The Prophet 22;370800 wroteI think everything is relative. I travel an hour for a tournament top 3 paid with 3rd getting 175.00 and 4th getting a free entry to the next tournament. There were 4 of us left and after battling it out for a level I asked for a break and it was agreed. The top two guys had us dominated so I went to the guy that I was close with in chips and said "do you want to agree to split the 3rd place money and the person who finishes higher will also get the free entry to the next tournament. Any money won beyond the third place money is kept by the the winner. " He agreed and thought it was better to walk out with something for your time than just an entry to the next tournament.
Collusion. Cheating. Plain and simple.
I would argue that any time a deal is struck between some, but not all, of the players they become incentivized to soft-play each other.
The Prophet 22;370800 wroteNeedless to say, I feel there is a sense of freedom when you have "nothing to lose".
Exactly. This gets to the heart of why players want to pay the bubble.
However, by going behind the backs of the big stacks and the TD, you and the other short stack effectively stole this sense of freedom. You did not earn it. Nor were you entitled to it simply because you had the disadvantage of being a short stack at the time.
The Prophet 22;370800 wroteNow maybe I still would have won the tournament who knows. But to this day I stand by what I did.
It seems to me you think the results somehow justify the collusion.
I would be happy to discuss this with you in person at Buzzzardd's on Saturday. But I stand by this post.