A and B are in the 4 and 5 seats in a 2/5 NL must move game. Player C is in the 10 seat. Player D is a pre-flop folder whose only role is to invoke IWTSTH.

Action in the hand on a 569 rainbow flop is as follows:

A opens for $40
B raises to $100
C agonizes over the call, and finally makes it after taking much more
time than is normal for him.
A reraises to $300 total
B calls
C folds
A may have had a whispered convo with B that I don't hear. He
instructs the dealer to run it out (they check down). Both of them
have 200+ more in their stacks.
D asks to see both hands
B wins with A9 after running 8s counterfeit A's 56.
A gets pissed when his 56 is exposed. Wants to see D's hand every
time he shows down.

A&B are young players who clearly know each other. I haven't played with B enough to evaluate his play, but A has a strong tendency to make huge bluffs and then show them. Other than showing bluffs, he tries to conceal his hand unless he wins. From my read on A, B calling with TPTK is reasonable.

A&B may be roommates playing off the same roll. While this accusation is plausible, I don't really know how the guy who made it would know.

C&D are middle aged regulars. Both are pretty solid. D invokes IWTSTH from time to time, but not excessively. I don't think C would ever invoke IWTSTH.

Any problem with IWTSTH in this situation? It seems pretty clear to me that regardless of intent to cheat or shared bankroll what these guys did is suspicious enough to warrant IWTSTH.

Would you have any problem with these guys playing at the same table? Should the floor take any action against them?

I'd like to see the floor make them play separate tables, but this isn't an option. There are only two 2/5 NL tables set up as a must move.

Get up and move, this table sucks

+1

Any time I see a checkdown between buds after preflop agression, I can't get a table change quick enough. The table is instant -EV.

Agreed.


I don't mind IWTSTH once with these two. They both showed hands that warranted the action, ie no colusion, so I wouldn't ask again

Selecting another table is not an option. This is the only poker room in town and it generally has two 2/5 NL games chained in a must move. When you play in this game, you are sitting at the only casino 2/5 table within 60 miles that you are allowed to play.

"Get up and move, this table sucks"

I'll go against the wisdom here and say the game is good. You may stack them both. And that would be fun. YMMV.

Howard

I agree with this generally speaking. If a player asks to check it down post-flop, it may be due to their inability to play well post-flop. It may also mean that they have a good but vulnerable starting hand (or good but vulnerable at the time they ask to check it down). At least, this is true from my experience.

This is exactly the situation for which the IWTSTH rule was invented. The rule is the remedy for the problem.

Yep, looks fine to me. As a houseman, I would caution the table that this does not mean we're going to be seeing everyone's cards for the rest of the night. If Player A asks to see other cards more than once, I'm probably going to deny it, unless there's another couple of friends in a similar situation at the table.

The action was on the flop and they checked down the turn and river.

They potentially squeezed out a player who had a hard time calling the initial raise, safe in the knowledge that they will be checking it down if the 3rd party folds.

Seems to me like blatant collusion, the player requesting IWTSTH is perfectly within his rights.

If after the third party folded the flop, they clearly agreed to check it down, the dealer needs to call the floor, without a player requesting so.

FYP

hopefully you mean it seems like POSSIBLE collusion. Once we see their hands, their play is no longer suspect. Also, if you played more small stakes live games, Bubble, you'd see that "let's check it down?" is pretty common among certain regulars/friends. I suspect that this request is ALWAYS made by honest players as colluders would take the rather simple precaution of bet/folding a later street. Two players in collusion are certainly playing the same roll so it doesn't matter which of them wins.

The only time "the dealer needs to call the floor" is in tourney play, where soft play is expressly prohibited. There is no, nor should there be any such rule in cash games.

Right. If they were colluding and using little signals and what-not then they would not just blatantly say out loud "Hey, want to check it down?"
They would do SOMETHING post-flop to make it look like a legit hand after they squeezed the other guy out perhaps even having one of them bet really big on the next round and then the other guy pretending to have a big decision to make and then folding his hand so that nobody would get to invoke IWTSTH.