Ethics or frank violation of rules

[JunctionA]

Here's the situation 12 left in a 45 man live tournament. Blinds are 300/600. SB is the big stack BB small stack has 2400 in chips i have 3200. I am in mid pasition one person to act before two after then SB BB. My hand AK after fold, i limp, then fold, fold, SB calls 300, BB moves all-in. I call the 2400......SB ponders and is looking more like folding than calling.. BB urges him to make the call and to put me all-in "he only has a few hundred more chips"...I urge quiet by putting my finger to my mouth ...he doesnt get it and continues the urging.....SB puts me all-in I make the call.......BB turns over AK matching my AK SB turns over JT needless to say a Ten comes on the flop the rest is history two of us are out.
Now i'm not asking whether i played it correctly but asking if this guy was violating rules of play or is it just ethics to not smart talk another player...i can see if he is in the hand by himself but he ended up putting me in a difficult spot as well.....your judgements please.

[chardrian]

push preflop and you wouldnt have to worry about ethics.

[euphoricism]

Players are certainly allowed to partake in this type of talk.

And totally push, youve only got 4x the BB!

[boost]

Players are certainly allowed to partake in this type of talk.

And totally push, youve only got 4x the BB!

err this is kinda a gray area, it can be interpreted as collusion. Either way, its def looked down upon.

[Lukie]

I think it's definitely collusion, even if it's unintentional.

that said, this kind of stuff happens ALL the time in live poker and you aren't going to change that.

[euphoricism]

Whaaa? Maybe I'm reading this wrong or something. I really dont see anything even close to collusion.

We limp, villain #1 calls, villain #2 goes all in. We call. Villain looks like he might fold and villain says "God man, youre the big stack and we're both short its like required you call here, folding would be really stupid."

Yeah umm... no.. thats fine in my book. Talking in poker to manipulate your opponent is practically a given. Villain #2 could have convinced villain #1 NOT to call just as easy as he could TO call...

[Phantaroth]

It is obv collusion.

It is fine to talk shit at the table, although it is annoying. But if we are on the bubble and I push to steal the blinds and someone urged the BB to call by saying "CALL, CALL, WE MOVE UP $$$ YAH CALLLLLLLLLLLL" I'd be pretty pissed.

[euphoricism]

Wow, for poker players you guys really need some thicker skin.

[givememyleg]

Wow, for poker players you guys really need some thicker skin.

Yeah I agree with you that it isn't collusion, but it would still really piss me off.

[Iwind]

If it was heads up it would have been different, but this is 3 handed, and it is definately not ok to advice other players how to play their hand. He might get a penalty for it if somebody mentions it to a floorman. I'm used to people trash talking and live tables now and then, and I don't care about that, but when they are breaking the rules in this manner I'd definately say something, and if he kept doing it, mention it to a floorperson.

[euphoricism]

I'd be pissed at the guy for making a retarded call and getting lucky -- but not the guy for convincing him to call.

And he isnt telling him how to play his hand -- he has no idea what villain #1 holds. If he was convincing him to call and the moron had like 64o, would you complain?

I cant really think of anything unethical that you could do at the table which isnt already against the rules. Showing your cards before the hand is over is ocasionally done and not generally penalized and I guess that *could* be unethical but its rarely done for any sort of unethical purpose.

The only one thats ever really bothered me was some asshole went all-in out-of-turn and they didnt hold it to him so when I said "alright I'll go all in and he'll call" they let him fold. But that was a homegame, and I'll probably never play there again because of it. I dont think that'd fly in a casino anyway.

The classic "burn 'n' turn" could be seen as unethical but I've never seen it done in any way but a mistake.

[NWNewell]

I wasn't at the table so I can't make an accurate comment....

But I could easily see the BB wanting the SB in the pot. He is short stacked and has to figure he has pretty good equity with his AK, and would like to see a 3-way pot. He is most likely only worried about AA, and KK (or one of you have a pocket pair and the other has a AK taking away his outs). If the SB is pondering that long, the BB probably doesn't put the SB on AA or KK.

He didn't really care if the SB put you all in, but he wanted him to call. He has to figure this is a pretty good opportunity to triple up since he is shortstacked.

Without additional reason, I don't think it was collusion. And I don't think it was unethical either. Talking and playing the metal game (when trying to do it for your own benefit) is part of poker.

[K2 the ArmA]

Talking about the hand during the hand with other players that are in the hand is looked down on certainly. He should have waited for him to fold before he told him how retarded he was.

[euphoricism]

huh? Are we all reading the same post here?

[Iwind]

urges him to make the call and to put me all-in "he only has a few hundred more chips"...I urge quiet by putting my finger to my mouth ...he doesnt get it and continues the urging.....

This is clearly talking about the hand being played, even if he doesn't mention his hole cards or knows the other guy's cards, he's still telling the other guy how to play based on his read of villain #1's and JuntionA's range, if he's a thinking player that is.

In a HU pot in cash games people do this all the time, I do it myself, and it's just a part of the game, and a very important part of the game. In a 3 way pot it's different though, since you affect the way two other players might play against each other. And also, there are different rules between tournaments and cash games when it comes to this, like flashing cards for instance, but I believe not telling other players how to play when a pot his 3+ handed is pretty standard no matter what you play.

[NWNewell]

As far as tourny verus cash games.... do your remember how much talking Jamie Gold did? No issues there.

As far as 3-way verus HU... It is bad etiquette at best. Not unethical. And probably not collusion (but since I wasn't there I'll refrain from serious judgement on that)

[Iwind]

But several poker professionals as well as other people have talked about how that issue was handled, flashing cards and talking about what he had is not supposed to be done in tournaments.

I'm not really talking about ethics, ethics in a poker game can be discussed for ages without getting anywhere, I'm talking about general etiquette and playing a fair game. There's supposed to be one player per hand, your not suppose to help players in their decisions agains other players, by flashing your cards, talking about the hand, talking about one of the players involved or anything like that. I'm sure this stuff also depend on which stakes you're playing, since there are more new players at lower stakes after all and it's probably not taken too seriously there. Also, different cardrooms and casinos react differently, but most places in a fairly high stakes game I'm sure a player who kept doing this stuff would have people complain and eventually would be thrown out.

[Knytestorme]

The way I look at it, if I want to talk about my hand till the cows come home in hopes of convincing my opponent to do what I want them to do then that's fine.

If someone else starts talking about my hand when they aren't in the hand that's not fine

If someone else starts talking about my hand when they are in the hand and it's not HU or their turn to act then that's out of line and should be seen as a rules violation. The problem with this is that with shows like HSP and PAD now people are seeing pro's do exactly that, and while they also show those pro's getting commented at or apologizing they also show them not getting penalized in any way. This has the same impact on players entering the sport as WPT showing only all-in-fests did initially, people see this as the way to play if it's their first or only introduction to the sport and mimic that behaviour.

This is not a good thing but there is nothing that can be done to stop it until it's introduced into the rules...problem is that could cause more hassles, if I recall correctly they made a rule in one tournament (possibly WSOP) that you couldn't do anything to try to coerce your opponent to do something (ie talk about your hand, comment on their stack, etc) and a player got penalized for doing just that which takes away one of the tools in the arsenal for a lot of players.

We don't want to get bogged down in rules to the point every hand requires players to be rules lawyers but we also need to ensure that even the hint of cheating or collusion are nowhere near the game if we want to prove to the govt. that it's a fair game with all players on an equal footing and it comes down to skill not chance or cheating.

[euphoricism]

Is it a bit rude? Sure. But poker is a rude game. Is it illegal? Nah. Definitely not written in any rulebook. Is it "unethical", nah. Its hard to be unethical in a game where the single sole objective is to literally and directly profit from your opponents mistakes

[NWNewell]

Is it a bit rude? Sure. But poker is a rude game. Is it illegal? Nah. Definitely not written in any rulebook. Is it "unethical", nah. Its hard to be unethical in a game where the single sole objective is to literally and directly profit from your opponents mistakes

Agreed. Mostly.... it's not hard to be ethical. We're not thieves. It's a chess match with chips instead of ponds. (Or do you sneak the chess pieces around when your opponent isn't looking too? lol... just kidding euphor )

I doubt that I would assume collusion based on what was stated by the OP alone. And it is not agaist the "rules'. And I wouldn't call it unethical, becuase I can see a strong case that the BB was talking to improve is very own chances of winning alone, not to improve his and the SB chances of taking out the OP. So, I would not call it "unethical". I would call it unethical if his intentions were otherwise (aka similar to colluding).

But I will agree that it is bad etiquette. And I think it would be a good idea for a rule limiting players from commenting on play when it is not their turn to act or not HU in an effort to avoid collusion (But I agree it would be a tough balance to enforce).


And my initial point was that I can see the guy making this comments (yes, in poor form none the less) in an effort to only help himself. Not to be unethical, not colluding. But yes, poor etiquette.

But anway..... "I don't thing this horse is getting up anymore!"

[Iwind]

I don't know about what rulebooks you are talking about, but it is included in the official rules for the Poker Tournament Directors Association.( http://www.pokertda.com/)

12 No Disclosure - No Advice - One Player to a Hand- Players are obligated to protect the other players in the tournament at all times. Therefore, players, whether in the hand or not, may not:

1. Disclose contents of live or folded hands
2. Advise or criticize play before the action is complete
3. Read a hand that hasn't been tabled

The one-player-to-a-hand rule will be enforced.

These are pretty standard rules, for instance WSOP uses them, and I believe most WPT tournaments follow these rules as well. Cardrooms where the tournament directors are members of TDA most likely uses them for all their tournaments, which is a lot of cardrooms, even though they are probably not too strictly enforced in lower buyin tournaments.

[NWNewell]

I don't know about what rulebooks you are talking about, but it is included in the official rules for the Poker Tournament Directors Association.( http://www.pokertda.com/)

12 No Disclosure - No Advice - One Player to a Hand- Players are obligated to protect the other players in the tournament at all times. Therefore, players, whether in the hand or not, may not:

1. Disclose contents of live or folded hands
2. Advise or criticize play before the action is complete
3. Read a hand that hasn't been tabled

The one-player-to-a-hand rule will be enforced.

Well... then I stand corrected about the rules.... if these were the specific rules that the tournament was being run by, anyway.
(thanks for that link BTW)

Although, it certainly seems that this rule has always been enforced at the discretion of the floormen and has been treated as a "gray area" rule *especially #2). I mean, if these rules were strictly enforced, then people would not even be talking to each other about the hand when heads up like you see all the time.

I guess it comes comes down to a case of bad precedence fostering behaviors that are being interpreted as acceptable..... and floormen that are enforcing these rules knowingly allowing these behaviors against established rules (i.e. Jamie Golds WSOP actions).

It made good TV and everything gives way to ratings...

[mcatdog]

Is it a bit rude? Sure. But poker is a rude game. Is it illegal? Nah. Definitely not written in any rulebook. Is it "unethical", nah. Its hard to be unethical in a game where the single sole objective is to literally and directly profit from your opponents mistakes.

This is true in a heads-up pot in a cash game, but in three-way pots it's very easy for two players to collude with each other in such a way that they're both +EV and the third player is -EV. It's even easier in donkaments.

Example: You're on the button with 1000 chips with 4 players left in a donk-and-go with the standard Top 3 payout structure. SB has 1000 chips, BB and UTG both have 4000 chips. UTG folds, you go all-in and while SB is deciding, BB shows his 23o. It's not hard to see why BB's actions directly cost you EV.