I like playing single-table Hold’ Em tournaments. I find that I have the most success when I have a chance to “learn” about the other players. I’m talking about their styles and tendencies, and not about tells. In multi-table tournaments, you have no control to where you’re moved. Thus, your new table might already have players that “know” each other. It may take too much time to adjust to new players and learn their styles of play. I understand that this is fair since everyone in the tournament faces the same issues. But I just find myself to be significantly more successful at the single-table tournaments. But these days, it is becoming more difficult for my friends to get together to play. And the drive to AC is a little too time-consuming when we all have families, kids, etc. So I’m considering the online option.
Enough of the lead in to the question. In online single-table tournaments, what’s to prevent collusion amongst players? For example, why couldn’t 3 friends join a tournament and help each other over their telephones, cellphones, etc? I think that fear of this possibility has stopped me from playing online.
It’s possible, of course. However, the poker sites take this kind of thing very seriously and continuously look for patterns. If the same three players keep ending up in the same single-table tournaments and appear to be helping each other out, they’ll be losing their accounts pretty quickly.
There are a couple of people here who’ve cited their concerns about collusion as their reason for not playing online poker. I wanna say Sam Stone is one but I’m not 100% sure. Anyway, yeah, as Priceguy says there’s nothing initially preventing players from colluding at tournaments or at cash games but the sites do watch for patterns and act on player reports as well. One thing to consider is the buy-in for the tournament. If you’re talking about $10 or less it probably isn’t going to be worth their time to collude. At a $10+1 10-person table, they’re putting $33 into a $100 prize pool so they’d have to take down all three of the top spots to have any sort of payday, and even acting completely in concert there’s no guarantee of a 1-2-3 finish. It may be more of a concern at higher buy-ins, but since the highest I play is $10+1 it’s not something I worry about. I’m more concerned with trying to deal with the lunatics who play the low-level buy-ins like they’re playing bingo.
This is where I live mostly as well, and my secret is to just let the dummies punch themselves out. There’s very few hands I’ll challenge a 6-handed or greater flop with. There’s just too much that can go wrong for so little reward.
I’m with Otto - I play $10 or less SNGs and I doubt its worth the risk. I have been at tables where I am convinced it happened, however - maybe 4-5 times out of the 300-400 times I’ve played a SNG. In each instance, Player A would make a bet followed by Player B coming in w/ an all-in reraise within the first 5 hands. Player A would have a high pocket pair, B something like Q3 off, followed by a ‘I thought I’d catch you bluffing’ comment. Assuming Player A doubled up, someone else is similarly charitable 3-4 hands later. One night I noticed it, checked out the profiles and noticed all three were from suburbs of Chicago and posted to the big winner that I was notifying the site management. Oddly enough, he busted himself out w a few dumb calls within ten minutes and never said a word.
All that said (criminy its slow at work today) I don’t sweat that near as much as players working Otto’s low-level/bingo analogy.
I realize that the math is often there (and don’t get me wrong, AA, KK, AK etc, I’m reraising) but those chips aren’t disappearing. It’s just not worth the headache and aggrivation of losing on a suckout that early in a tourney.
I worry about it in the higher limit games. I don’t mind playing 2-4, 3-6, or 5-10 online. But when you get up to the $20-40 games and such, I think the chance of collusion is a lot higher.
Incidentally, I just read an article about some online poker tournament champion who’d been busted playing up to 6 accounts at the same time in the same tournament. And he claimed the practice was widespread.
Someone started a thread with a link to his blog on the topic, which isn’t coming up on a search. IIRC, he claimed he had no idea, never crossed his mind, that playing multiple hands in the same tournament might be unethical. He then went on to bitch about how money that he claims not to have cheated to win was taken when his accounts were frozen and the money confiscated. My heart broke in 17 places upon reading it, it did.