Collusion at Final Table of Millionaire Maker!
Yaginuma vs Carroll. Carroll enters final table with 10 to 1 chip lead, Yaginuma gets $1 million dollar bonus from Club
It’s obvious to any poker player it was collusion but to the layman in court, it could be difficult to get that across. Like that Postle guy survived court I think because the judge just didn’t get how obvious the cheating was.
Point of information: Postle's case never got to court, but not because of the judge not understanding it. It was a larger situation wherein California does not litigate gambling disputes between players.
This is not the first time this kind of situation could have happened. Full Tilt definitely did a similar thing for the Main Event but even bigger (like...I think it was 10M if you qualified on FTP and then won the main). Through most of the 2000s and 2010s there were massive bracelet bets between pros that could have led to this kind of situation, except, you know, people knew
I thought of this right away... I could envision some pretty crazy scenarios if you got down to 2-3 tables and a Full Tilt qualifier was among the final players. "Hey guys, if I win this, Full Tilt is giving me a $10 million bonus. So let me win this, and I'll give you a piece of that extra bag." Of course, you'd have to make it very, very worth it, given the pay jumps at that point.
In before we learn that Moneymaker had an extra PokerStars bounty for his Main win, that Sammy Farha knew it and made a deal after all – thus explaining the fold with top pair 22 years later. :p
That might make it worse. Then you've got incentive for the big stacks to collude with the short stacks to keep them alive.
They don't need more than one player to collude, just one big stack feeding the short stack a few blinds here and there to keep them going. That would absolutely be unfair to the other players trying to ladder and make pay jumps.
At least that would be explicitly against the rules. Which means the players would be risking a lot more.
If Yaginuma even mentioned the idea with Carroll before it got to HU, then that is absolute collusion.
If this happened, is the correct penalty to take away all of their payouts and redistribute the money to everyone else? Or do you have to prove they did more than just talk about it?
Should WSOP be the ones investigating or should they hand it off to the gaming commission? And should they tell us if they do?
lol wut? WPT is getting amazing bang for their marketing bucks. You really think they give a **** about two guys chopping up that money? Hell the amazing press they'll get if the WSOP refuses or bans those players. WPT is getting exactly what they want out of this and I'm sure Doug Polk is going to make a video about it even promoting the brand further.
Who exactly got cheated? The site that ran a promotion probably hoping this exact thing would happen?
exactly. who lost money? Who got cheated? WPT made the deal knowing stuff like this could happen.
Others saying similar
I'll go you one better: do we know that ClubWPT Gold did not have this prize insured? Not that they couldn't just swing the full amount, but quite often these more sizable prizes are wagers in themselves. If you see a half-court shot to win a car, chances are good that the organizer purchased a policy against a contestant winning.
Pure spectulation on my part, obviously, but I wouldn't be surprised if ClubWPT Gold did similar. Rather than possibly paying out a milly to some winner, they already paid a tiny fraction of that amount while considering it the price of advertising around the WSOP.
I'll go you one better: do we know that ClubWPT Gold did not have this prize insured? Not that they couldn't just swing the full amount, but quite often these more sizable prizes are wagers in themselves. If you see a half-court shot to win a car, chances are good that the organizer purchased a policy against a contestant winning.Pure spectulation on my part, obviously, but I w
Yes things of this nature are generally insured. But if it was insured not sure what the process would be. Seems unlikely they would say they are paying regardless of the findings.
Think people are leaning too hard on the no victim angle. That’s understood but rigging the end of a poker tournament might be something that they are forced to deal with regardless. They have a big sweat going on now, and I’m not so sure it’s just trying to determine if it started prior to HU.
Grunching, so apologies if itÂ’s been disproven/covered, but I agree that itÂ’s not an issue if nothing suspect happened prior to headsup, but if it was 3-handed (or 4, 5, 6, etc) and I knew that if I got HU with a guy whoÂ’d get an extra milly we could split up if we got there, then I might play some hands differently to try to get there, especially if I were the CL with chips
This is the first legitimate point on this side. Someone somewhere mentioned that they were friends, and I don't know if that's true. But if you already know ahead of time that you and your friend will chop 1 mil if it gets HU, and that this might not be true otherwise, it could affect things earlier in the event. This might actually be an ethical issue.
However, if you were to look for impropriety in this case, this should be totally compartmentalized from anything that happens heads up. At that point it is a business transaction that doesn't harm anyone else in the pool.
Well they are not some paid entertainers whos job is to entertain u and other spectators. They are players who bought in with their own or staked money and their main goal is to make a profit.Most here would have done the same with so much money on the line, can't tell me otherwise. U obv not because ur main focus in this situation would be what people on stream think and how t
Right. These people are conducting business with their own money. Like, you can be a Warren Buffet "fan" if you want to, but that has little to no impact on his business decisions. Or you can be a fan of car auctions on TV. Doesn't mean the buyers and sellers have some obligation to behave how you wish to maintain the purity of the "sport."
Even when people are paid entertainers, like athletes, they often tank to produce an outcome that is more desirable than winning the competition at hand. They tank to get a higher draft pick. If a game becomes lopsided a team might stop really trying, since it makes more sense to rest their good players than to pursue a 1/500 chance at winning this game.
A guy might spend a week's salary to take his kids to see an NBA game and their favorite players are all on the bench to be in better shape for the playoffs. That guy has a pretty good complaint since he paid out of pocket and contributed to the players' salaries and the team's profits, but it happens anyway. If you're one of 400 people on earth who is still a "poker fan," you have no such argument.
That might make it worse. Then you've got incentive for the big stacks to collude with the short stacks to keep them alive.
They don't need more than one player to collude, just one big stack feeding the short stack a few blinds here and there to keep them going. That would absolutely be unfair to the other players trying to ladder and make pay jumps.
Sorry to break it to you but assuming the table is few medium stacks, 1 giant stack, a the rest very short stacks happens now as the very short stacks lower the willingness of the medium stacks to play aggressively. It can be very +ev for the giant stack to keep the short stacks around to better bully the medium stacks.
Moronic question. No. They were Heads-up if u not aware of that.
Would have definitely been more obvious but he wouldn't be deceiving anyone or breaking any rules right?
Sorry to break it to you but assuming the table is few medium stacks, 1 giant stack, a the rest very short stacks happens now as the very short stacks lower the willingness of the medium stacks to play aggressively. It can be very +ev for the giant stack to keep the short stacks around to better bully the medium stacks.
That's just poker. You're doing what's in your own best interest.
It becomes unethical when you're colluding with other players for their benefit (not your own) to the detriment of others in the tournament.
This is already commonplace with stables having shared financial interests, and incentive to "help each other out." Similarly when people are buying action from each other in the same tournament that can be a major conflict of interest. Collusion may be difficult to prove or police but that doesn't mean it's OK.
I don't know what the answer is though. So much of the high stakes tournament poker scene is funded by a relatively small number of backer whales. If you made a rule against these arrangements the prize pools would drop dramatically overnight. That and these deals would likely continue in the shadows anyway.
No need to resort to insults man. You wrote:
Well they are not some paid entertainers whos job is to entertain u and other spectators. They are players who bought in with their own or staked money and their main goal is to make a profit.
The rules of the WSOP show that IF they colluded to chip-dump so the golden ticket guy could win the extra million and chop it up, they were in violation of those rules.
There is damage to the WSOP's brand, the integrity of the game, the bracelet win being tarnished, POY points, etc. You can't just say "no other players were harmed" because there are other factors involved that delve outside of other players at that final table being hurt by these actions. Players competing for POY could be harmed by this too, and there's value in the marketing and status of being named POY, not to mention I'm sure plenty of side bets. While that may not have an impact in this one instance, to allow this type of chicanery to stand encourages it more in the future, as players would fear no repercussions for violating rules in their quest for more profit.
You stated they paid their own money and their main goal is to make a profit. But they can't just go breaking rules to do it is what I'm saying.
SECTION IV – PARTICIPANT CONDUCT AND TOURNAMENT INTEGRITY
40. The competitive integrity of the WSOP Tournament is paramount. All Participants must adhere to the spirit and letter of
these WSOP Official Tournament Rules that forbid play or any action that is illegal, unethical or constitutes cheating or
collusion in any form.
a. Cheating is defined as any such act engaged in by a Participant to break the established rules of play to gain an
advantage. Cheating includes, but is not limited to, acts such as: collusion; chip stealing; transferring non-value
WSOP chips from one Event to another; introducing chips not intended for an Event into that Event; card marking;
card substitution; or the use of any kind of cheating device.
b. Collusion is defined as any agreement between or among two (2) or more Participants to engage in illegal or
unethical acts against other Participants. Collusion includes, but is not limited to, acts such as: chip dumping; soft
play; sharing card information with another Participant; sending or receiving signals from or to another Participant;
the use of electronic communication with the intent to facilitate collusion; and any other act that Host Properties
deem inappropriate.
1. Chip dumping is defined as any agreement between or among two (2) or more Participants for one or more
of the Participants to bet chips with the intent of increasing another Participant’s stack.
2. Soft play is defined as any agreement between or among two (2) or more Participants to not bet or raise
each other to minimize the number of chips lost by those Participants participating in the agreement.
c. All Participants are entitled to expect civility and courtesy from one another at every table and throughout the
WSOP area. Any individual who encounters behavior that is not civil or courteous – or is abusive in any way – is
encouraged to immediately contact a WSOP Tournament official. Participants who violate this rule are subject to
penalty in accordance with Rules 40, 41, 42, 113, and/or 114.
d. This rule shall include, but is not limited to, any Participant whose personal hygiene has become disruptive to the
other Participants seated at their table. The determination as to whether an individual’s personal hygiene is
disruptive to other Participants shall be determined by WSOP Personnel which may, in its discretion, implement
sanctions upon any such Participant who refuses to remedy the situation in a manner satisfactory to Host
Properties.
e. Host Properties will penalize any act that, in the sole and absolute discretion of Host Properties, is inconsistent with
these WSOP Official Tournament Rules or the best interests of the WSOP Tournament.
f.
Anyone found to have engaged in or attempted to engage in any act that WSOP officials believe in their sole and
absolute discretion compromises or could compromise the competitive integrity of the WSOP will be subject to
sanctions imposed by Host Properties. The nature and extent of the sanctions imposed shall be in the sole and
absolute discretion of Host Properties and may include, but shall not be limited to, the following:
1. FORFEITURE OF CHIPS
2. FORFEITURE OF PRIZE MONEY
3. EJECTION FROM AN EVENT OR THE ENTIRE WSOP TOURNAMENT
4. LOSS OF PRIVILEGE TO PARTICIPATE IN FUTURE WSOP EVENTS
5. EXCLUSION FROM ENTERING THE PREMISES OF CASINO AND/OR ALL DESIGNATED AFFILIATES
OF HOST PROPERTIES.
g. All violations of this Section or any other violation of the WSOP Official Tournament rules, as determined by Host
Properties in its sole discretion, may be publicly disclosed in an effort to deter future violations and to assist other
poker tournaments in identifying Participants who engage in play or any action that is illegal, unethical, or
constitutes cheating or collusion in any form.
41. In addition to the penalties authorized in Rule 40, Host Properties may impose penalties of any kind or nature upon any
person who gives, makes, issues, authorizes, or endorses any statement or action having, or designed to have, an effect
prejudicial or detrimental to the best interest of the WSOP as determined by Host Properties, acting in its sole and absolute
discretion. This may include, but shall not be limited to, expulsion from the Event and property, forfeiture of a Participant’s
entry fee(s) and/or loss of the right to participate in this and/or any other tournament conducted by Host Properties or its
affiliates. Additionally, Host Properties may in its sole and absolute discretion impose penalties of any kind or nature upon
any person who, in Host Properties’ view, engages in inappropriate conduct during Event play.
42. Host Properties, in its sole and absolute discretion, may also disqualify any person from receiving any prize based upon
fraud, dishonesty, violation of promotional rules or other misconduct while on the property, for acts otherwise occurring in
relation to the WSOP, or as otherwise reasonable or necessary for Host Properties to comply with applicable statutes and
regulations. Host Properties also reserve the right to exclude any individual(s) acting in a disruptive or inappropriate manner
or counter to the best interests of the WSOP. Participant agrees that if Participant files a lawsuit against Casino or any other
individual or entity, involving these Official Tournament Rules or related to Participant’s removal from one or more Events,
but Participant does not prevail against each defendant, Participant shall pay each prevailing defendant the costs, expenses,
and reasonable attorney’s fees, it/he/she incurred in defending Participant’s lawsuit. Any Participant who initiates a credit
card dispute seeking reimbursement of any amount paid to register for any WSOP Event is subject to permanent exclusion
from Casino and all other Caesars Entertainment, Inc. affiliated casino properties/online businesses.
43. Any attempt by any person to deliberately damage, corrupt or undermine the operation of the WSOP Tournament may
be a violation of criminal and civil laws. Should such an attempt be made, Host Properties reserve the right to seek damages
from any such person to the fullest extent of the law.
44. All decisions regarding the interpretation of the WSOP Official Tournament Rules, Event rules, Participant eligibility,
scheduling and staging of the WSOP Tournament, and penalties for misconduct lie solely with Host Properties, whose
decisions are final.
Especially that fat **** Scott Seiver, it’s pretty obvious most of these pros that are staked and in make up probably chip dump to friends all the time, most of these pros are scumbags.
The high rollers are a huge circle jerk filled with collusion. Bunch of nerds playing for a small piece of themselves,having swaps with each other and mutual backers in super small events.
WSOP would lose big time if adjudicated. When the two players reached heads-up, they locked up 1st and 2nd place money between them. It would be a long road for WSOP to try to deny payment. Maybe they combine 1st and 2nd place money and equally distribute it 50/50 and withhold or negate the actual bracelet win.End of the day, as comical as it looked, it was basically a heads
If those 3 scumbags ran electronics to beat blackjack they would be in jail. If wsop chose to pursue them using electronics to cheat which is a felony in Nevada they would be in jail. But they wanted to minimize the bad PR so nothing was done.
No need to resort to insults man. You wrote:The rules of the WSOP show that IF they colluded to chip-dump so the golden ticket guy could win the extra million and chop it up, they were in violation of those rules.There is damage to the WSOP's brand, the integrity of the game, the bracelet win being tarnished, POY points, etc. You can't just say "no other players were harmed"
Players can play how they want. There is no chip dumping heads up. If there was collusion prior to HU, WSOP should act if they have evidence. If WSOP attempts to not pay 1&2 because of a vague technicality about game integrity... that's a hell of a foot cannon.
Maybe WSOP should pick on someone their own size like WPT, rather than holding players funds hostage? These guys are pros likely playing on stake. It might not have even been their choice to chop or not.
Players can play how they want. There is no chip dumping heads up. If there was collusion prior to HU, WSOP should act if they have evidence. If WSOP attempts to not pay 1&2 because of a vague technicality about game integrity... that's a hell of a foot cannon.Maybe WSOP should pick on someone their own size like WPT, rather than holding players funds hostage?
Lol this is beyond irrelevant.
Players can play how they want. There is no chip dumping heads up. If there was collusion prior to HU, WSOP should act if they have evidence. If WSOP attempts to not pay 1&2 because of a vague technicality about game integrity... that's a hell of a foot cannon.Maybe WSOP should pick on someone their own size like WPT, rather than holding players funds hostage? These guys are pr
Unfortunately for the players, those rules I read that Knish posted seem to give the WSOP very broad discretion re: rules and regulations surrounding the ‘integrity’ of the game and protecting their brand.
I don’t really follow what you mean when you say the WSOP should go after the WPT? For what? What’d the WPT do wrong? How’d they damage the WSOP?
And the whole idea that the players may have been under a stake and ‘didn’t have a choice’ is not only far-fetched, but irrelevant wrt whether or not the WSOP chooses to act.
All that said, I still don’t think these guys did anything ethically/morally wrong if all they did was chip dump when it got to be headsup (which still isn’t clear, I’m guessing [I haven’t read hand histories]), but that doesn’t mean they are in the clear from the WSOP, which can’t be too happy with this publicity.
Tournaments are so dumb. Who cares about this.
This is the real correct answer. All you little girls playing tournaments. Real men play cash games.
This is the real correct answer. All you little girls playing tournaments. Real men play cash games.
Cash game playas are so ****in gangsta
They can’t prove anything. Most of us would’ve done the same as a **** you to the hefty rake
