Wizard Recommends
100 % up to
2250zł +200 spins- Massive gaming platform
- Crypto-friendly
- Loyalty program
120 % up to
1200zł +50 spins- Welcome bonus package
- Loyalty Program
- Exciting slot tournaments with substantial prize pools
Ask the Wizard Column 165 Addendum
Here’s an unfiltered response from Tony Guerrera addressing a query regarding poker collusion in the. May 31, 2006 Ask the Wizard column.
A few common collusion schemes exist, and it is important to know about them so that you can recognize them and defend yourself against them. If you wish to enter the dark side of poker and implement them, that’s your business - not mine. Before proceeding, I’d like to say that I’m writing this for intellectual purposes only; collusion is an interesting topic worthy of theoretic discussion. My discussion will be in the context of Texas hold’em since that’s currently the most popular poker variant.
In cash games, there are two prevalent tactics employed. The first involves colluding players setting traps for their opponents, compelling them to contribute more chips to the pot than they typically would. Often, these colluding players position themselves next to each other, though they might also face each other across the table. When one participant has a strong hand, they discreetly signal to their partner to increase the pot size. The partner may have a weak hand, leading to signs of collusion, such as a player frequently raising on the flop and turn, only to fold when it comes to the river. The second tactic also involves a strategy of betting and raising, but its goal is to force opponents out of the pot rather than to inflate it. This type of isolation play is most effective when colluders are seated next to one another.
If you encounter any of these collusion strategies while playing cash games, you have several options for self-protection. One approach is to inform the management of your casino or online poker platform. However, if you think the colluding players could actually enhance your expected value (EV), it might be better to remain at the table and keep quiet. For instance, if they only aggressively bet with strong hands, you’ll be able to identify when it’s best to fold hands like top pair or bottom two pair. Conversely, if they also push the pot with mediocre hands, you can confidently play weaker hands against them than you would against regular opponents. Moreover, you would benefit greatly since the colluders are giving you favorable 2:1 odds.
The strategies outlined above are among the most frequently used in cash games. The advantages gained are often minimal, especially when you have to share any winnings with your partners. I can only see collusion in cash environments as worthwhile if you have access to multiple computers, different IP addresses, and various online poker accounts, allowing you to play several accounts (ideally no more than 2 or possibly 3) at the same table. Without a partner to share winnings with, trapping opponents through strategic betting when holding strong hands could be a viable approach without giving away 2:1 odds to others. However, major online poker platforms are adept at detecting this form of collusion, making it an impractical strategy.
Collusion during tournaments, particularly in no-limit hold'em, can be even more potent. In addition to the previously mentioned tactics, there are more sophisticated plays that might go unnoticed as they blend into the natural competitive rhythm of the endgame. The large participant pools in most major multi-table tournaments make collusion challenging, as it is unlikely that members of a collusion team will find themselves at identical tables. On the other hand, single-table tournaments (STTs) are prime hunting grounds for colluders. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if collusion takes place in high buy-in STTs online. However, I’m not claiming that such activities are definitely happening; I'm simply recognizing the possibility.
The inaugural tactic in the tournament collusion playbook is known as the chip dump. By pooling all of a team's chips with a single player, the chances of securing a top finish increase significantly. Since the prize structures of most tournaments heavily favor first place, this collaborative approach leads to greater expected value (EV) for all team members, even when accounting for the need to split any earnings. If one individual operates multiple online accounts, their profit can substantially rise. Detecting chip dumping is tricky, particularly when only four players remain. A skilled STT participant typically goes all-in with a broad range of hands while calling all-ins with more selective holdings. Nevertheless, it's feasible for a team member to have a marginal hand like KQ in the big blind and covertly signal their partner in the small blind to go all-in if they anticipate opponents will fold. The small blind might then push all-in with a hand like 23, while the big blind calls with KJ, and the other players won’t suspect collusion—they may think the push was a poor decision but see it as a common attempt to steal blinds. The chip dump tactic works best when only three or four players are left in the tournament. When five or six players are in play, the blinds are high, making blind-stealing an essential strategy, which might limit the benefit of consolidating chips at that point. Another tactic that does work well with five to six players is what I refer to as the 'pre-emptive all-in.' This strategy involves going all-in with a wider range of hands to seize blinds, proving most effective with three or fewer opponents still to act. But if a teammate occupies the big blind, you can push all-in with four players remaining, creatively reducing the number of opponents to three since your collaborator can’t be counted as a potential caller. By being the first to push all-in, you can deter others from entering the pot, effectively safeguarding your partner's big blind while also acquiring a small blind for the team.
The tactics we've discussed so far serve as an excellent introduction to various strategies utilized by colluding players. One critical remaining aspect is the ability for colluders to share information about their hole cards (a practice that is especially easy in online play). This sharing can provide a significant advantage. For instance, if you hold 44, you are outmatched by a 7.51:1 ratio when hoping to hit one or two 4s on the flop without knowing other players' hands. If you are in a pot against several players who have limped in, you might typically call in hopes of flopping a set, relying on future betting to suggest a positive expected value (EV) for your preflop decision. However, if you are colluding and your partner indicates they have A4 before you act, you should fold 44. Many similar scenarios illustrate how understanding a teammate's cards can influence your odds in hitting your hand. For example, suppose you have T6, and the flop shows TT9 while your partner folded T2. During a no-limit hand with significant betting, you may usually be concerned about an opponent having a Ten with a better kicker. But with knowledge that the last ten has already been discarded, the only combination beating you is 99. This shared knowledge of hole cards gives colluding players enhanced insights for optimizing their decisions, thanks to more accurate information regarding the deck's layout.
In summary, effective collusion relies on established tactics and sharing information about hole cards. Generally, collusion involves two or more players, but in the realm of online poker, it's entirely possible to collude with oneself through multiple accounts at the same table. In fact, colluding with yourself is arguably the most advantageous approach to maximize your hourly earnings—there's no need to split profits when you can retain them all. Major online poker platforms utilize sophisticated software to identify any suspicious betting patterns, particularly amongst players who frequently compete on the same virtual tables. The ideal collusion occurs in online STTs, ensuring that any collusion arises organically through the natural endgame flow. You would require about four to five distinct accounts, with dedicated devices and IP addresses for each. Moreover, managing these accounts should be such that colluding players primarily face off against each other only a small fraction of the time. Even with set tactics like chip dumping and pre-emptive all-ins, how you approach each tournament ultimately hinges on the skill of your opponents. Ultimately, even if you're engaged in collusion, you still need to possess a solid understanding of profitable poker strategies.
