I made a deal last night that cost me an arm and a leg...

[THAY3R]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I went deep in this too and was surprised you were begging for a deal so much, but whatv. gg

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have voted for a 15 way chop. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

2 Years ago in Vegas during the WSOP we were down to 19 people in the 2nd chance tourney and everyone agreed to an even chop.

True story.

[aejones]

BTW to those saying "X-cool person has good chopping skills." or "chopping talk is a poker skill."

A few things: First of all, I'm dead serious about my chop talk. I always offer people to give me a ridiculous deal, if not, I don't chop that [censored]. It basically comes down to: I don't need it for my bankroll, I think I have an edge over the table.

The only situation I could envision chopping is final three at the Stars million with like... maybe Ansky and (insert someone else I thought was good from MTTc, not one comes to the top of my head). Then, I would be like wtf 200k and 60k is just too swingy, let's just throw 20 off first to third and play that shizz out.

Other than that, I will define good chopping skillz:

You are an a-hole.

You are very good at poker and feel you have an EV greater than the chips in front of you.

You can say things other people wanna hear.

You have experience and this is not your only final table.

Honestly, I'm obviously a master chopping judging by the criteria.

[Rick Diesel]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you are begging, or even prefer to take a 6 or 7 handed deal you shouldn't be playing the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really disagree with this, in large field low-buyin tournies. 10r 55k is a great example.

[/ QUOTE ]

I stand by my statement although I'd rather not get into it, but also note that the tournament in question is definitely not a large field low buyin tournament by online standards.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with you mostly because you are saying that if I put up $162 for a tournament I should be willing to flip a coin for 10k. So if somebody is playing in the sunday million and they reach the final table they should be willing to flip for 70k or else they shouldn't be playing in the tournament at all? In a similar situation I would rather take 32k than flip for 70k if given the option. There has got to be some point for you at which the money matters too much for you. Maybe this low of buyin for you isn't much. For example say a low stakes player posted this about 180 $20 tournament. We would all be saying play for first. But assume his bankroll is only $200 and he played in the tournament just to take a shot. Then it could certainly make sense for him to take a deal with 7 left.

Another point I want to make is that $162 is approximately 1% of my current online bankroll. I don't see why it should be mandatory that I have to play a hand that will either win or lose me more than 50% of the previous amount of my entire bankroll. And so what if I don't want that much variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems like you are proving his point with your example of the person playing a 20/180 on a $200 bankroll. They are clearly playing out of their bankroll and should not be playing in the tournament. What am i missing here?

[Inyaface]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW to those saying "X-cool person has good chopping skills." or "chopping talk is a poker skill."

A few things: First of all, I'm dead serious about my chop talk. I always offer people to give me a ridiculous deal, if not, I don't chop that [censored]. It basically comes down to: I don't need it for my bankroll, I think I have an edge over the table.

The only situation I could envision chopping is final three at the Stars million with like... maybe Ansky and (insert someone else I thought was good from MTTc, not one comes to the top of my head). Then, I would be like wtf 200k and 60k is just too swingy, let's just throw 20 off first to third and play that shizz out.

Other than that, I will define good chopping skillz:

You are an a-hole.

You are very good at poker and feel you have an EV greater than the chips in front of you.

You can say things other people wanna hear.

You have experience and this is not your only final table.

Honestly, I'm obviously a master chopping judging by the criteria.

[/ QUOTE ]

Word
That's all

[cking]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW to those saying "X-cool person has good chopping skills." or "chopping talk is a poker skill."

A few things: First of all, I'm dead serious about my chop talk. I always offer people to give me a ridiculous deal, if not, I don't chop that [censored]. It basically comes down to: I don't need it for my bankroll, I think I have an edge over the table.

The only situation I could envision chopping is final three at the Stars million with like... maybe Ansky and (insert someone else I thought was good from MTTc, not one comes to the top of my head). Then, I would be like wtf 200k and 60k is just too swingy, let's just throw 20 off first to third and play that shizz out.

Other than that, I will define good chopping skillz:

You are an a-hole.

You are very good at poker and feel you have an EV greater than the chips in front of you.

You can say things other people wanna hear.

You have experience and this is not your only final table.

Honestly, I'm obviously a master chopping judging by the criteria.

[/ QUOTE ]

well when you say to be good at chops you need to be an A-hole your absolutly right. Now demanding rediculous chops isnt necessarily being good at it though. You just don't need to chop, and so you dont. Being good at chops is getting more then your equity in the tourney. If your in 2nd place and getting as many chips as first place through negotiation, now thats being good at a chop.

Also it comes down to finding people, such as the OP who are desperate for the chop, and picking on them for more money. Wheh they are getting way more then if they bust now, losing what is a small percentage of that isnt a big deal to them, get 2 of these guys in your chop and between them you can add a healthy amount to your deal and making it a very +EV situation.

[wpr101]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you are begging, or even prefer to take a 6 or 7 handed deal you shouldn't be playing the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really disagree with this, in large field low-buyin tournies. 10r 55k is a great example.

[/ QUOTE ]

I stand by my statement although I'd rather not get into it, but also note that the tournament in question is definitely not a large field low buyin tournament by online standards.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with you mostly because you are saying that if I put up $162 for a tournament I should be willing to flip a coin for 10k. So if somebody is playing in the sunday million and they reach the final table they should be willing to flip for 70k or else they shouldn't be playing in the tournament at all? In a similar situation I would rather take 32k than flip for 70k if given the option. There has got to be some point for you at which the money matters too much for you. Maybe this low of buyin for you isn't much. For example say a low stakes player posted this about 180 $20 tournament. We would all be saying play for first. But assume his bankroll is only $200 and he played in the tournament just to take a shot. Then it could certainly make sense for him to take a deal with 7 left.

Another point I want to make is that $162 is approximately 1% of my current online bankroll. I don't see why it should be mandatory that I have to play a hand that will either win or lose me more than 50% of the previous amount of my entire bankroll. And so what if I don't want that much variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems like you are proving his point with your example of the person playing a 20/180 on a $200 bankroll. They are clearly playing out of their bankroll and should not be playing in the tournament. What am i missing here?

[/ QUOTE ]

I said in that case the person was taking a shot. I said the buyin for this tournament made up about 1% of my bankroll. Have you seriously never played in a tournament where the buyin was more than 1% of your bankroll?

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you are begging, or even prefer to take a 6 or 7 handed deal you shouldn't be playing the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really disagree with this, in large field low-buyin tournies. 10r 55k is a great example.

[/ QUOTE ]

I stand by my statement although I'd rather not get into it, but also note that the tournament in question is definitely not a large field low buyin tournament by online standards.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with you mostly because you are saying that if I put up $162 for a tournament I should be willing to flip a coin for 10k. So if somebody is playing in the sunday million and they reach the final table they should be willing to flip for 70k or else they shouldn't be playing in the tournament at all? In a similar situation I would rather take 32k than flip for 70k if given the option. There has got to be some point for you at which the money matters too much for you. Maybe this low of buyin for you isn't much. For example say a low stakes player posted this about 180 $20 tournament. We would all be saying play for first. But assume his bankroll is only $200 and he played in the tournament just to take a shot. Then it could certainly make sense for him to take a deal with 7 left.

Another point I want to make is that $162 is approximately 1% of my current online bankroll. I don't see why it should be mandatory that I have to play a hand that will either win or lose me more than 50% of the previous amount of my entire bankroll. And so what if I don't want that much variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems like you are proving his point with your example of the person playing a 20/180 on a $200 bankroll. They are clearly playing out of their bankroll and should not be playing in the tournament. What am i missing here?

[/ QUOTE ]

I said in that case the person was taking a shot. I said the buyin for this tournament made up about 1% of my bankroll. Have you seriously never played in a tournament where the buyin was more than 1% of your bankroll?

[/ QUOTE ]

Right - should I not play in the Million (on a sat) because the putative buy of 215 is well more than 1% of my online BR? (Though if it were the WSOP ME, damn right I take the cashahs - 10k or a tournament where my likely equity is probably half that? Hrm...)

[locutus2002]

We all play tournaments with big prizes because we like to gamble. Realistically our EV is substantially smaller than a top prize, and we like the big field sizes.

It's unlikely that Roothlus, or AEjones have any advantage on a final table.

The only thing people remember is that they were an a-hole. If any company ever sponsors a player I know to be an ahole I will go out of my way to send the company a letter.

[mikeymer]

[ QUOTE ]

It's unlikely that Roothlus, or AEjones have any advantage on a final table.

The only thing people remember is that they were an a-hole. If any company ever sponsors a player I know to be an ahole I will go out of my way to send the company a letter.

[/ QUOTE ]

uh what

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
It's unlikely that Roothlus, or AEjones have any advantage on a final table.

[/ QUOTE ]

im gonna go ahead and disagree