this season so far

Final episode airs in UK tonight on Sky Sports 3 at 10p.m.

2 more episodes until the final table on partypoker youtube channel and then final table covers 3 episodes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvbQBqoZuFc

Ep 18

Yayyy thanks!

Mmm looks like some nice TV poker to watch today. This and one drop.

Phil Laak is in rare form in season 7. So far, PPPL has been my fav Poker videos to date.

The feuds in the meta game are epic. Siever tried and tried to bust Cates, only to double him up and put Siever on raging tilt. Plus, the Selbst blow ups

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWAiuurzw34

Antonio's facial expression from 15:55 then at 16:19 after a suck out. #Bring'nthepain

Almost as much as "bahgel." STFU!!!

lol ba(h)gel is hilarious muahaha

bahgel

bahgel

So... where, when can we watch the final table of season 7?!

Party release them on their YouTube channel every Wednesday. They can't publish earlier due to terms of the contract between the producers and Sky Sports where it is being shown.

Seiver and Duhamel straight up colluded to keep each other in the top 8 and it's really, really obvious. Like Men the Master-style chip dump collusion.

I thought maybe this wasn't the case at first...but if they truly had a piece of each other...it's not even anywhere near close - it was clear collusion. the questions I would want answered:

1) did they have significant pieces of each other?
2) did they have significant pieces of anyone else?
3) did scott benefit in some way that I'm missing by having duhamel advance?
4) is it AS frowned upon to collude in this tournament as it is in a regular one?

I think the point system does affect things, and especially in the final heat I think it might have made sense for Seiver to dump to Duhamel so that other players would bust first to improve his own personal standing.

However, it's also something that seemingly went on for the entire length of the tournament, far before the point standings had begun to cement themselves.

While the point system does complicate things, I think it actually should be more frowned upon to collude in this tournament then in a regular one for the simple fact that it's a 12 person tournament and every heat is a single table. If you have two people colluding at the same table and they only need to outpoint 4 out of 12 people to advance, it's going to be really hard to beat them when they can just dump to each other to keep each other alive and wait for other people who are playing the game straight up to bust.

I think it's even more egregious if there was some not-spoken-of arrangement between the two of them when you have known long-time friends in the game like Laak and Esfandiari actively trying to bust each other and going at each other harder than they're going at anyone else.

The snap-fold by Duhamel with top two pair is an obvious collusion fold. Even if you're ever going to make that laydown in that spot, it's NEVER a snap fold. It's a wow let me take five minutes to think about this before I make the biggest hero fold of the tournament fold.

yeah at first I defended that fold as legit but now after seeing how many times seiver 3 bet and folded over and over. clearly something was going on. surely someone as smart as scott would adjust and not continue doing that.

scott did what benefited him regardless of what secondary affect it had on duhamel.

When you knock someone out on the bubble of a tournament are you colluding with the other players because they all now get paid thanks to you?

No.

But if you dump chips in a tournament you are colluding.

I think it's a very difficult subject because it's too difficult to classify it as collusion.

Shouldn't a player play his absolute best to increase his chances to win? You say no, which I think is outrageous. You are saying Scott Seiver isn't allowed to increase his winning chances to max potential.

You think he should not be allowed to make very tight/bad folds against Duhamel. Do you also think he should not be allowed to trap Jungleman?

The only reason is because he makes folds he normally doesn't. I remember a clip with Gus Hansen where he went all-in like 18 consecutive times in a tournament and noone could call him because of the structure. Gus normally doesn't go all-in with any hand so let's face it: The tournament's structure decides the player's strategy.

Let's be real here. The only way of proving collusion is if Scott and Duhamel admits they are colluding. Any other scenario is a very slippery slope because of the ramifications.

I remember an old thread where a supernova player got some angry emails from Pokerstars support (I think) because he kept timing out with hands in tournaments that were "easy folds". But Pokerstars doesn't decide your strategy. They don't decide which hands you can or can't play or how you play them. They are responsible for the structure, then the players will play that structure.

And what about when 5 regs sit at the same table and wait for a fish? The fish doesn't have the same information about them as they do when he sits down. And they will target him and not go so hard against eachother. Isn't that colluding? Yet it happens everyday.

It's very obvious that players pool together their rolls and also play together. I realize the huge issues here but it's such a problem making a decision without it having a huge impact on how the game is played.

onlyamonkey: I agree the only way is prob to absolutely PROVE it is to have them admit it. but we can still speculate. and there were a bunch of hands where seiver repeatedly 3 bet total trash and folded to 4 bets. why would he continue to do that? it's not like duhamel has a reputation for letting people run him over.

the snap fold of top two pair at the time...I just thought it was a good laydown. but in retrospect, the speed at which he did it really makes you wonder if they just talked about it before and told each other to not slowplay. so his raise was a message to scott that he had the goods and scott's rereaise let's him know he doesn't (this is speculation obv).

I would like to see some tape of some other hands where duhamel had a huge hand and was 3 bet and had a big decision to see if he ever snap folded like that.

would you feel different if the two of them had huge pieces of each other?

it's almost like they used a Survivor-like strategy in this tournament. The other question I'd have...is it really even frowned upon in this type of tournament even if they admitted it?

Also I would assume moving forward into the final table, we won't see any of that.

Regarding the point structure, did it give any reason for Seiver to keep Duhamel in during the last heat?

i'm not sure...i couldn't figure that out. if there was even any benefit from having an extra stack at the table, then he is totally justified in doing anything he wants.

but if they just have pieces of each other or are just good friends and playing Survivor and making alliances, I'm not sure how much anyone else would like that. and I don't wanna hear he would rather have duhamel than jungleman on the table or something. not like anyone in this tournament is not a top top elite player.

5 regs sitting in a cash game waiting for a fish is not collusion. If they know they're about break-even EV against each other in a raked game, it's simply a matter of waiting for a better spot if they simply never play big pots against each other.

Collusion in a tournament is also way different from not playing big pots against someone in a deepstacked cash game simply because you know they're a really good player.

There where multiple hands where Duhamel and Seiver clearly dumped chips to each other. It's not a matter of a fold being too tight or straight up just bad, it's a matter where clearly there was no thought put into the decision because they already made an agreement backstage about what they where going to do in heads up pots.

As for Gus Hansen... Gus Hansen ships it all without looking at his cards from the big blind as a "defense", and has probably my favorite quote of all time in poker.

"So I raise it up in early position and of course I get four callers, because everyone who has watched poker knows Gus Hansen is insane and that the best hand he can have is jack-four off-suit.... so anyways I end up shipping it with the nine-four off-suit..."

Any time you're trying to make a point about good poker strategy you're best advised to not introduce Gus Hansen's name as anything but a counter-example.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_4LaPLgJ-w

EP 19

Sweet - thx!!

Ep 18:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvbQBqoZuFc