Lee Jones Flawed Thinking

[deacsoft]

What answer were you looking for? Sorry if I wasn't aware that it was rhetorical.

[suzzer99]

I will say that Lee Jones has no idea how to chop a deal at the final table of an MTT.

In the party guaranteed million, xx31xx had 53% of the chips, and McGinn had 47%. (Forget about the $30k set aside to play for - that's a whole nother mess.) Lee applied this percentage difference to the entire prize pool that was left (1st + 2nd place), rather than just to the difference between 1st and 2nd, as it should be.

By this logic, if xx31xx had had 80% of the chips McGinn would have gotten less than the amount guaranteed for 2nd place. Crazy. It cost McGinn something like $7-$10k.

This may or may not be relevant. But the fact that this is someone's job, they are supposedly an expert in the field, they've cut deals online major MTTs hundreds of times, for a lot of money, and got it THAT wrong, is a little spooky to me.

I have absolutely no ax to grind against Mr. Jones whatsoever. That just really blew my mind.

[MicroBob]

Lee only does 'suggestions' based on chip-counts because that is what many players prefer.

Lee does not 'make' deals in any tourneys.
If the players WANT to chop based on chip-percentage than Lee will do that for them.


You can even e-mail Stars about this and they will tell you the same thing.

Lee and Stars are VERY careful to make sure everyone agrees to the terms before the deal is official and finalized.


Lee has never and will never force a deal on anyone...and I would be VERY surprised if he even recommended a deal.

He might start by saying 'heres how it would work as a direct percentage of chips if you're interested' or something like that.
Otherwise, the players are responsible for doing it (as it should be).


That's how deal-making works...including on stars.

I saw a live-tourney with 4 players remaining.
Large-stack had about 55% of the chips.
The 3 others each had 15% of the chips
They evenly split the prize-money 4 ways.
That's not the fault of the tourney-director. That's the fault of the idiot who was the chip-leader.

[Cactus Jack]

[ QUOTE ]
What answer were you looking for? Sorry if I wasn't aware that it was rhetorical.

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad, and I guess it was rhetorical, even if I wasn't thinking it at the time. No doubt there are situations that one could say are black/white and no gray areas in between.

Sorry.

[suzzer99]

[ QUOTE ]
Lee only does 'suggestions' based on chip-counts because that is what many players prefer.

Lee does not 'make' deals in any tourneys.
If the players WANT to chop based on chip-percentage than Lee will do that for them.


You can even e-mail Stars about this and they will tell you the same thing.

Lee and Stars are VERY careful to make sure everyone agrees to the terms before the deal is official and finalized.


Lee has never and will never force a deal on anyone...and I would be VERY surprised if he even recommended a deal.

He might start by saying 'heres how it would work as a direct percentage of chips if you're interested' or something like that.
Otherwise, the players are responsible for doing it (as it should be).


That's how deal-making works...including on stars.

I saw a live-tourney with 4 players remaining.
Large-stack had about 55% of the chips.
The 3 others each had 15% of the chips
They evenly split the prize-money 4 ways.
That's not the fault of the tourney-director. That's the fault of the idiot who was the chip-leader.

[/ QUOTE ]

First he offered to do it all or let them do it. Then xx31xx went away and after 3 minutes(!) came back with the %53/%47 number. The Lee offered again to chop based on that %, and *incorrectly* assigned it to the entire prize pool, instead of just the difference between 1st and 2nd. Yes the players agreed on it, and McGinn should have called him on it. But McGinn seemed just happy to be there and not exactly a rhodes scholar.

I'm not saying Lee is culpable and I have no vendetta against him whatsoever. I play on PS and love it, and I don't have a big problem with them not taking all ZJ's money. I just don't like seeing mistakes like that. It bugs me that that can happen at the highest levels and no one catches it. Sorry to hijack btw.

[MicroBob]

Lee did nothing wrong.

It appears the player said, 'lets split the total prize-pool 53/47'
Lee said, 'if you do it that way then this is what it is'
and then they both accepted it.


If the player had said, 'lets give us each 2nd place prize money...and then split the remaining money 53/47'



I would expect Lee to conduct this split according to the players wishes every time and think he does a great job of staying out of the way and letting the players decide the numbers. He's just the intermediary.
I don't see how he did anything wrong here.

[StregaChess]

[ QUOTE ]

.

I saw a live-tourney with 4 players remaining.
Large-stack had about 55% of the chips.
The 3 others each had 15% of the chips
They evenly split the prize-money 4 ways.
That's not the fault of the tourney-director. That's the fault of the idiot who was the chip-leader.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would it be possible to get the user name of the chip-leader? Not that I think I can beat him in poker, but possibly I could get him to write me a loan?
I'm sure that pay back terms would be awesome!

[Badger]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

.

I saw a live-tourney with 4 players remaining.
Large-stack had about 55% of the chips.
The 3 others each had 15% of the chips
They evenly split the prize-money 4 ways.
That's not the fault of the tourney-director. That's the fault of the idiot who was the chip-leader.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would it be possible to get the user name of the chip-leader? Not that I think I can beat him in poker, but possibly I could get him to write me a loan?
I'm sure that pay back terms would be awesome!

[/ QUOTE ]

probably not.

[suzzer99]

[ QUOTE ]
Lee did nothing wrong.

It appears the player said, 'lets split the total prize-pool 53/47'
Lee said, 'if you do it that way then this is what it is'
and then they both accepted it.


If the player had said, 'lets give us each 2nd place prize money...and then split the remaining money 53/47'



I would expect Lee to conduct this split according to the players wishes every time and think he does a great job of staying out of the way and letting the players decide the numbers. He's just the intermediary.
I don't see how he did anything wrong here.

[/ QUOTE ]

These guys were both speaking in a few one-syllable words. All the dude said was that he had 53% of the chips in play. Lee took the 53%/47% and ran with it. I'm not saying he is cuplable or to blame, ultimately the dudes are. I just don't like it, because it's the wrong way to do a chop. It messes with my sense of order in the universe that this can happen.

[JCCARL]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am a business owner and I don't bad mouth my competition.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Smoke:

We don't bad mouth our competition either. Of course we don't have any competition so that makes this area easy.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]
Hi Mason,
I respectfully disagree with you. In terms of your work on poker theory and your contributions to poker, you might consider yourself colleagues, much the same as University professors. In that sense you have no competition. As soon as you sell your work for profit, make no mistake about it, you have competition and it is the other publishers. Lee Jones is one of them. You are competing for the hard earned dollars of those individuals who choose to buy your published work. The fact that your work is very good (IMO [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]) compared to other authors, and may even be head and shoulders above, might lead you to falsely believe that you have no competition.
Regards,
Carl