Quote:
Originally Posted by junior15
I did read the article and I still don't agree with it. I was just referencing the section you decided to quote and pointing that I didn't agree with the logic of the argument. Tommy is arguing that because some people think it is bad etiquette to ask for freely available information, then it becomes information that isn't available to everyone because some people won't ask for it. The fact is, the information IS available to everyone, some people choose not to avail themselves of it, whether because the don't know they are entitled to it or because they feel it is bad etiquette to ask for it.........
The rule was instituted to prevent collusion, but what actually happens by a wide margin, it doesn't, it gets abused by jerks who think its a nice way for them to get free info. Its an abuse of the rule to do that, and since everyone doesn't abuse the rule, only lowlife jerks with no morals, its not information that is freely available to everyone, so its a low grade form of cheating/angle shooting; like soft playing your buddy.
And saying you don't think the rule was instituted to prevent collusion and you've never seen any evidence that it was doesn't make it so, it just makes you sound naive and obtuse.
One last thing, etiquette doesn't change because a few jerks are willing to ignore it. Etiquette is something we as a somewhat peaceful society develop over a very long time frame so that we can all co-exist without giving in to our baser instincts. As long as there are guys around that are willing to do something violent to you in retailation for disrespecting them, its probably a good idea to follow it; you really never know who that guy you just showed up is or what he's capable of, so why take the chance?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guyra
So back to my original question: how does one prove collusion in a heads up pot if only the winner of the hand can ask to see the losing players cards? The players who folded before the showdown will never have their cards revealed and they should be mucked together with all other folded cards. If I suspect players A and B of collusion but only player C and A have a showdown(bc player B folded the turn due to him realizing player A actually had a hand) how do I go about detecting collusion?
If you suspect collusion, you are going to have evidence to point to, signaling, betting patterns, ect, Tell the floor, tell the shift manager, they'll call surveillance, if you're right they're going to see the same thing.
In my experience the few times its happened, that is what was done, and the situation was cleared up very quickly.