the various cross percentage ownerships of some of the players could lead you to very questionable conclusions and a feeling of wanting to puke."

To late Demetriou!

I actually posted this on April 28th under the tournament poker section prior to this thread being started and prior to that on another website.

I think it was a joke Harry. Notice the face throwing up.

[SeattlePoker 0]

I can guarantee you that Smash won't even agree with this but I'll say it anyhow...One of the absolute guarantees in this forum...If Smash posts on a topic, the thread will soon be completely off topic and be all about him. And he'll blame it on everyone else.

I must take some blame for this happening this time. I apologize. As for collusion at the final table, or earlier in the tournament for that matter, I think it sucks, and will eventually require "team play." In fact, there already appears to be quite a bit of this going on. If its an edge, and its not technically cheating, then it will happen in the poker world. Someone needs to take a stand on this. I'm not sure who or how, but someone needs to take a stand! It's about drawing a line in the sand, across this line you do not ... and Dude, Asian American please.

[Smasharoo 0]

If its an edge, and its not technically cheatingWell, it's is techinically cheating. I don't think anyone's arguing that. The problem is it's impossible to prove and it's fairly prevalent in varying degrees of severity.

[BB 0]

I guess the larger question is whether staking should be prohibited, as it leads to a conflict of interest if you meet on the same table. As to the specific example of Hasan and Tuan Le, I don't see proof from the examples that there was collusion. Tuan Le plays aggessively, so it is not the case that there is a pattern of him playing differently against Hasan there, knowing he would be cut a break. From Hasan's point of view, it is hard to see how dumping chips would help him more than just winning the hand. The most you can say is that it might have been a factor if he was undecided whether to risk a call. That would be a type of collusion, but impossible to prove, and Hasan might have done it unconsciously, still thinking of his own tournament situation.

[LAPoker 0]

HarryDemetriou

"There were numerous plays at the final which when considered in conjunction with the various cross percentage ownerships of some of the players could lead you to very questionable conclusions and a feeling of wanting to puke."

To late Demetriou!

I actually posted this on April 28th under the tournament poker section prior to this thread being started and prior to that on another website.

I think that Daniel will comment as soon as he gets out of his rehab meeting, but I'd like to hear TL's or HH's comments on this matter lol. Maybe that's why Hassan is always sweating.

[BadBeatBou 0]

Good day all,I like the discussion about the integrity of poker (I like to read Roy Cooke's commentaries in CardPlayer magazine). When something gets a boom of popularity as poker has right now, there is always I think that phase where things that have been around and accepted by most since the beginning of the game (and gambling) is not anymore.Baseball was the same with the White Sox scandal. Throwing games away was part of baseball for years but suddenly it was condemned because the sport itself was becoming so big and followed by journalism (like today poker is with internet forums, television,...) that it became important to fix the problem if you wanted the sport to continue to grow.I think Poker is facing a bigger problem because it is gambling. You can play a baseball game without betting on it but can you play cards without money involved? No. And now the money in Poker is getting bigger and bigger. I read Daniel once talking about playing a tournament where first place was paying less than what he is used to play in cash games. I think it should stay that way. Nobody would accept to play ring games aginst two-three players that have all a share of each other or at least a pro would pick up fast if there is collusion or softplaying. Tournament poker is killing the game.I mostly agree with Smasharoo on everything except one: I think poker players can do something about it. Roy Cooke seems to have good ideas. At least they are a start for discussion to find a solution.Have a good weekend.