possible collusion in a live tournament i was doing

[AceyDeucy 0]

Every other month I run a tournament for a bunch of friends of mine here in Atlanta. This weekend I saw a play that, the more I think about it, crawls all over me, I want to know if I am crazy.We have guy Ab who is playing at a table and his girlfriend Ag is in, and short-stacked. She pushes preflop, and gets flat-called by Ab and another guy, C. They check down to the river, and Ab throws in 600 (about a third of the pot) and C calls. Ab turns up king-high, and C shows ace-high (Ab says “I had to try to start a side pot”). (Ag had turned a set of jacks and was bulletproof) Now, Ab was someone who a few hands ago knocked out my wife semi-bluffing a dry side pot by going all-in with a flush draw after the flop, so I was giving him the benefit of the doubt for being stupid. But the more I think about it, the more this play bugs me. Ab was deep-stacked at time (he wound up missing the money, though) and so I wonder if that was an attempted chip-dump.Now I was already thinking of banning the guy because of his personality (described as being like, “having Antonio sitting there but playing with Gus cards and acting like a lucid combination of Hellmuth and the dude from WPT Paris” (referring to Tony G)) but the more I think about this play the less I like it. Thoughts?EDIT: Spelled title correctly

[Naismith 0]

It doesn't sound like a chip dump since he was creating a side pot she wasn't eligible for. He might've been trying to protect her hand, but you said he already ignorantly bet into a dry side pot earlier, so unless he was extremely clever in setting up his future collusion, you just have to assume he's bad.Even though collusion might've happened, it sure doesn't seem like there's enough evidence to be certain.On the other hand, the guy certainly sounds annoying.Peace,Jay

[Royal_Tour 0]

heres a thought..don;t play "married couples" tournaments. its always going to be a case of teams.but on a side note.. sounds like your reading to deep into it.

[AceyDeucy 0]

"Betting to protect her hand" was the phrase I was looking for. I have a hard time believing that he thought King-high was good on the river. The flush draw after the flop wasn't AS bad, because he still had outs (though I would still classify it as silly. My wife is one of the last people you want to triple up). I am having a very hard time justifying the king-high river move, though.

[slash 0]

I don't think this is conclusively collusion. It just sounds to me like bad play from a bad player. At most, he was making loose calls against his small-stacked girlfriend, thinking that if he lost, he wouldn't mind that much. But big stacks in tournaments do that all the time. And the side pot action is irrelevant.But if the guy's a douche anyway, why do you need another reason to ban him? If his girl is hot, though, you could still invite her.

[AceyDeucy 0]

heres a thought..don;t play "married couples" tournaments.  its always going to be a case of  teams.but on a side note.. sounds like your reading to deep into it.

Actually the married couples are the most cutthroat groups there. The husbands and wives playing want to bust each other more than the rest of the field. It's the DATING couples that I worry about! Remember the lesson Daniel and Evelyn learned...

[chindi 0]

I don't think it was collusion because his play doesn't help her at all. He's creating a side-pot that she's not eligible to win, and he's also not even effectively protecting her (because if he was protecting her he'd have gone all in pre-flop to drive out other callers). For it to be a chip dump, she'd have to have a chance at those chips.More than likely he was trying to push the other guy out of the hand to maximize the chances that either he'd take it, and she'd be out or that she'd take it. He also just sounds like a bad player, so unless he's putting the grandest false tell that ever told it seems unlikely that he was setting up that play.

[Royal_Tour 0]

heres a thought..don;t play "married couples" tournaments.  its always going to be a case of  teams.but on a side note.. sounds like your reading to deep into it.

Actually the married couples are the most cutthroat groups there. The husbands and wives playing want to bust each other more than the rest of the field. It's the DATING couples that I worry about! Remember the lesson Daniel and Evelyn learned...

You say that.. but in the end., Obviously each couple would rather see one of them make the money. i know they would rather beat eachother for bragging rights.. but that is always a side bet to the real action.

[Naismith 0]

Actually the married couples are the most cutthroat groups there. The husbands and wives playing want to bust each other more than the rest of the field. It's the DATING couples that I worry about!  Remember the lesson Daniel and Evelyn learned...

I don't think I know that story. Please share. :)In any case, he might've been protecting her hand. Bluffing at a dry side pot with a draw is a pretty bad move, though, so it's hard to say whether he just sucks or not. For the record, I see people bluff at dry side pots all the time where I play and I can never understand why people do this. Peace,Jay

[Whatever 1]

You're reading too much into it and maybe looking for a reason to ban him.

[AceyDeucy 0]

Back when they were dating he ran a huge bluff on her, showed it, and she got enraged, left, and then dumped him. They got back together briefly, but then settled on being friends.

[iveyfan30 0]

say what you want , on some level some husband/wife "teams" are gonna soft play against one another...why bust your husband/wife when you can bust somebody else...when me and my wife play cash games its always seperate tables...in tourney play , my wife busted me with ak <that she smoth called preflop ....> to my a q.......we havent both made the same final table yet...so we havent had that come up...i'd like to think we would play it square...she loves to bust me and gloat afterword lol...i dont know if i would enjoy doing the same to her....

[AceyDeucy 0]

This is the distinction I've made between the two dry side pot hands I am describing:Betting with a big draw ON THE FLOP is much much more defensible than betting with high card ON THE RIVER. To me, the difference between those is very obvious. Now, I will certainly grant that this distinction is not obvious to all players, and there is certainly no guarantee that he thought it through when it was happening. The general consensus seems to be leaning toward stupid, and that's fine. I had already decided that I wanted to be rid of him based solely on his personality, anyway, but it does occur to me that "cheater" works a lot better than "jerk" for ditching someone. However, I can see that I might be oversensitive here.

[leejdl 0]

if his girlfriend was already all-in how could it have been a chip dump? im confused.

[speedz99 145]

if his girlfriend was already all-in how could it have been a chip dump?  im confused.

I don't think a chip dump is the issue, because by calling all in pre flop he iss running the risk of busting her. The problem is that by betting with nothing on the river he might be trying to push out the third player in case he has a better hand than his wife. Somewhat sketchy, but not collusion I don't think.Ban him anyways if he sucks, though. Why bother playing with people like that?

[chindi 0]

The problem is that by betting with nothing on the river he might be trying to push out the third player in case he has a better hand than his wife.  Somewhat sketchy, but not collusion I don't think.

Hrm. Unclear pronoun usage.If you mean that Hubby was betting to push out #3, in case Hubby's hand is better than Wifey's, than that's not sketchy at all, that's trying to push out a player so he can bust his wife.Ummm.... that's not sketchy... it's called a bluff .If you're saying that he's trying to push out hand #3, in case Hand #3 is better than what his wife is holding. Than that would be sketchy... but it would also be stupid since any hand that good would call. A player that'd good enough to try to collude (through soft play, protecting, chip dumping or otherwise), with his wife... knows that throwing a small bet here on the river isn't going to accomplish any of those. Hence the simplest solution is likely true: Dumbass player.

Ban him anyways if he sucks, though.  Why bother playing with people like that?

Cause their money spends as well if not better than your own?

[bourbenz 0]

This is the distinction I've made between the two dry side pot hands I am describing:Betting with a big draw ON THE FLOP is much much more defensible than betting with high card ON THE RIVER. To me, the difference between those is very obvious. Now, I will certainly grant that this distinction is not obvious to all players, and there is certainly no guarantee that he thought it through when it was happening.  The general consensus seems to be leaning toward stupid, and that's fine. I had already decided that I wanted to be rid of him based solely on his personality, anyway, but it does occur to me that "cheater" works a lot better than "jerk" for ditching someone.  However, I can see that I might be oversensitive here.

Maybe im the odd man out but it seems to me that hes doing exactly what you say, ive seen people do it in tournaments all the time.

[speedz99 145]

Unclear pronoun usage.

Sorry.

Than that would be sketchy... but it would also be stupid since any hand that good would call.

Sketchy is sketchy, no matter how stupid. I actually don't think it is that horrible if he is trying to protect his wife's hand. What if she has A high, and player #3 has a low pair? With that bet he could make player #3 drop his hand.

Cause their money spends as well if not better than your own?

It depends on the stakes. If this is for hundreds of dollars, then you are correct. If (as I suspect) this is low stakes poker, then it isn't worth the $50 profit to play with someone that takes the fun out of the game IMO.

[renaedawn 1]

heres a thought..don;t play "married couples" tournaments.  its always going to be a case of  teams.but on a side note.. sounds like your reading to deep into it.

Actually the married couples are the most cutthroat groups there. The husbands and wives playing want to bust each other more than the rest of the field. It's the DATING couples that I worry about! Remember the lesson Daniel and Evelyn learned...

I was going to say this exact thing but you beat me to it. If I can bust my husband out, you'd damn well better bet that he's going. Never any collusion or soft playing among married couples that I have witnessed.

[sjm20 0]

about two weeks ago we were having our weekly home game and a dating couple was playing. The girl had actually accumulated a lot of chips (after cracking my AA with Qs3c when 4 clubs hit the board) he moves all in on the short stack and she calls him with J2 saying "she felt like playing". We didn't get mad because they both lost soon after, but other than that I don't know what to tell you. My opinion on cheaters is even though they try...they are still beatable and I always try to keep that attitude

[sideSHOWbob 0]

I don't think it was collusion because his play doesn't help her at all. He's creating a side-pot that she's not eligible to win, and he's also not even effectively protecting her (because if he was protecting her he'd have gone all in pre-flop to drive out other callers). For it to be a chip dump, she'd have to have a chance at those chips.More than likely he was trying to push the other guy out of the hand to maximize the chances that either he'd take it, and she'd be out or that she'd take it. He also just sounds like a bad player, so unless he's putting the grandest false tell that ever told it seems unlikely that he was setting up that play.

doesn't that help her in a big way.

[HappyPanda 0]

This is totally collusion.He figured that she would have his K-high beat. If he pushes the other guy out, she will win the main pot and still be in the tourney.of course, it depends how much money was in preflop... if the main pot was peanuts, then 600 is him trying to keep her in. If the main pot was like 2000+, then the 600 could be thought of as a "dumb" value bet, and he really did think that his K-high was good.

[faisal 0]

What wrong with protecting someones hand? It might be more suspicous if she raises all in, and he himself, re raises all in, but still nothing wrong with that.

[Royal_Tour 0]

heres a thought..don;t play "married couples" tournaments.  its always going to be a case of  teams.but on a side note.. sounds like your reading to deep into it.

Actually the married couples are the most cutthroat groups there. The husbands and wives playing want to bust each other more than the rest of the field. It's the DATING couples that I worry about! Remember the lesson Daniel and Evelyn learned...

I was going to say this exact thing but you beat me to it. If I can bust my husband out, you'd damn well better bet that he's going. Never any collusion or soft playing among married couples that I have witnessed.

You missed the point. you can joke all you want that you would love to bust your husband out., but if Jimmy Mcdoodle is all in against your husband, who are you hoping wins?.. If your in a pot with jimmy Mcdoodle and your husband is all in, and your involved in that same hand, unless you have the nuts, or close to it.. you should be checking this hand down to hope your husband gets knocked out., But i'l guarantee with Mcdoodle in the pot., if you sense weakness, your goin to try to get him out of it. Because clearly., You want to win the tournament. But who do you want to come 2nd???????ahhh thank you.

[Rocketwadster 0]

Wouldn't the bet on the river be considered an attempt to get the ace-high guy out of the pot? He didn't improve his king-high hand after 5 cards, so he took a stab at getting the ace-high guy to fold. The ace-high call seems more suspect to me (I know I personally don't call too many bets with ace high in tourney situations) :wink: