How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs?

[Reeshah]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs?

Your fold equity against the other active players ;) They cannot take on the big stack whilst the sitouts are still there..... The Sit Out having an increased chance of winning is a by product of maximising my chances, not the goal, and that for me is the critical distinction :unsure

Exactly!! Thankyou!!

[morlspin]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs?

Exactly!! Thankyou!!

Willfully giving chips to other players is Chip Dumping:ok

[Guppie]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? Guess we had all best watch if theres only 2 or 3 live players on a table of sit outs then and silently agree to share the blinds.

Willfully giving chips to other players is Chip Dumping:ok

[Guest gazza271]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? chip dumping or not, this has caused a hell of a discussion :loon I have never been in the fortunate postion of being only 1 or 2 active players on the table, always been at least 3 (PL'ers) and tonight we had 6 active players on our table. It IS a downer to make the FT having played the others and come up against 1 or 2 players with huge stackes. They are not unbeatable but the odds are heavily stacked in their favour. All of my points have been earnt the hard way and I'm pleased with that. The strategy that happened tonight would never have crossed my mind tbh, I would have been stealing the blinds and gone from there had I been in that fortunate position. What is dissapointing for me about that thread is that feelings seem to be running very high, beyond banter about whether this is cheating/unsporting etc. There is a lot of money at stake granted but I almost feel we have or are losing the PL spirit here. PL games (accept this is'nt a exclusive PL game but as good as) are normally played in the highest standard with people waiting for reconnects etc but here now we seem to be getting an edge creeping in. We are all recreational players here (I think) and this tournament should be played in the usual spirit. This has not been helped by the lack of chat facilities,sit outs, week 8 scoring fiasco that we are still waiting to be resolved and now this tonight. eSport, sit down and look at these threads and talk to us about them. Give us some answers about the sit outs, "chip dumping" thread and week 8 saga. This league has the potential to be fantastic but I'm not sure I want to play in a series where there are bad feelings between many "internet pals" and a number of unanswered questions. This tonight (the thread not the actions) has put a dampener on this series for me. Just my (slightly pi$$ed) thoughts.

[GeordieGaz]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? IMHO (if it counts) is that it is quite a good tactic however it IS chip dumping! I also think it is very unsporting and personally wouldn't do it! :spank Then again... what do I know!! :unsure

[Dodger]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? What a thread...mind boggling. Massive chip leader raises 10XBB, his short stacked pal calls the bet. Everybody else has folded. Leader is first to bet...he folds and lets his pal have the chips. This is chip dumping...or at least this is what the banning of chip dumping intends to eradicate. Chip dumping as collusion is abhorent and needs to be eradicated from the game. It is neither legal nor moral. It is cheating. Here we have a maximum BB involved. I well imagine that most people's views on chip dumping would involve pots far, far bigger than that. There can be no collusion as the opponent is sat out, is on an opposing team and has probably not played a single hand in the whole bloody tournament. A few points I need to get my head around: 1) If a big chip leader has been seen to be doing this...then doesn't the onus lay on the other players to ensure that they also challenge the blinds that may be being left? Or does everybody just sit back and protect their own stacks and expect the chip leader to do all of the work? 2) Do we want it to become an illegal move to fold when the only following players are sit out blinds? Because if this became the case then I would have to consider stopping playing these types of games as my concentration sometimes lapses and I accidentally fold when the blinds are there for the taking. I don't want to be banned because I've been distracted by my AA on another table! 3) If this were to become illegal...would not the chip leader then just allow his time to run out and be auto folded...that way he is not to blame...it would be the software that would be at fault. Same result, but this time the game drags as the sixty second clocks tick away. -------------------------------- You cannot ask what would happen in a live game...live games don't have 75% sitouts so this situation would not arise. This is a two fold problem. Firstly the fact that the large number of sit-outs can make the final table very unbalanced. Secondly that some smart buggers have realised there is a situation here that can be manipulated to maximise their own teams standing. OK...my own conclusions would be: This is NOT collusion. It IS very small scale chip dumping...however, as no collusion is evident...this is too insignificant to be made illegal (which, in effect, cannot be done anyway.) So I view this as a totally acceptable team tactic. ...and if you don't like that...then DON'T LEAVE THEM WITH THE OPTION TO DO IT!!!

[Fonzie14]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? You can dress it up however you want. But imho, passing chips from one player to another (even if he is sat out) is chip dumping and is therefore against the rules. BLACK AND WHITE. However, I can see the other point of view and we are all entitled to our own opinions. The fact that the tactic has backfired, in that the table has frozen and in all probability the scores from this table will end up being ignored (as seems to have happened with the game 8 table freeze), tells me that the "Poker Gods" know what is right and proper...:ok

[Dodger]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? This article explains why chip dumping is not tolerated on poker sites. I strongly believe that none of this applies in this particular situation and, if the poker site were to look into it, they would take no action at all. Storm in a tea-cup???

• • Published 2005-08-16
  • Author Pokeraddict

  Almost all of us have had a friend that wanted to play online for the first time and did not have a way to deposit or a friend that needed a small loan. Going to a private table and purposely losing chips to your friend is not the way to go about it. This is called chip dumping and many players have had their accounts locked and funds confiscated for doing this. There are many reasons why this is not allowed. The biggest reason is because a player who sets up a fraudulent account using a stolen credit card or other stolen funds can use this method to transfer money to an accomplice who would then cash out the funds. The fake account creator sits down and plays heads up with a friend with a legit account. The fake account holder then plays every hand raising every step of the way until the river. Then they fold the last bet sending a large pot to the legit account holder, their accomplice. The accomplice then cashes out the fraudulent deposit. The actual credit card holder then finds out his credit card has been used at an online poker room, they then dispute the charge and win. The poker room is now out these funds. Long ago poker rooms caught onto this scam and catch on very fast. People still try this often and virtually never get away with it. The poker rooms often associate this kind of transfer with fraud and will consider it chip dumping. Another reason poker rooms have stated this is not allowed is because of the money laundering possibility. Poker rooms are there for players to get together and play poker, not for you to do your personal banking. Online poker is gaining international recognition and becoming more and more mainstream. The last thing an online poker room needs is to be thought of a way for criminals to transfer their funds. There are also processing fees each and every time you make an online deposit at a poker room. These fees range from 3%-5%. There are also fees often when cashing out that the poker room must absorb. This is why poker rooms sometimes limit the number of free cashouts in a month, or have an outright fee for them. If two players get together and dump chips to cash out to another player to pay back a loan, to initiate a loan, or to make some sort of payment the poker room is now stuck with the fees involved in this transfer. The rake in a quick chip dump will not cover these fees that add up quickly. This is also why many rooms now require play requirements on transfers. They do not want to be the middle man for players to use to avoid the transfer fees involved in Paypal or Neteller person to person transfer. Online poker rooms are also intent on offering fair games. Two players sitting down and playing heads up with the sole intent on losing is obviously not a fair game. If another player sits down at this heads up chip dumping then the other two players are colluding. The third, unsuspecting player, will not be getting a fair game. There will be raises that will force player #3 out of the pot where they otherwise would not have folded, only to see one of the colluding chip dumpers fold to the other at the river. Tournament chip dumping is also forbidden. This is downright cheating. Players that know each can end up at a tournament table together. If one is short stacked it might seem like a good idea to dump the rest of your stack to your friend. If you get caught, and you probably will, the poker room will lock both of your accounts and seize your funds. This is known as collusion and everyone knows that collusion will get you banned from the poker room forever.

[Dodger]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? Having searched for a sharp and precise definition of chip dumping I have hit a problem: I cannot find a definition that excludes the term ''collusion''. Typical would be:

(v phrase) Chip dumping is a collusion tactic were one player deliberately funnels chips to another player through under-handed maneuvers. As there is no collusion in our examples...then, by definition, there has been no chip dumping.

[Fonzie14]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? Quote "Poker rooms are there for players to get together and play poker"...hmmmmmmmm :unsure

[Reeshah]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? It seems to me that at this stage one of the most important obstacles in this debate is that most people consider chip dumping a form of collusion so we need to decide whether chip dumping can be considered a legitimate strategy when there is clearly no collusion involved...

[BAM]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? wow you lot really need to get a life! Very shrewd play IMO, something I wouldn't hesitate in doing myself. If you can't play against this tactic then sit out yourself and find an easier game :ok I wouldn't even put it in the unsporting category, how could it possibly be? lol

[BAM]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs?

It seems to me that at this stage one of the most important obstacles in this debate is that most people consider chip dumping a form of collusion so we need to decide whether chip dumping can be considered a legitimate strategy when there is clearly no collusion involved...

I hope it never gets out how unsporting we are in the dreamteam games ;)

[goater14]

Re: e-sports league - CVG Poker Champions

So if i just check it down to showdown would you then consider my strategy legitimate? or is the only legitimate play to steal from the sitouts? if i just check it down then i am clearly not trying to take the pot myself so would that classify as illegitimate too?

Would,nt have a problem with that if you checked it down:ok. Just got in from work can,t believe this has generated so much interest, feel a bit embarrassed:$ to be honest as it was myself who started this hotly contested debate(has been interesting reading all the replies though) As I said on a previous thread lets all move on and look forward to the Champions League where hopefully their will be less sit-outs and we can all get back to playing proper poker, and we can then celebrate one of the PL teams being champions of Europe:cheers

[happyhornet]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? My word, this has been one hell of a thread. For my money, it is probably not cricket, but it is a reasonable tactic to use, I guess, and certainly doesn't breach any rules as far as I can see. It certainly isn't collusion. I have seen (and been involved in) situations where 2 players and X sitouts are left on a table, and there has been an unspoken agreement to raise alternate hands. Again, not cricket, but a reasonable tactic.

[Mad Duke]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? anynews on matchday 8 :wall:wall:wall;);)

[GaF]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? Lets try and get this back on topic ;) This league hasn't got off to a very good start - the result? It's not poker as we know it. However it is still a strategic game that requires thought and consideration and is one whereby the overall winners will be those who "played the game" the best. The winning team will not be the best team of poker players, they will be the team that adjusts best to dealing with the sit outs and adjusts tactics and gameplay to the situation in hand. Like it or not, the sit outs are the major environmental factor of this series - the key skills in this series are how you deal with these sit outs - how you can leverage your advantage over your opponents. The key objective? Is to outlast the sitouts (any team who outlast the sit outs on all 5 tables probably wins the week). A better objective is to outlast the sitouts whilst ensuring your opponents dont. Why would we collude with active players to improve their situation to our detriment?

[Mad Duke]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? A better objective is to outlast the sitouts whilst ensuring your opponents dont. Why would we collude with active players to improve their situation to our detriment? the in built doomsday device in pokerroom software :loon no seriously i thought they would of done something about this:unsure

[morlspin]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? Can i throw another arguement into the mix here? If i called a raise of an active player and then folded on the flop each time, cos id rather see them do well than someone else, would that be tolerated? Cos if so, im more than willing to dump all my 2000 chips to the biggest offer or deal i can find.

[Guppie]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? Totally different scenario morls and you know it

Can i throw another arguement into the mix here? If i called a raise of an active player and then folded on the flop each time, cos id rather see them do well than someone else, would that be tolerated? Cos if so, im more than willing to dump all my 2000 chips to the biggest offer or deal i can find.

[GaF]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? Ok - I'm moving all of the "junk" out of this thread - enough!!

[slapdash]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? I guess I'm another lowlife. I've not been playing in this league (and I think I'm glad!). I agree that a tournament where this kind of tactic plays a significant role is ridiculous, but it seems to me that the real culprits have got off rather lightly in this thread: that's the people who set up the competition in such a way that this happened. But if you're playing in a competition with silly rules, then it's not your fault if that leads to silly tactics. Chip-dumping is wrong because poker is an individual game, and you should be playing so as to benefit yourself, and not to benefit another player. If you're not doing it to benefit another player, then it's not chip-dumping. Otherwise the definition that GaF posted from the Pokerroom website: Quote:

Chip Dumping Tournament chip dumping is defined as a situation where one player purposely loses chips to another player with the sole intent of increasing their combined chances of winning prize money.

would have ended after "another player", and wouldn't have qualified it with the bit about the intent. As for whether it's "unsporting", I really dislike having "unwritten rules" in a game, because they inevitably lead to situations like this where people have different opinions about what should be allowed, and bad feeling ensues. If it shouldn't be allowed, then make the rules so that it isn't allowed.

[BillHicks]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? This situation only occured because Reeshah built up a huge chipstack by being the only non sit out on a table and to my mind he conceived a very clever strategy to maximise his teams points and minimize his competitors points. The circumstances are parctically unique to this esport league with lots of non active teams I think we should be congratulating his ingenuity and trying to think up counterstrategies rather than accusing Reeshah of unethical behaviour. BTW he knocked me out with his aggressive big stack.

[Burnley Joe]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? The original discussion was not about how he accrued the chips, pretty obvious and he did what anyone would do. Its about how he then fed the sit outs chips, which as i have stated i personally feel that its chip dumpling But hey ho lets move on as this seems to have raised a few arguments, got heads up to look forward to tmrw and hopefully ill play him and he`ll feed me chips if i sit out LOL

[GaF]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs?

This situation only occured because Reeshah built up a huge chipstack by being the only non sit out on a table

There was one other active player on the Table, but Reeshah knocked him out :ok

[morlspin]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? Mick, ive removed my over reaction and your reply I am going to contact pokerroom regarding clarification however as i think its in all our interests

[BAM]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? A lot of censorship has gone on in this thread, long live the internet ;)

[GaF]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs?

A lot of censorship has gone on in this thread' date=' long live the internet ;)[/quote'] There has been no censorship of any posts to do with the topic being discussed.

[GaF]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs? Ok - lets raise something else that I think may be controversial (but better to talk about it before it happens than after I do it :tongue2) Imagine a game starts and there are 5 active players and 15 sit outs. 4 of the active players are on one table 1 of the active players is on another table with all sit outs. If I am on the table with the active players, then I would sit out to get the game frozen, whilst everyone has the same number of chips Taking it a step further - imagine 10 sit outs and 10 active players - 9 active players are on one table - 1 active player is on the other table. (the active player here also happens to be a member of the league leaders) If I am on the table with 8 active players, I would try and persuade 4 other players to sit out with me to get the game frozen, to deny the player on the other table the chance to accumulate any chips. What do you think? I view this as far far more borderline (in the sportsmanship stakes) than what Reeshah did last night, but I think I'd probably do it if it benefits my team.... :unsure

[The Quiet Man]

Re: How far is it fair to go with Sit Outs?

Ok - lets raise something else that I think may be controversial (but better to talk about it before it happens than after I do it :tongue2) Imagine a game starts and there are 5 active players and 15 sit outs. 4 of the active players are on one table 1 of the active players is on another table with all sit outs. If I am on the table with the active players, then I would sit out to get the game frozen, whilst everyone has the same number of chips Taking it a step further - imagine 10 sit outs and 10 active players - 9 active players are on one table - 1 active player is on the other table. (the active player here also happens to be a member of the league leaders) If I am on the table with 8 active players, I would try and persuade 4 other players to sit out with me to get the game frozen, to deny the player on the other table the chance to accumulate any chips. What do you think? I view this as far far more borderline (in the sportsmanship stakes) than what Reeshah did last night, but I think I'd probably do it if it benefits my team.... :unsure

Nice one GaF.....you go for it!:ok TQM