|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 11/20/2008 9:16:45 PM PACIFIC |
 does this smell of collusion?, PokerDude, 10. Dec 2003 03:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Player 8's play on this hand seems suspicious to me considering his position to Player 7. Does this seem a little funny to anyone else? Community Cards F L O P TURN RIVER Kc 6s Qd 8h 5c player /hand /*pre * /*post * /*turn * /*river* 1/ **9c6c** / *2,2* /*2,2 * /*4,4 * /*2 * 2/ Folded*/ *F* 3/ Folded*/ *SB,F* 4/ Folded*/ *BB,1,2 * /*0,2,2 * /*0,F * 5/ Folded*/ *F* 6/ Folded*/ *1,1,2 * /*0,F * 7/ **QhQs**/ *1,2,1* /*1,2,1* /*2,4,2 * /*2 * 8/ **As8s**/ *2,2 * /*2,2 * /*4,4 * /*2 * 9/ Folded*/ *F * | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: does this smell of collusion?, Hatchthunder, 10. Dec 2003 06:35 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I cannot follow what happened in the hand. All I can see if that one player flopped a set and the other had bottom pair/best kicker. You should write out what happened and maybe someone would be able to follow the hand. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Clarification of Hand Play, PokerDude, 10. Dec 2003 06:54 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Player 8's play on this hand seems suspicious to me considering his position to Player 7. Does this seem a little funny to anyone else? I might be reading too much into it, but no pair raising twice after flop, and twice with 3rd pair on turn, seems suspicious. These two players were sitting next to each other, if that makes a difference. Community Cards Kc 6s Qd 8h 5c Hands at Showdown Player 1 9c6c Player 7 QhQs Player 8 As8s PREFLOP ACTION Player 3 is small blind player 4 is big blind player 5 folds player 6 calls player 7 calls player 8 raises player 9 folds player 1 calls player 2 folds player 3 folds player 4 calls player 5 folds player 6 calls player 7 raises player 8 caps betting player 1 calls player 4 calls player 6 calls player 7 calls FLOP Kc 6s Qd Player 4 checks player 6 checks player 7 bets (trip queens) player 8 raises (Ace High) player 1 calls player 4 calls player 6 folds player 7 raises player 8 caps betting. player 1 calls player 4 calls player 7 calls TURN CARD 8h BOARD NOW READS Kc 6s Qd 8h Player 4 checks Player 7 bets (trip queens) Player 8 raises (Pair of eights) player 1 calls player 4 folds player 7 raises player 8 caps betting player 1 calls player 7 calls RIVER CARD 5c BOARD NOW READS Kc 6s Qd 8h 5c Player 7 bets Player 8 calls Player 1 calls Player 1 9c6c pair of sixes Player 7 QhQs trip queens Player 8 As8s pair of eights | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, Hatchthunder, 10. Dec 2003 07:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I always thought collusion was 2 players betting inferior hands max to get others to fold. At least one player had a premium hand throughout. Maybe the one guy just wanted to make a donation. It does seem a little strange to cap the betting on the turn. He might have been on a steal with the raise preflop and I can see capping the betting on the flop but his turn play seems mighty strange. He might have been on tilt or thinking that the other player was on a bluff but I do not understand his play. Or for that matter player 1 who kept calling with bottom pair. Just remember this play and the players and if you see them again see if this kind of play happens. After a couple of times I would report them and the hand numbers to support or if you do not wan to get to involved just do not play with them. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, PokerDude, 10. Dec 2003 08:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks for the input, Hatch. I thought Collusion was two players working together to trap another player(s). The play on the turn was extremely odd, and beyond what I would think anyone would play, even as a semi-bluff or bluff. I will watch these two and see if I see them playing together more, and take action from there. Thanks again. May your bankroll grow twenty fold by Christmas (mine too). LoL | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, Flakes, 10. Dec 2003 07:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| "Clarification"? Sorry Poker Dude, but this post isn't any clearer than the original one. Is it too much to ask you to just tell the entire story and give the playout of the hand in your own words. Really. This hand history stuff is confusing and well, it's just not fair for the people who are trying to read it. (sorry, I don't mean to offend you but it really is tough on the eyes when it's posted in this form). Ok, I just woke up and perhaps I need a cup of java. (sigh) Flakes | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, Candide, 10. Dec 2003 07:44 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I agree, explain don't just post hand histories. Also toss in what you were thinking at the time, and why you think this is collusion? I think I follow what happened, but don't see how it is anything more than bad play by two of the players against a guy with a set of queens. Also, what limits are you playing? If this is 1-2 or 2-4, that would explain a lot, somepeople love to bluff, and get a kick out of it. I wouldn't think collusion one bit. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, Flakes, 10. Dec 2003 07:47 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| LOL> Well you got alot further than I did! As soon as I saw the hand histroy mumbo-jumbo?........later!! | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, PokerDude, 10. Dec 2003 07:53 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| That is perfectly understandable and fine by me. The hand history serves better than my memory here, that is why I used it. The limit was 1 2 . The play on the turn is very suspect with the hands involved. I'm sorry if I can't make it any clearer. I see hand history style posts on here all the time, and they aren't followed by ridicule. Another reason I posted the hand history, is because that is what the cardroom manager would have to look at, right? they wouldn't have any more information that the hand history. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, Flakes, 10. Dec 2003 08:04 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Sorry man, but just because other posters may use hand histories doesn't make it any better. I'm just explaining to you that hand history posts are tough to follow. My response and my request was not meant as ridicule towards you. If I offended you, I apologize. Flakes | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, PokerDude, 10. Dec 2003 08:16 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| My apologies. I didn't realize that hand histories were that hard to follow. What I was saying was, that since I see so many of them posted here, I didn't think it would be a problem. I post here periodically, and the last few times I have, I haven't had much response other than what is wrong with my posts. Maybe that has me on the defensive here. My bad. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, Hatchthunder, 10. Dec 2003 08:19 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| What site is that history from? I have never seen one that is that hard to decipher. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, PokerDude, 10. Dec 2003 08:27 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| It's from planet poker. If I would have copied and pasted it as I did at the beginning, it would have been harder to follow, I tried to make it at least line up correctly. apparently I didn't do a good job. I've learned my lesson. Hand Histories aren't welcome. Should be a sign somewhere. Thank you, though, Hatch for taking the time to understand my post before leaving your reply. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, Flakes, 10. Dec 2003 08:37 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks Poker Dude:) Now, about the collusion stuff? If two players are in collusion, one player will usually have a very strong hand and the "other" player will make sure that he's in the pot to "pump it up" for his "friend". That will continue to happen through the playout of the hand and depending on what action is taken place now, is how the colluders will act and or react with their betting. To me, It doesn't make as much sense if neither one of the colluders held a strong hand as much as it does if at least one of them did. Because if neither one has a good hand and they're in the pot betting and raising to death when there's someone else involved....they're basically just throwing their money away unless they can be close to positive that the other player will throw his hand away at some point. And you really can't be sure that that will happen so like I said, one of the players that's in collusion will have a hand. If you suspected collusion in your game or if you notice something perculiar 'next time', then jot down their names and bring it to the attention of the site that you play at. Flakes | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, PokerDude, 10. Dec 2003 08:43 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks, Flakes. That is exactly what happened. I was against posting this to protect names, but if you would like to check it out at planet poker, hand # 33352629. It is an isolated incident, and I shall keep both names in my memory bank. If I see them playing together again, I will most certainly watch them with a close eye | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, JStewUF, 10. Dec 2003 21:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| If it makes you feel any better I followed the history pretty easily. Just takes a bit of looking at. It is extremely difficult to spot collusion in low-limit games because so many people chase hands. But Player 8 chasing an ace? Especially after getting raised and reraised so much preflop and on the flop. You have a very valid complaint here. And if he were bluffing then why not bluff at it on the river? Seems like they wanted to get at least one more call and didnt want to chase you out with a raise if there actually was collusion. In any case, the play seems pretty strange all around. Id send in the history to your site and see what they have to say. Collusion happens more than people give it credit for in low limit online games because so many people chase hands. Props for being wary of it. By the way...some of us can read the hand better with the history so dont leave it out next time. ; ) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, Palinya, 10. Dec 2003 09:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I guess it is possible that player 8 was semi-bluffing and thought he was going to hit an A or a third 8... pretty bad play though It is a little strange though to cap like that. It would make more sense if he just called to the river (still extremely bad though) Like everyone else said, make a note of it and pay attention to them if they are ever in the game together again | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Clarification of Hand Play, JStewUF, 10. Dec 2003 21:11 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| If it makes you feel any better I followed the history pretty easily. Just takes a bit of looking at. It is extremely difficult to spot collusion in low-limit games because so many people chase hands. But Player 8 chasing an ace? Especially after getting raised and reraised so much preflop and on the flop. You have a very valid complaint here. And if he were bluffing then why not bluff at it on the river? Seems like they wanted to get at least one more call and didnt want to chase you out with a raise if there actually was collusion. In any case, the play seems pretty strange all around. Id send in the history to your site and see what they have to say. Collusion happens more than people give it credit for in low limit online games because so many people chase hands. Props for being wary of it. By the way...some of us can read the hand better with the history so dont leave it out next time. ; ) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|