Collusion?

[action man]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBABP1pUB18

[Ironside]

wow without seeing the lead to that it still sounds like they were trying to cheat the rest of the comp to me

[Rookie (Rodney)]

Interesting...

[snoopy1239]

I don't understand the cho chop/ top top dialogue

Can someone explain that to me

[dik9]

me too??

[Rookie (Rodney)]

I don't understand the cho chop/ top top dialogue

Can someone explain that to me

Gold says, i thought you said "Top Top" meaning, TP TK... which is why Jamie called as he had the same hand and thought it would be chopped.

[dik9]

Didn't Gold speak first and Kolt say me too?

[Rookie (Rodney)]

Kolt thought Gold said, "Top Pair" not "Top Top", Kolt replied "Me Too" to the Top pair part when he misheard.

[action man]

i hope gold gave 50% of his winnings away in percentages to the other colluders and with that $6mill ended up owning money on legal fee's that would be justice

[dik9]

But that was after Kolt said all-in?

Then Kolt said sorry??? Tis blowin my little mind?

[snoopy1239]

But that was after Kolt said all-in?

Then Kolt said sorry??? Tis blowin my little mind?

Kolt moves in, Gold says he has top top (A-J), Kolt mishears him for 'top pair' and says me too (ie. A-J), which is why Gold calls, thinking it's just a split pot (chop chop)

[bolt pp]

But that was after Kolt said all-in?

Exactly.

This isn't collusion, he said it after the money went in, he could have been saying that for a multitude of reasons, table image, make the guy feel a bit better, a joke.

You guys are to gullible in believing golds reasoning behind the call, maybe theres no confusion at all, maybe he wanted to knock his pal out and then tried to pretend it was a mistake so as not to harm there friendship.

[Mbuna]

The implication is that Gold would NOT have called had he know his opponent only had top pair and not top pair top kicker, ie he wouldnt call if he was AHEAD.

This might not be collusion but is softplay which is also not permitted .

[bolt pp]

The implication is that Gold would NOT have called had he know his opponent only had top pair and not top pair top kicker, ie he wouldnt call if he was AHEAD.

This might not be collusion but is softplay which is also not permitted .

I'd speculate that its closer to a statement than an implication.

The main point i was making is that your taking his word to readily, I understand what he said and why supposedly he said it but if ever questioned about it he could very easily dismiss it as a joke, or an attempt to make the other players at the table think about him in a certain way that would add to a certain type of table image he was trying to project.

He mealy referred to a situation whereby he claims to have refrained from "soft play" as a result of miscommunication as opposed to an inherent veracity and reverence for the rules that would compell the restraint of others.


You cant prove he would've done it, it happend afterwards not prior or during the hand.

If two footballers walk of the pitch after a game and one says "i was going to tackle you in the box but thought that if i did you'd take a dive" and the other one replies "i would've" and the ref was to overhear should he book the guy for suggesting that if the situation arose for him to cheat me may take it?

[snoopy1239]

Are they allowed to announce their hands at the WSOP?