Yeah but lets say there is one guy that doesn't get this concept. It is very likely more people will reg in the short future. Is it still highest EV to openshove?

Soon as more players reg u can stop jamming. Obvious maths while your stack is worth 13 times more than you paid jamming 72o is +ev even playing against correct calling ranges.

I would think so anyway sure some smarter people will chime in and confirm or refute this.

It would be if the others can gain EV by not cooperating, I don't think they can. Lets say BTN jams and the SB calls, you are the BB and have 72o. If you fold quickly you almost sure to be heads up, but definitely not a 100% since a player can reg during the hand (and a split pot). To be able to win the tournament you would have to go allin as fast you can after that and win twice. The more hands you will play the bigger the chance is an extra player will join. It's just after a break so players sometimes reg <5 minutes after the start because they want the extra minutes break. I have played it from the start a few times and there where always 5+ players when I did.
Other scenario is BTN jams and the SB folds, then it would be a pretty easy fold because the SB is not going to cooperate. This is no exact math of course, but I think the BTN should jam and the SB has kind of a tough decision to find out if the BB will cooperate. But if the BTN is jamming any two, then the SB should probably call any two.

Anyway any extra hand is likely to cut your equity from 33.k to 2.6k(+your edge). So it's very likely max EV to go allin in theory, but in reality its a little bit tricky for the SB. I don't know if I would have come up with the idea with two randoms in the tourney. It's very likely there are players folding the SB or BB and after thinking a while find out what you are doing.

edit: I think if you do some math on how many times the blinds will have to call that number will be pretty low. Pretty tough to lose the huge amount of extra equity.

It would be a problem that many tournaments (especially higher buy-ins) and satellites would be cancelled. Not just few, we're talking like "half of the 109+ tourneys"-style of many.

I was thinking about this, wouldn't it be possible to "pause" play untill a certain amount of players are registered. I remember back in the day when you regged a Party sng you would be seated waiting for the other players, something like that. It's likely that some players don't like playing 3 handed in a HS tourney, especially not on a busy Sunday. So maybe pause it until there is a full table.

I think there would be a pretty easy solution to this: just make it impossible that tournaments end before late reg closes. If you have all the chips before, fine. You sit there waiting, just as all those HS Cash open siters . If Somebody joins, the tournament resumes. If not and late reg is over, you are declared winner.

I understand that this is not a super sexy thought (haveing all chips currently in play in a tournament but not beeing instantly declared winner and have to wait if somebody joins) but lets face it, all that would only happen in those very rare cases anyway.

I truly can't see why this should not be the way its done, other than software/technical limitations. Than again, if we can fly to the moon...


@PartyRep: aggree with blakkman here, it is super important that you tell players how this was handeled. As has been explained above, there is situations where it is correct to go with any two cards without colluding, simply because it is the best strategic choice.
If this was handled anyway other than not at all (eg deepsee winning a SHR within 1 hand) than not telling us how and why you basically refuse to give us information which is of drastic importance. As others have explained before, in some spots just getting the money in with any two cards is clearly the best strategy choice if payouts are as they are advertised. Of course, this strategic choice chances a lot when advertised prizes will not be paid/ freezed/ whatever. And it becomes pretty terrible if you don't only seize funds but ban players or whatever. I have no clue how you handeled the situation, but for the mentioned reasons it seams pretty obvious that it has to be done transparently. People have to know.

Let me be very clear: I don't want things like this to happen frequently or whatever, the suggestion I made above would (I think?) resolve this problem easily. But not talking about it when people have legitimate questions is really not the way to go.

This open jamming issue isn't new to online Poker. And it can become a real problem for the sites and players long term. It seems in this case it might have been 3 random people that regged and found themselves in this potentially +EV spot... but this isn't always the case.

On Full Tilt when they first re-launched they were losing thousands of dollars a day due to multiple teams of players from around the world targeting satellites that had a low min player requirement and had no players regged for. They'd reg last second and shove the first hand and chop up the overlay between them.

Are these players technically cheating?
If you answer "no" then would you want 2 or more of these guys on your table?
What happens if an innocent player joins at the last second with 3 people who are obviously content on scamming the site and are obviously the type that are much more likely to cheat players.

As online poker continues to decline more opportunities for this scam become available, and believe me these scamming groups sit around scanning lobbies just waiting for the opportunity 24hrs a day. (Eastern Europe especially) Sites that haven't altered their MTT offerings are going to find this scenario playing out more and more frequently. The good news is there are some safeguards available but most sites let small issues become big issues before they can justify spending a penny to stop it.

It's clear to me Party just has to pay up veeea his 100k, not close. They just exploited a bug in the system, but, I mean they even had legit hands. The only proof of collusion would be if they chatted about it in client.

lol russians, respect

yeah k3o pretty legit call after 2 people all in for 200bb each

unavoidable cooler is unavoidable

risk $2600 to win $100k, I think hes getting the right price

yeah but so is 32o

I sent to the security guy at stars and he says its strictly prohibited and people have been banned a lot because of attempts and that its in the below rules (I'm guessing party has the same/similar))

Rule 7 - Unfair Play
Collusion, by which two or more players work together in the games or share knowledge to gain an unfair advantage over other players, is strictly prohibited.

Rule 20 - Poker is an individual (not a team) game. Any action or chat intended
to help another player is unethical and is prohibited. Unethical play, such as soft-play (playing less aggressively against a partner) and chip dumping (intentionally losing chips to a partner), may result in penalties, including seizure of funds from the offender's account and/or termination of the account. We routinely review game play to look for violations of our rules and to ensure the integrity of our games. It may be necessary to withhold player winnings until the completion of game play reviews.

Rule7:
Which player had a disadvantage? The players who didn't register the games count allready?

Rule20:
They probably didn't chat to help and give someone more informations?
Was this chipdumping or just maxEV play with obv arrangement off the tables?

Rly dont see any Rule fit here, but get it that Sites will not allow this to happen. Should make a new rule in cases like that. Banning would be imo ridic.

Pretty sick actually that SB got a legit hand here which makes collusion a little bit harder to prove. BB obv has an easy call once SB calls. I think the chance that they did not chat about this off the table is 0% but obv it is going to be very hard to prove.

I can tell you with 100% certainty that players aren't always banned for this with Amaya. In fact players that have systematically targeted satellites to secure an overlay were allowed to keep playing. Even with later evidence showing that they attempted stack balances against innocent players.

The reality is websites look at the risk associated to themselves and the risk to innocent players not in the same light.

Hey everyone, this is Deepsee more commonly known as Veeea.

As for now, I've been playing poker over 7 years. I have never referred to any unfair or fraudulent methods to gain advantage. I am playing on many poker rooms and have never been alleged or suspected of cheating.

I am regularly playing the Super High Roller tournament on Party Poker and yesterday I've registered to it hours before it was supposed to start.
Some time later I went back from the break having 16+ tables and have seen the SHR running and having three players only. I was limited on time to think yet I concluded that going three way all in would be a massive +EV granted two other regs understand the situation. Obviously there were no teamplay or collusion. Besides I had A9o and would have a good equity if called wide. Had any of the them folded I would just resume playing the tournament as usual realising they are not going to flip.

Back there I had no idea I could be violating the TOS and face any consequences at all. I've seen a +EV spot and I took it.

30 minutes after the tourney ended, my account was frozen and so was my bankroll. No attempts to contact me were made either by E-mail or phone.

Before the tournament started I had deposited 4k$. Lifetime I am losing on Party, feel free to check my Sharkscope account. I am willing to agree with the cancellation of the Super High Roller, yet I find the ban and freeze of all my money completely unfair.

Sorry for my english

yup
BTN could expect other regs would understand the situation.
any reg would call QQ out of SB.

BB would have some considerations whether they all on the same wave or someone waken up w/ the hand and just pretend he`s trying to chop quickly.
In former case K3 is decent hand to call it off.

I think it would have been wrong to accuse Pads every time you see hungarian ghost at the table or accuse you when its a dutch one.

0% is probably a bit biased, they don`t even had 3 random hands.

these guys are like best friends, not just randoms from the same country.

think only veeaa got banned too bc I encountered biack semi deep in party main past midnight

i recall seeing that too, however biack didn't play the 2.6k again which suggests to me that his account was locked but could continue playing tournaments that were already running

Wait you agree SHR gets cancelled and forfeit $100k but insist on getting your $4k BR and account back....?

Partypoker lols and snapcalls

hahaha Veea..God...

agree with Alexos, that's a rather strange approach if all you wanted is to gain "max +EV" and hoped the other two "regs" would "recognize this is highly +EV"

If I think Im in the right here, Id lawyer up and sue for the 100k (or something to that extent, costs will be manageable I think)

#howrich

So what if the first guy jams 200bb then player two has ATo (pick a hand ) and is not trying to collide but thinks hmmm he is probably jamming any two to end it I don't want to collude but it's super +chip ev ( not talking the obvious +$ev) for me to call and then player three has 99 and reads this situation the same and thinks wow I don't want to collide either but this spot is to good +cEV etc... At what point is it collusion and at what point ( hand strength ) is it circumstance ?

Cancelling the tournament and returning buy-ins to players with a warning should be fine.

Party should really give some incentive for people to early reg. It's not tempting for many players to play 3-handed at the beginning of tournament with good players. Some kind of satellite which ends before tournament but requires player to play?

Like some megapath to Super High Roller -> get a shot to big one -> gives incentive for good players to reg early etc. 0,01$ -> 5,5$ -> 22$ -> 109$ -> straight to 2600$ with 1 or 2 seats guaranteed.