Collusion or Multiple Accounts?

Red_King

Playing a 6-max, down to 3 players, 2 get paid. (1 player is AWAY).

Villain is chip leader >3:1 to my left, AWAY is short stack.

Villain keeps folding blinds vs AWAY, or call/check to showdown vs AWAY.

Chip dumping?

Villain always called or bet vs my blinds.

Asked in chatbox why Villain not betting vs AWAY or why keeps folding SB.

No answer?

I finished 2nd after AWAY eventually got blinded out (10mins) and lost vs Villain.

The only conclusion I can think of, is Villain playing 2 accounts on a STT.

MODERATOR EDIT - DETAILS OF EVENT REMOVED

goldnballz

Not really. It's to his advantage to keep the away player in. He can then bully the hell out of you, knowing you can't play back because of the away guy.

percival09

and why would one of his 2 accounts be sat out? I assume they're using the same internet connection. 

Being the chip leader, and on the bubble, it actually makes more sense for him to keep the short stack in the game to keep you very much in line. With an away player slowing bleeding chips, there's nothing for you to do but fold. 

TommyD

Playing an away player HU is easier than playing a person who is present.  What he's doing is, based just on what you have said, not cheating in any way.  It's just good poker.

percival09

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts?:

Playing an away player HU is easier than playing a person who is present.  What he's doing is, based just on what you have said, not cheating in any way.  It's just good poker.
Posted by TommyD

guess you haven't played MattBates

Tikay10

In Response to Collusion or Multiple Accounts?:

Playing a 6-max, down to 3 players, 2 get paid. (1 player is AWAY). Villain is chip leader />3:1 to my left, AWAY is short stack. Villain keeps folding blinds vs AWAY, or call/check to showdown vs AWAY. Chip dumping? Villain always called or bet vs my blinds. Asked in chatbox why Villain not betting vs AWAY or why keeps folding SB. No answer? I finished 2nd after AWAY eventually got blinded out (10mins) and lost vs Villain. The only conclusion I can think of, is Villain playing 2 accounts on a STT. MODERATOR EDIT - DETAILS OF EVENT REMOVED
Posted by Red_King

Hi Red,

If you have any suspicions of collusion or Multi Accounting, please report them to Customer Care. Such allegations must not be aired on the Community, as people's reputations can easily be harmed when in fact they may be innocent. 

If you included a Tournament ID in your Post - & I suspect you did - it is a simple matter for anyone to trace the players involved via Sharkscope.
 
Just report such things to Customer Care please.

Thank you.  

Tikay10

As to whether this was collusion, see the replies by the vastly experienced guys such as gldenballz, Percival, & the Arsenal supporter, TommyD.

The villain is playing perfect poker in this spot. In SNG's & DYM's it is VERY important to understand these dynamics.
 
I would add that nothing much surprises me in poker these days, but colluding in a £1 or £2 DYM seems highly improbable to me. If they were able to do so with any degree of success, they'd not be doing so in £1 & £2 games, they would use the profit to do it in bigger games. It is not as easy to collude in these things as some may think, & the upside is negligible.

You are absolutely correct to be wary, & if something feels wrong, report it to Customer Care. But please don't put details on the Community, as you can so easily smear innocent people's reputations. 

Thanks, & good luck at the tables.     

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts?:

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts? : guess you haven't played MattBates
Posted by percival09

Deserves all the love we can muster. No doubt Mr Bates will be along to protest shortly.

Darkangel7

It used to annoy me in sng's when players used to go away straight away instead of playing. Now I use it to my advantage. They often come back after 2 players have come back. Either they are very fortunate and have a good run or they get blinded out. Either way what used to bother me now doesn't. Part of the game of poker.

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts?:

It used to annoy me in sng's when players used to go away straight away instead of playing. Now I use it to my advantage. They often come back after 2 players have come back. Either they are very fortunate and have a good run or they get blinded out. Either way what used to bother me now doesn't. Part of the game of poker.
Posted by Darkangel7

That's quite a touchy subject, & I've absolutely no idea why it makes people so cross. Wish there were away players in every DYM.

It's similar to Freerolls (FREEROLLS) when folks complain half the table are away. 

Some things make no sense to me at all.    

VespaPX

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts?:

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts? : That's quite a touchy subject, & I've absolutely no idea why it makes people so cross. Wish there were away players in every DYM. It's similar to Freerolls (FREEROLLS) when folks complain half the table are away.  Some things make no sense to me at all.     
Posted by Tikay10

Think that guy last night was away with the fairies :-)

F_Ivanovic

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts?:

 I would add that nothing much surprises me in poker these days, but colluding in a £1 or £2 DYM seems highly improbable to me. If they were able to do so with any degree of success, they'd not be doing so in £1 & £2 games, they would use the profit to do it in bigger games. It is not as easy to collude in these things as some may think, & the upside is negligible
Posted by Tikay10

I don't necessarily agree with this. Whilst it might seem on the surface that it's better to collude and cheat in higher games you are also far more likely to get noticed and caught by the regular players at those limits.

A recent example of this is the bot ring found on the big site that were playing 100PLO I think. They were caught by some reg's that frequently play those games. However, there are most likely bot rings that have gone undetected at micro stakes because the player pool is so huge that it's impossible for anyone to get enough information on it (as well as those playing micro stakes not being experienced enough to try and spot it)

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts?:

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts? : I don't necessarily agree with this. Whilst it might seem on the surface that it's better to collude and cheat in higher games you are also far more likely to get noticed and caught by the regular players at those limits. A recent example of this is the bot ring found on the big site that were playing 100PLO I think. They were caught by some reg's that frequently play those games. However, there are most likely bot rings that have gone undetected at micro stakes because the player pool is so huge that it's impossible for anyone to get enough information on it (as well as those playing micro stakes not being experienced enough to try and spot it)
Posted by F_Ivanovic

You may be right, but I'm sticking with my view. On a site such as Sky Poker, it must be incredibly time-intensive to collude in £1 games, & if they did so successfully, you can bet your bottom dollar they move up to higher levels. That's how it works, they'd never stick to £1 games if they were colluding successfully, greed would drive them up to £2, £3 & £5 games.   

40 minutes per game & they end up splitting (say) 2nd place between them in a 1 Quid SNG?

Anyway, we could debate that all day, but it was just me musing.

gerardirl

Sorry did someone say its good poker to fold to an away player? 

Seriously? lol

Ger

goldnballz

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts?:

Sorry did someone say its good poker to fold to an away player?  Seriously? lol Ger
Posted by gerardirl

Sometimes, yes. The answer to why is in this thread.

gerardirl

Awh thought it was a dym, sorry my bad....

swanstu

Be interested in thoughts on similar game DYM, I recently played - I was one of the two ss's vs two big stacks, I survive and the other ss is put all in against the two big stacks.

Both big stacks only had to limp with about 3% of their stack to knock the other player out, but first folds. Now I suppose there can be some reasons to fold, but really this is neglible surely?

They did this twice (folded without any raise) when the ss was all in. Why would they do this when both big stacks would naturally be likely to win the hand with little risk and thus the game??

Obv pocket talking as I then get knocked out (no fold when it was me funnily), but really, anyone comment on that? It looks downright dodgy, like the big stack was trying to save the SS.

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts?:

Be interested in thoughts on similar game DYM, I recently played - I was one of the two ss's vs two big stacks, I survive and the other ss is put all in against the two big stacks. Both big stacks only had to limp with about 3% of their stack to knock the other player out, but first folds. Now I suppose there can be some reasons to fold, but really this is neglible surely? They did this twice (folded without any raise) when the ss was all in. Why would they do this when both big stacks would naturally be likely to win the hand with little risk and thus the game?? Obv pocket talking as I then get knocked out (no fold when it was me funnily), but really, anyone comment on that? It looks downright dodgy, like the big stack was trying to save the SS.
Posted by swanstu

Hi,

There's simply not sufficient detail there to comment with any substance.

If you think there was something amiss, take a note of the Game Number, & those you believe were messing about, & REPORT IT TO CUSTOMER CARE.

They DO look at these things, look at the gameplay properly, & research deeper into the history of the players concerned, then make their decision.


 

Sky_Dan

What Tikay said. I am happy to follow things up on here/via private messages but it's always best you go through Customer Care in case I'm away etc.

swanstu

Thanks for the info fellas - I think I will simply watch out for the same players again, just in case. If I see anything again will get back.

Jac35

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts?:

Thanks for the info fellas - I think I will simply watch out for the same players again, just in case. If I see anything again will get back.
Posted by swanstu

Why don't you just enjoy your poker a bit more?

You seem to be looking for problems all the time

Sir-Gary

They may have been avoiding tripling the short stack up, they can soon become dangerous then your comfortable postion may not be so comfortable after all

swanstu

In Response to Re: Collusion or Multiple Accounts?:

They may have been avoiding tripling the short stack up, they can soon become dangerous then your comfortable postion may not be so comfortable after all
Posted by Sir-Gary

Would make some sense if they were not so far ahead and if the ss did treble they still had the other ss to take out, and there was only one player to face them. So there was almost literally no reason not to limp?

On average they would be at least 66% faves by checking the hand down, so why would they not?

Just to add the same big stack did this TWICE also.