Two $25NL Stories

1. This Cannot Happen

So there I was, sitting at 3AM at a table with a few other dudes, one admitting that he was drunk, but playing pretty solid... another who had donated $25 twice and reloaded after each time... and a guy across the table from me, who I'll simply call "lucy" (loose-y, get it?). Now, a few minutes prior to the story I'm about to tell you, the reload guy had called my $3 pre-flop raise when I held the lovely-yet-dangerous Hilton sisters, and when the flop came something like J73 rainbow, I took a stab and put the guy all-in.

(Now as an aside here, this maybe wasn't the best play, but it's one you'll see quite a bit in $25NL... people seem to love to make these kind of $18 bets into a $7 pot when they have what is probably the best hand, and when it's hidden well... like overpairs, or sets, or improbable straights. I'm kind of on the fence about a play like this really... sometimes I'll do it... and sometimes I'll just bet enough for value and to defend my hand against draws. But back to the story...)

So the guy calls himself all-in, I win the hand, and he doesn't show 97o. "Really? Calling a $3 pre-flop raise with 97o?", I type into the chat. Lucy chimes in saying, "I like the call." We discuss it a little more... calling raises with medium suited connectors I'll do sometimes against the right player... but 97o, no way. We then openly taunt reload guy as he reloads again, by saying that we're adding him to our buddy lists.

Then the hand happened. On the button I find the hammer (72o), and raise to $3 for fun and what I hope will be profit. Lucy calls, everyone else folds. Flop: K92 rainbow. Hmm... Lucy checks, I bet $3, and am slowly called. Turn: 7. Now I hold bottom two pair, but two pair none-the-less... Lucy checks, I bet $3, and Lucy calls, adding "you guy's might be adding me to your buddy lists after this hand". Then the river card, the hammer-of-the-gods, holy-fuck-I-am-going-to-nail-this-guy, this-will-be-hilarious card: another 7. Full house, sevens full of deuces: the hammer's raison d'être.

I bet $10, and get raised $8 more (Lucy is all-in), I call and he shows: 97o. Sevens full of nines. OMFG. The table erupts at both me and Lucy.


2. This Cannot Happen Either

Now I know all the stories about how online poker is rigged... the classic line you'll often read in the chat window after someone suffers a beat is: "only on partypoker" or "that's partypoker for you", as if nobody ever hit a runner runner with real felt and cards before. I've never seen anything to make me feel even the slightest bit skeptical. And though I know cheating must exist, I've never really felt cheated online. The classic and most likely scheme you're to encounter would be two (or more, but just 2 is most likely) persons who are on the phone or on IM while they are both sitting at the same table.

I don't have much history with collusion, other than thinking about the theory of it, and participating in implicit varieties... like when you and a friend go to a game with other strangers, and avoid playing in pots together, always respecting each other's moves. Or, like in tournament poker, when one person is all in and gets two callers: the two callers may often want to check (unless they have an unbeatable hand) through the turn and river, implicitly colluding to knock the other player out: two hands have a better chance of beating him than one. The point is, implicit collusion isn't exactly cheating... you don't even talk about it... it just happens.

Now the only thing I watch for really online, is two players from the same town, or who are chatting as if they know each other. Usually, this doesn't mean a thing... most of the time they end up trying to outdo each other and I can be waiting to scoop some $ with a monster. But the other night, I encountered two players from the same town, acting suspiciously: always dumping pots to one another... often taking a tell-tale 5-10 seconds to act when they were both in the hand, yet acting quickly when just one of them was. (Phone or IM?) They were from the same town. Then a railbird (presumably from the same town) came in... I suspect waiting for a seat at the full table.

Now here's the thing for future reference... I had no concrete proof they were cheating, but I was pretty damn sure about it (other players would voice the same opinion independently later, so that's a pretty strong argument)... so why did I continue to play? Why not sit out and watch for a bit?

Eventually, this nasty hand happened. I held JJ, raised pre-flop, and got called by one of the suspected cheaters. The flop came K94, which isn't too bad for the Jacks, and I bet. At this point, my opponent is chatting openly about the hand with the railbird, asking "what should I do?" She hasn't yet said what she holds. She calls. The turn is an ugly ace. For better or worse I bet again... she says "what should I do ? I have AK." He says, "re-raise", and she does.

Now at this point, I'm pissed already. It's obviously against the rules to talk about a hand in progress or even what someone might hold. It's certainly not acceptable to say what you hold. But in the few times I've seen someone either say thier hole cards directly, or allude to holding a particular had, they've never had it. It's a classic intimidation technique. And why would you say what you have here? She has damn-near the nuts with top two pair, if she indeed does have AK.

I end up calling, to see another Ace on the river, luckily she only has a few bucks on hand... I call, and she has AK. Me and a few other's immediately jump on her and her buddies about talking about the hand... and we get met with the usual censored replies and wonderful statements like "what a bunch of homos".

I reported all the details and apparently the three of them have had their chat disabled, were sent warning emails, and had thier accounts flagged for periodic review. I know after the flop and on 4th street (in hindsight) I played the hand poorly, but at the time, it felt very right. How would you have played a situation like that?