|
|
#11
01-31-2007, 11:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: It can\'t be right to change the number of paid places?
[ QUOTE ]
Well I definitely think this is wrong! This could easily be a kind of collusion. These two players, or a group of players could make such an agreement before the start of the tournament. The result is that some people plays two win, while the informed people plays to win or get second. This is a big difference in my opinion. What to do about it? I don’t know… [/ QUOTE ] As was previously mentioned, there is nothing preventing them from doing it without making a deal at the end. Now that you are aware of the practice, if you feel you want to try for a deal at 2 handed, play to make the top two then offer a deal. It would only really be an issue if before the 3rd person is eliminated, someone said he would deal with one person when it gets heads up, but not another. Single table satellites at the WSOP are winner-take-all, but deals are made all the time when it gets heads up. I've even seen 4 way splits before in those. 
|
|
#13
01-31-2007, 11:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: It can\'t be right to change the number of paid places?
[ QUOTE ]
Why would there be any difference in making a deal "on the bubble" and making a deal once ITM? They are all fine as long as everyone still left agrees. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#14
01-31-2007, 12:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: It can\'t be right to change the number of paid places?
Man, you would have hated our 10 man tournament that paid 3 to start, but the remaining players decided on a perfectly even chop when we got to 5 handed with relatively even stacks (BB was 1/10th the average stack).
|
|
#15
01-31-2007, 12:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: It can\'t be right to change the number of paid places?
[ QUOTE ]
Well I definitely think this is wrong! This could easily be a kind of collusion. These two players, or a group of players could make such an agreement before the start of the tournament. The result is that some people plays two win, while the informed people plays to win or get second. This is a big difference in my opinion. What to do about it? I don’t know… [/ QUOTE ] If they are cheating they don't need to make an open deal, they just cut up the money later. If they aren't cheating they still need to play to win since they can't know that there opponenet will agree to teh deal they want if they get heads up. If the next time you run this tournament and one of them is not trying to come in first, just trying to get heads up so he can make a deal, what happens if you are the person he ends up HU with. You say no deal. Now if hurt his chances earlier thats to your benefit
|
|
#16
01-31-2007, 12:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: It can\'t be right to change the number of paid places?
There's nothing wrong here - if you're not in the torunament, your EV doesn't change. And if you ARE in the torunament still, you don't have to agree to the deal so your EV doesn't change if you don't want it to. Pretty simple, really.
They're not doing anything wrong, let alone cheating.
|
|
#17
01-31-2007, 01:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: It can\'t be right to change the number of paid places?
It sounds like both were playing for 1st and 2nd and as such, first need stripping and publically beating, then tied to a wooden stake in the middle of the village green and burnt as a witch!! It's shocking the type of player frequenting our innocent friendly games these days!!!
|
|
#18
01-31-2007, 01:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: It can\'t be right to change the number of paid places?
"they decided to change the payout" sounds like it was the organizers that changed it, not the players making a deal. If that's the case, then it sucks. It's a lot different playing to win than playing to survive to 2nd place.
|
|
#19
01-31-2007, 01:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: It can\'t be right to change the number of paid places?
[ QUOTE ]
"they decided to change the payout" sounds like it was the organizers that changed it, not the players making a deal. If that's the case, then it sucks. It's a lot different playing to win than playing to survive to 2nd place. [/ QUOTE ] "Live six handed tournament" sounds like a home game. The players probably ARE the organizers.
|
|
#20
01-31-2007, 01:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: It can\'t be right to change the number of paid places?
Players entering the tournament agree to the payout structure.
The remaining prize money belongs to the remaining players. If the remaining players agree to alter the payout structure, that's their right. It's their money. If the tourney had originally been scheduled to pay the top two finishers, and the final two players agreed after all the other players had been eliminated to change that to "winner take all" , would that deal upset you as well? Of course not. If they want to gamble with their own money, that's their right. Why shouldn't they also be allowed to reduce their risk, and share the wealth more evenly?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
