More than 1st chop

[BadgerPro]

For some reason I feel this is unethical to do. However there is a P5s thread about my chop last night in the 55k where I pretty much got first place money when I had a monster chip lead 3 handed. It was brought up that I probably could have chopped it for more than first if I had really pushed for it.

Just wondering what other's feelings were on the subject.

[Sciolist]

My view is that negotiating the chop is part of the skillset of a tournament player. If you are better at it than the others, that's their problem.

[timex]

[ QUOTE ]
My view is that negotiating the chop is part of the skillset of a tournament player. If you are better at it than the others, that's their problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, mikeymer had a nice chop yesterday in the 7:00 109.

Stack sizes were like 230k, 90k(him) 60k, 50k, payouts were something like 7900, 5000, 3300,2300, they chopped it up
5k,5k,4200,3600 and left 1k to play for. He got as much money as the guy with 2.5x his chips, nh sir.

[BadgerPro]

[ QUOTE ]
My view is that negotiating the chop is part of the skill set of a tournament player. If you are better at it than the others, that's their problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no problem with people negotiating a better deal than a chip chop would give them or an ICM or whatever 'fair' method you're using to determine the deal. For whatever reason I don't feel chopping for more than first is right. I'm just wondering if I'm crazy for feeling this way or what the general conscience is.

[timex]

Also, after a tournament is chopped, it seems that the old payout structures are more or less arbitrary numbers. Whether you are making $1 more than first or $1 less than first would normally pay, I see little difference more than $2. If you do feel this is immoral, I think there should be other chopping related things that should cause you to feel immoral(ie. getting more money than a player with more chips, getting more than the average of 1st and 2nd place money when you have less than 1/2 the chips).

[Ontario_Tory]

I was thinking about this yesterday too. If the site has a requirement that $X is left on the table, then I have no ethical problem with it.

For example, you're 5 handed on stars in the Sunday million with 50,000,000 chips. The other four people have 2,500,000 each. Winner gets 200k, 2nd gets 100k, etc.

They all want to chop, as they all figure it's a crap shoot with 2.5M chips each. You know that you're gonna win.

Stars insists on leaving 30k on the table. I would have no problem asking for 180K to chop, which means that if you win 1st you may end up with 210 - more than 1st place money. That's the price you're willing to take to risk that 20k.

For the rest of them, they are equally likely to end up with 25k as with 100k if they don't chop, and have as good a chance for the extra 30 as the rest of the gang.

Long story short: if the others agree - which is the only way to get a chop - there is no ethical problem with ANY deal you make.

Perhaps one day I'll be able to test my theory...

OT

[yellowsub]

very OK, if yer opponents are dumb enuf to give u >1st $, then take it!

and then post in bbv ftw

[pokerstudAA]

Nothing wrong with chopping for more than 1st if the situation allows it. Usually a huge chip lead is about the only factor that will get your opponents to agree. And your opponents need to care about the money more than you do.

The last two deals I made have been three-way chops. I think I owned both of them. Both I had a nice chip lead and good aggressive table image. Basically, the other two guys knew I was going to win if we played it out. I was in their heads.

3 way chop in a $30 MTT.

QMCCTrips: 94912
Zorro_AA: 66532
pokerstudAA: 618556

1st - $2016
2nd - $1271
3rd - $702

Hero took $2100. 2nd in chips got $1000 and 3rd $889.

------------------------------------------------
3 way at the end of a $50 / 240 person tourney.
Chips counts are:

Hero: 396048
Player A: 146768
Player B: 177184

Prizes:
1st - $3,240
2nd - $1,956
3rd - $1,080

Hero made a deal for $3,100 and the other two each got $1,588.

[thesilkworm]

I think if you can get away with it, then it should be allowed. I think this can definitely work in a satellite situation. I have my doubts as to whether you would have managed it in the $55k earlier.

Let's say the 3 of you were playing a WSOP satellite with the same stack sizes as earlier - the prizes are 2 "seat-only" packages, but you are allowed to chop them for cash or T$/W$/whatever. Nothing for 3rd. Depending on who you're playing against, you could negotiate $11k or even more in this situation. $4.5k doesn't sound bad to most people when one hand could see them get nothing.

I don't think it's unethical, no. You are not forcing them to give up equity. They can play on if they want a fair deal.

Btw, I was the PS support guy who did your chop earlier Badger. Great deal and great win - congrats!

[Body Man D]

[ QUOTE ]
very OK, if yer opponents are dumb enuf to give u >1st $, then take it!

and then post in bbv ftw

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, if the other players are dumb enough to accept such a deal then that's their problem.