Collusion at Final Table of Millionaire Maker!

You don’t think people draw inferences in criminal cases (despite the judge saying not to?) also do you think they would be forced to testify in a civil trial as Scotch suggested and my post was in response to?

Some guy comes up to you and says "hey, I have this great scheme where we break a lot of rules and cheat to win 1 million - the deal entails you have to basically give me about 250k in EV, but trust me I will give you a bit more back once our scam pulls through".... Sounds like a guy you want to trust. Id never trust someone who proposed this deal. Paradoxically the bigger part of the million he promised me the less Id trust him.

Almost serves Carroll right if Yagi takes the milly and retires

Sure even against instructions some likely hold taking 5th but the opposing council cannot make it a point to bring it up. In civil case, opposing council can explicitly use it as part of their arguments. They can encourage jury to consider that they took 5th.

Yes they can be forced to testify in a civil case. Initially, both parties are subject to being deposed during discovery. At trial both parties are subject to subpoena and be forced to testify.

And as pointed out, there will be either a paper trail via taxes OR one/both would be committing tax fraud. This paper trail could also be used in the civil case.

I didn’t say they were going to be explicitly forced but but they were never going to win if they took the 5th when making a legal challenge. So had WSOP held the money they would have had to lie under oath to be drawing live.

DNegs makes an interesting reveal (at least new information to me) that the deal was discussed with three players remaining, with 3rd place declining to the “chop”.

I have no reason to believe it changed how they acted with three people remaining, but the incentive was certainly there to soft play to get heads up. Very curious to see if people are going to go back and take a closer look at play with three remaining.

Kind of reminds me of the situation where the Foxen’s both got to a final table and there was some accusations of soft play. In that situation, they strongly reminded the 3rd player it was in his best interest to chop given the situation.

In his Vlog posted today on youtube he says the 3rd place finisher was asked to do a deal and refused

From the vlog he posted about an hour ago. 2:28 in is when he specifically mentions it.

Would appreciate a second person confirming though, especially given Daniel’s ties to GG/WSOP.

Not going to lie, I was a little surprised that 99% of discussions about this assumed nobody talked about it prior to heads up. Figured there must have been some sort of confirmation I missed.

Are you shocked? Everyone jumping the gun without knowing the full story lol

It would really be funny if he did that, there is no honor among thieves for a reason, it’s actually insane Carroll agreed to this, it gets tricky with tax situation as well.

Thanks for confirming I'm not the only devious bastard in here up for some more controversy.😀

But Daniel told guy had only ten minutes to decide...

Frauds on the net have the same time span. Urgent, urgent...

I always root for mass carnage

Anyhow, we had quite a few “all y’all would have done the same and if not you’re stupid” people in this thread

I would not have considered it for a second.

These guys are banned from WSOP but any chance these guys get the Ali Imsorivic treatment in other tournament series?

For example Carroll is playing some 10k at Hard Rock in Florida and comes back to Day 2 to find his stack was picked up and he’s DQ. I don’t support that it happened to Ali in a tournament series in Texas but also don’t see why it should happen to Ali and not Carroll.

A number of us did, but some were so incredibly outraged that anyone would question a final table deal being made that they ignored those wondering if the deal may had been struck prior to heads up play.

Yes but far more important it established the precedent that even if two players literally shared the same wallet it was not collusion. Pros buy and sell shares all the time and are not required to tell the table they have a financial interest in another player. Everyone whining collusion needs understand WSOP has already not just condoned collusion but facilitated it by not requiring you not have an interest in any other player in the tournament you are in and not requiring you disclose such interests to others at the table. I'd appeal to the Nevada Gaming Commission rather than a court as they can pretty much do whatever they want "in the interest of the game" and they do not like the owner of WSOP and would love to destroy them.

So like I said on that day, the final table was compromised (Info revealed by Dnegs that 3rd place finisher was approached to collude).

Watch how 0 well known players will admit they were wrong that this should never have been a thing (the deal). Respect to Todd Witteles/Felipe Ramos
being one of the only players who spoke out against these 2 players from the start.

Apologies if already posted but don't think I'd seen & should carry some modicum of weight.

Don’t think it carries any weight as we are hearing rumblings it’s started 3 handed. But even just heads up, it’s Caesars/WSOP prerogative and no one doesn’t think that they didn’t rig the ending. Remove the lifetime ban from guy who took free sandwiches outside the Kings Lounge first.

Scotch, why the **** did you leave with those sandwiches?😀

They just get trashed anyway

Some pros were happy that happened as well even though Ali was accused of doing this online so it should have nothing to do with live poker and so many cheat on online poker as it is.

Yes Ali admitted to RTA online but a parade of people complained to TD and they ended up DQing him. Didn’t agree with that and wouldn’t agree with Carroll/Yagi. It probably won’t but if can happen to Ali it can happen to other guys.

Lots of pros probably chip dump especially to friends if they are deep in make up, I wouldn’t trust any of these players because of how much they played this thing off like it was a big deal, you don’t have to value bracelets but for a tournament to be fixed like that is not good way to get more people into game especially since outsiders think poker players are scumbags and this pretty much proved that right.

No it shouldnt. They cheated and that they didnt cheat when there were 5 people left is irrelevant even if true.

Also makes me chuckle that the two villains who make a cartoonish, face up ploy are named Jesse and James. Lol. Someone like SeriouslySrius should make a parody video.

If you mean this shows they definitely weren't trying to collude with 5 people left you're right it should. As for his take on it being a travesty they're banned- he's dead wrong.

And just because they didn't offer to collude 5 handed doesn't mean they didn't 3 handed.