MTR 5.2 Covers much of what is ok to do as far as Collusion is concerned, but it is less clear when it comes to unsplitable prizes, such as cards or PT Invites etc.

The MTR gives the example:

: In the finals of a 1-slot Pro Tour Qualifier that offers a travel award and an invitation to the winner, the two finalists may agree to split the tournament prizes, but this agreement cannot alter the results of the match. One player must drop from the tournament, leaving the travel award and the invitation to the player who did not drop from the tournament. That player is then free to split the remainder of the prizes as agreed upon. The travel award and invitation are a single item and may not be split.

This example doesn't describe how this money can be split, so, in this situation, let's say there is the PT Invite, and $1000 to be split up $600 to first $400 to second. One player in the finals, we'll call him Alvin, says he will not be able to attend the PT, and asks his opponent, Bob, if they can split the $1000 $800 to $200 in the favor of Alvin, who will not receive the invite. They agree, and Alvin drops. Is this legal?

What about the case where the prize is strictly un-seperable? Let's consider a tournament where the first prize is a Bazaar of Baghdad and second is an Unlimited Underground Sea. Alvin is a known Vintage player, and says “I need a 4th Bazaar to complete my playset and I'll be done with my Vintage Dredge deck. If you win, I'll ship you $30 for the Bazaar to make things even, and you can have the Sea.”

With the introduction of money into the match, would this be wagering? If he offered a trade here would it be wagering or collusion? Should intention be considered in this judgement?

Originally posted by TJ Clark:

doesn't describe how this money can be split

what money? If you're referring to a travel award supplied by Wizards, it can't be split - that's the meaning of that sentence in the MTR. However, if the TO adds cash to the prize pool, that's part of “the reminder of the prizes” which can be split “as agreed upon.”

In your second example, that has never been allowed - the player is introducing an incentive outside the actual prize pool. Only the prizes that were designated for that event can be split, as part of such an arrangement.

Of course, that player could have said “I really need that Bazaar, and I'd like to trade for it if you win.” And what those two players do with their prizes, after the tournament and outside the venue - well, as much as it may bug us at times, that's their business, and we can't stop them from violating the spirit of the rules.