^^^^^ wow. Ho Lee ***


can we please please please get a ufc fight Doug Polk vs any of the list of 5million people that will take it booked? please

Doug is talking about being a high stakes cash game player and high stakes tourney player. In the games he plays, he's probably right. Rarely in his games do you see players have a virtually 0% 3bet range without aces, 3 handed at a FT. As with what we saw.

Sorel is talking about being a high stakes tournament player, but also someone who I've seen playing mid stakes $400's at the Venetian. He plays tournaments where an Old Man Coffee may luckbox to 3 handed, then fold 30 hands in a row, then 3bet out of the big blind, screaming aces. 4betting JJ there. would obv not be the best move.

The reason Sorel sees that as the most surprising thing in the video, is because Sorel is a multiple times accused cheater. What that means, is he probably knows way more cheaters, and way more about the cheating going on in the game of poker. So this, isn't surprising at all.

It's like people who have sex in panda outfits. I don't know a single one, but they all know each other

I think it's a little dramatic to classify this as cheating

Perhaps one less extreme solution would be that once the couple is at the same table, they must reveal any of their hands to the table if requested at the end of the hand (even when folded preflop).

2 professional poker players with millions of cashes, who are a couple, entered a 5k 180 man in the middle of summer in Vegas, together. They're intent, was to take 1st and 2nd, together.

I have a problem with their initial intent before registering, the implicit collusion at the final table, and the fact they've said nothing since, except for, "Aren't we great" on twitter. But all couples would most likely do, EXACTLY THE SAME THING, STEP BY STEP. "Let's do this, Collude at the final table, Tweet about how great we are." That's my problem. They could still be great people. This situation, is awful.

And **** tabling their hands. They shouldn't be playing in the same tournament at the same table. Period. Everyone else at that table is a disadvantage.


[IMG][/IMG]

And like look at this. It's all fun and cute, I guess, but these people are playing high stakes. Do the other players really not care that play these stakes?

Why is giving them 9th and the possibility of 1st not an option? Maybe even combine stacks as a bonus, but they never play at the same table. It shouldn't happen. And the other problems with soft play in poker, aren't as easy to fix. This should be simple. Players shouldn't want to take an edge away from the other players at the table by playing with a significant other. They should want the integrity of the game to be upheld.

What if they break up while waiting in line for registration and come back together after the tournament is over? Standard on-off-relationship..

Don’t know bicknell so can’t speak to that but calling Foxen a cheater is incredibly rediculous. Your talking about a 180 person field that when you register the intent is to play against the field individually and never get into a situation like this and when they do get into a situation that is questionable they give up their opportunity to play by offering a chop they normally wouldn’t offer to be fair. If this is cheating then selling action/swapping action should be outlawed in all tournaments as collusion. The Germans enter like 8 people on shared money in like 30 person fields in the shr tourneys and refuse to chop with anyone outside their group ffs.

So their intent was for both not to reach the final table?

It’s not like this is a 9handed sit n go. They can’t be entering an event this size with the intent of playing solely as a team due to the sheer amount of tables. If every friends/roommates/couple was not allowed to enter the same tournament because of the possibility of being on the same table it would be disasterous for any player to socialize in the community. Think of how many people would actually be able to play the main event if what you are implying is true. It would go from a 7k field to 5 antisocial poker players. Can you honestly say that you entered a tournament in the last year where you do not have a good friend/roomate/girlfriend/family member/someone you swapped or bought action from that entered also?

You are making general points that do not speak to the AA vs. JJ hand.

What you're saying is that if you're playing a donkament with at least several tables the chance is small enough (who is to judge) to make it not cheating. But when it happens you get stuff like this, which is definitely cheating.

This thread went from talking about the individual hands that seemed like softplay to they entered the tournament with the intention of soft playing which was rediculous. I didn’t like how they were looking at each other and their body language while they were playing. I think Foxen’s line Is more standard then bicknell’s with that hand but it’s not like either is insane just very tight even considering icm. There’s a difference between intent and subconcious decisions when determining if something’s unfair or cheating. I think it was an unfair situation being 3 handed vs a couple. I don’t think they cheated in any way and the only fair thing to do was offer a fair deal which they did.

just to put on the tinfoil hat for a few seconds, in foxens shoes otr i see no reason to be looking over at bick, seemingly going for eye contact.

I will say that their behavior on this hand was rather odd.

I've never watched Bicknell play, so maybe she does this normally, but is she ever checking turn then literally snap-calling against any other person? It seems like she's trying to turn her hand faceup with timing tells.

If she does balance this against everybody than so be it.

Meh, just looks like two players with 40+ BBs playing extra cautious when the 3rd player at the table has 15 BBs, both are just trying to avoid an ICM suicide while the shortstack is still at the table.

Yeah, pretty much. Other than Foxen not jamming river, I didn't see anything outrageous with this hand at all. And I can even make an argument for Foxen's river bet size if he thinks Kristen is capped to AA/AK/KQ and might hero fold most of that range to a shove. (Foxen is way more likely to have KJ or sets in that spot than Kristen is.)

That doesn't mean that Foxen and Bicknell weren't softplaying each other (I didn't watch the whole stream) but using the AA/JJ hand as some kind of smoking gun is a bit much.

If you tell your friend that if you get 1st and 2nd no matter what chipping pre tournament, then you're a team, and you're cheating. If you tell your friend, I"m gonna get first, and you're gonna get 2nd, let's still swap 10%, that's individuals still wanting to win. Normally that is nowhere the same level, but on occasion it is just as bad.

You don't ban people or penalize ones who haven't done wrong. These 2 did, it's obvious to anyone who actually watched the stream and isn't looking at highlights. And this is a unique situation that nobody wants to be a part of.

And for the person who said what if they break up, then they still colluded together 3 handed. If their intention is to hide that they are together, for the purposes of colluding against each other, then they, or whoever tries to hide it, are not the "Ambassador Professionals" for the game that some people are claiming, and need to penalized for it. If it's disqualification so be it.

If these people feel they did nothing wrong, then they want what's good for themselves. If they see that this isn't something that should be going on, then they want what's good for the game. Sounds simple

And who do we want coming into the game? The recreational amateur, or the couples and groups that think they can play together and win together. This should be something we try to combat, not try to justify with the old, " Everybody does it"

What does this mean? I can't figure out what the if clause part of the sentence means.


I think the person who said that was asking how your proposed rule banning people who are dating from playing in the same tournament would handle people who broke up prior to the tournament starting, but ended up getting back together at some point after the tournament had ended (whether legitimately or perhaps not legitimately).

Yeah, this. Surprised there has not been more mention of ICM considerations in this thread.

As I have often played the highest stakes online sngs with this payout structure, and spent thousands of hours with solvers specifically reviewing 3 handed strategy deviations from GTO based on how others play, I have an extremely good understanding of this situation and consider myself an absolute world expert on this subject.

In this scenario it was gracious for them to offer a chop. Most of the advantage comes from the payout structure giving money to second, if it was winner take all, most of that advantage is gone (but there still is one obviously.) The fact that they offered a chop shows that there is no ill intent.

As for the play, with all hands considered (not just JJ v AA) it is undeniable that they significantly deviated from how they might play if they did not know each other, to maximize their combined equity. Even with the ICM factor of "not wanting to bust with the third guy present." Saying that their play did not significantly deviate is just straight up wrong, period. She made a "good fold" in a world where Foxen basically has JJ+, AJs after the flop, and never bluffs (which was probably basically the truth.) So it's kind of implied that if AA is a good fold, then Foxen is softplaying her. Either way.

I understand why people want to defend the play in this hand though. They feel if this hand is played differently, then it was "cheating". I don't view it that way. I don't think Foxen and Bicknell did anything wrong: they are obviously looking to maximize their combined equity, and the fact that they offered a chop (which is probably costing them many tens of thousands if they were actively cheating) shows that they were not looking to abuse what is basically a dream situation with respect to cheating.

By the way, the biggest "cheating" isn't even the play of this hand, it is the trash button opens. Krissy is a great player and would understand that opening absolute garbage on the button (especially when partners are BTN + BB) maximizes the *combined* equity a lot compared to folding. She understands the button opening range well because of her study of 100bb cash games, and her trash open in the ladies Poker After Dark recently. Which is to say that for example, opening 32o might lose individually for the button but loses less than being in the blinds. (But actually, opening 32o doesn't even lose if your partner isn't 3 betting you.) I did not view the other hands too much to know, but if for example Foxen is folding anything on the button, that would be another example that said they were not doing this.

In conclusion, the hand was not played legitimately, but Bicknell/Foxen are not cheaters. And that third guy should have taken the chop or created a winner take all payout structure. Case closed.

What's your argument for why they entered an expected 200 man 5k MTT, in the middle of summer in Vegas, while many other tournaments are going on, together? For value? Doesn't seem like both of them entering would be the greatest value. Unless, of course, you look at the edge they have if they make the same final table.

I agree they don't seem like cheaters. I agree they don't seem like bad people. But I'd like to know how pros like this, who I'm sure understand equity, think this tournament, going on at this time in Vegas, was the best value, to enter together. I can only think of one reason why it would be


They could of scheduled their tourneys in advance and not even thought about it. But I think they have thought about the fact that they could get 1st and 2nd. And as innocent as the thought could be to them, it's not innocent to the other players who played at the same table

Deliberately playing in a way to improve a 2nd party's equity at the expense of the equity of a 3rd party (and the expense of your own equity) is absolutely cheating.

And no player should ever, ever, feel pressured into accepting a chop by their opponents, especially under the threat they will be cheated if they don't accept.

mike mizrachi knocked out his brother with JQo in the 50k, cant find the hand but he played it pretty fast iirc. those saying its impossible to not collude, that subconsciously you are gonna softplay etc, are wrong.

i agreed with alex wices post until the end saying they aren't cheaters. after writing a long post explaining why they are. why?

stuff like this happens all day every day and is impossible to police. any attempt at setting rules for entry will have more negative impact than good. father and son cant play now? how many people are they gonna tell, by the time its done circulating who knows what people will be saying.

its the wild wild west out here, be safe and name-and-shame.

Why would a rule where you have to disclose your significant other, otherwise you'd be disqualified, be so bad. If a couple is doing the right thing, they should want this. They shouldn't want to hide it. They should want to play separately so the game is fair.

What's so bad about if they both make the final table, the shorter stack gets 9th, and we can even give his/her chips to the significant other. It would be an amazing accomplishment A, it would improve the equity of the significant other by giving them the others chips, they'd be playing together but never jeopardizing equity of others, and WSOP.com and Pokernews could promote this, instead of try to sheepishly talk about it.

If you're a couple that's trying to gain an edge by not being known at the table, you're cheating. If the WSOP announced this new rule, it would even highlight and advertise to couples that don't play poker yet, that couples "play poker together at the WSOP", with rules in place obv.

The ones who are upset, are the ones who are trying to unfairly gain an edge


And for the ones for saying how would you police it, that's the great thing, you'd rarely have to. Whatever way people are trying to play "together" at a table to gain an edge, needs to be looked at. This is just ridiculously obvious and was sick to watch. But again, the ones who are upset, are the ones who are trying to unfairly gain an edge