Hey guys,

I just want to start by saying that I don't really assume people are colluding vs me, and don't want to start throwing out wild accusations. This spot however, combined with some other information made me extremely suspicious.

The spot


river checkback makes me think they may be soft playing (if goriann jams and janmichaelV calls with TTxx and I have AA45 or like AK45ds it could be kinda awful). I didn't think they were card sharing because goriann could just blast and jan could fold. But now I'm not sure, they might have just gotten lazy. Thought Goriann might have just blanked out and didn't realize he had the nuts. This spot was on money bubble, only top 2 get paid out. Neither player had bubble protection.

Then I looked into both on sharkoscope, and realized they had the same exact avg stake. Was like ok, maybe it's a coincidence. The next day their stakes were slightly different, and I thought oh it probably was a coincidence. Now today their stakes are both exactly $104. They also both got 1st and 2nd in the same 63 bounty PLO event last night. Not really sure what that means, but I feel like my suspicion is justified? What do you guys think.





*EDIT didn't sit at their table for very much of the tournament, don't have many more hands on them.

Its more likely that he went into auto checkdown mode and didnt even notice he rivered the nuts.

The stats dont look like they are colluding at all. They dont play the same tourneys much at all. Only this one the past couple days. Its also 10 entry tourney, play enough of those and you are going to see the same players at 3-4 handed most of the time.

Its just a spot that encourages unspoken collusion to knock out the shorty.

Is there any significance to their avg stake being the same? If I was colluding, I would have a bunch of different accounts to collude with, so I'm not sure that them not playing the same tournaments is accurate to the whole picture. There could be other players that fill in those gaps.

Probably a coincidence. That is the only thing that is weird at all.

I just see nothing from the play that suggests collusion, other than its a situation that encourages it naturally.

There is literally no benefit for him checking back river. If they are colluding and wanted to hide it he should have bet the nuts on the river so the other guy folds and you dont even get to see what his hand was, you just lose to a rivered straight.

Maybe if he shoved the nuts and got called by a trash one pair hand, to win the whole thing, I might be sketched out.

Yeah, that's mostly the conclusion I came to as well. Just found the avg stake matching to be strange, but not too concerned. Not going to stop me from firing the 63 tonight