Trying to label soft play as collusion is a good way to spread a bad rumor. It literally doesn’t make any difference to you if someone decides to check down once you are out of the pot - as long as they are not manipulating the action in a way that is either clearly trying to get you out of the pot or to put in the max when one of them has a really good hand.

In general, it doesn’t bother me at all, but there are times where I get bounced out of a pot because of aggressive action and then they check it down. That’s pretty damn annoying. But as long as it makes sense when the cards are turned over, it shouldn’t really matter.

Is it bad for the game? Yes. Should you be blatantly accusing people of playing teams or colluding for doing something you basically see in any card room ever? No. That’s a bad look for you.

I don’t get it myself. I enjoy playing poker and I really enjoy beating my friends. I guess some people just lack that cutthroat mentality. Even when my wife and I are occasionally on the same table we will continue to bet each other if we are heads up.

I haven’t played much 8/16 at Fortune, but the 8/16 at Palace is insanely good. Fair warning: some people there check down with each other. Also fair warning: they are not cheating or colluding either. Don’t be silly.

I used to hate the soft play check down, until I realized that if one of these goobers busted the other their seat might be taken by a good player.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

of course it is better for you to have them soft play. even if they sometimes make moves to get you out of the pot as these are bad players and all those things they do will be wrong for them and good for you.
besides its customary for this especially among asians who defer tho the higher up one in the group. and they are the ones many times pumping the money in the game.

Collusion is a pretty strong word for regs and OMCs soft playing each other. I understand how frustrating it can be and it's the main reason I don't play many weekday morning/afternoon sessions. The game gets boring and pretty unenjoyable (imo), but I always remind myself a large portion of the players are there for the social aspect. They aren't really colluding against you and in reality it's really not that much different than the sharks trying not to eat each other when there's easy money on the table. Everybody waits their turn and takes bites of the person dumping buy in after buy in. It's just how the game is played by different demographics. It's the same in every single cardroom I've ever played in.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Most of these smaller games have pretty small player pool and many players know each other.

It is pretty common for players to give each other "breaks" or what not in the smaller game. Part of the game, just like rake and jackpot drop.

I don't agree with any of it, but it is social norm. Accept it and move on.

Fellow BH and all,

lol at all the rationalizing and downplaying of collusion. It is cheating

The argument of how much cheating is tolerable, or still allows me to be profitable in the game, is separate and is irrelevant to whether or not collusion is cheating.

I agree collusion is cheating but they aren’t colluding so...

If they played that way in a tournament, would you consider it collusion?

I mean really what else are we supposed to do? Anyone that has played poker for any amount of time has just accepted that this happens at every room. To begin, with the amount of bad play at low stakes, it would be near impossible to prove they're cheating. I see players only call when they have the nuts at least once every other time I go (when they aren't even trying to soft play). Then, if you did prove this was cheating, you're pretty much screwing over your favorite cardroom, as half their morning/early afternoon crowd would be banned from playing there. I think all the rationalizations are because we've already rationalized to ourselves and debated our options prior to this conversation. I dont agree with it, and maybe if I was playing 5/10 I'd feel more of a responsibility to speak up, but none of us is going to start a grassroots movement against these low stakes recreational players.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

"Oh, it's just you and me?"
Check... check
Check... check
Check... check

Something else to remember about this debate is that a lot of this is happening because if HH promotions. It's an unsaid courtesy that everyone is limping and trying to check down all pocket pairs and suited connectors. I watch many of these players limp/call every street with KK and QQ as well, which can be heaven or hell to play against. I personally avoid morning hours because I cant seem to beat this game and end up being tilted.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Try running a poker room first.

Start kicking these players out or make collusion less visible, to which is probably worse than obvious collusion.

You gotta pick your battles. But if you feel that this is important to you, there are other rooms.

Plus how are you going to apply the rules? Heads-up cannot check down?

Cannot discuss checking down? Cannot check behind with the nuts? Cannot play with friends or family?

Where do you draw the line? And once you draw the line, how do you apply the rules? Warning and then kick? Dealer has to speak up? Other players can start accusing others of collusion? Every hand is shown at show-down?

List goes on and on. If you have a working solution to prevent low stake players from soft playing each other, I am sure these houses wouldn't mind applying it.

I think a place could try a rule that if you routinely check it down when headsup with someone in particular, you are forced to check when headsup with anyone.

Thats terrible. Define "routinely".

Don't think it would be that tough for a floor to determine with regulars in a room. Of course I wasn't trying to spell out an actual rule.

I can see that as a preventative measure, whereas people will see they can't just check down pots. But I don't see the enforcement of it reasonable.

Collusion and soft playing are two completely different things yet they’re being talked about in this thread like they’re one in the same.

I think its a matter of semantics. Technically softplay could be classified as collusion. And so far I think we have one person who puts it on the level of cheating.

I disagree it’s only a matter of semantics as collusion affects your ev while soft playing does not. If it did it would be cracked down upon the same way it is in tournament.

I think that’s up to the TD, not the players. Most tournaments have a rule against checking back the nuts last to act. There are also rules against talking about checking it down, particularly when someone else is in all in.

Also, I don’t think it’s a good comparison. If players have an unspoken agreement to check down in a cash game it doesn’t really have a ripple effect, whereas in a tournament, checking down can cause massive shifts in future results (i.e. getting knocked out by someone that should have been out already, etc.).

As someone pointed out earlier, there can be ripple effects in cash games as well, especially with regard to stack sizes later in the same game.

I have never called a floor on anyone for softplaying. However, when I saw someone check behind with the nuts on the river vs a friend, I have said "are you going to check that when in a hand with me as well"?

It's not as bad as some other kinds of collusion, but it is still unfair, and it is still bad for the game. And I really think most of it would be stopped simply by the floor coming to the table and telling the regulars "checking it down and other kinds of softplay between friends is not allowed in this cardroom. Either you play to win against everyone equally, or you will be asked to leave."

I feel that part of the issue is how can we tell the difference? If I'm at a table with these types and see a flop 3-handed and proceed to fold to a flop bet only to watch them check down turn and river on multiple occassions is that considered soft play or collusion? They aren't actively colluding, they are just acquaintances and Im the guy at their table that is the stranger amongst them. Is that -ev or just require me to change strategies, because it seems like they are getting to play at a 6-handed table, while I'm playing 9-handed.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

If these people meet in the parking lot to exchange the chips they get as result of checking it down, I'd consider it collusion. But when you check it down, that doesn't put money in the pot. Doesn't make sense.

Reminds me of a guy who flopped a flush draw, hit on turn, loses on river to a full house. Then proceeds to remark, very somberly, something like the game is rigged. Similar nonlogic. Like the reviews on pokeratlas complaining about rigged games. You're just an idiot.

I flopped sets of aces twice last week and lost all my stacks in 1/3 nl. Thats how the game goes. And checking it down doesnt happen in that game IME.

If the game sucks, change tables or card rooms. Collusion isn't an issue at your local low stakes games. OMC and lame regs are everywhere. Deal with it!

Soft playing is collusion
Collusion is cheating
Therefore collusion is cheating

basically they are playing in a way that makes them lose more slowly to each other but faster to the rest of the table. you have to love that.

they are not doing it for a benefit to their bottom line but to a benefit to just themselves for social reasons so let them have their fun while you take their money.