How to become the most unpopular man in the Casino

[RED-DOG]

After a while, people will respect the fact that you don't do savers and stop arguing with you, as long as, when YOU are the short stack, you refuse to ACCEPT a saver

[londonpokergirl]

After u went junior, I was watching Jim on the final table, got down to 4 handed , then out in 3rd Jim,   gets to heads up and they play  Button gets big blind, so I say no thats wrong, at this point there are about 10 people saying well actually Mel is right  button is small blind,   Olga brings a manager who says because they've always played that way, thats how it is

I told him its not acceptable and where in his rules does it say that.  At that point he couldn't find it

Talk about hard work and still not getting anywhere

[Bongo]

After a while, people will respect the fact that you don't do savers and stop arguing with you, as long as, when YOU are the short stack, you refuse to ACCEPT a saver

I'm there to have fun and try to win - hanging on to a tiny stack isn't my idea of either of those as such i'm far more likely to be out than a short stack...

But yes, I will say no to a saver when short too. I guess that would make me an unpopular lunatic if it ever happened?

And to Mel - been there done that, was 'politely' informed by the dealer that he knew how to do his job...

[Junior Senior]

After a while, people will respect the fact that you don't do savers and stop arguing with you, as long as, when YOU are the short stack, you refuse to ACCEPT a saver

I thought about saying no and perhaps i should have done as i guess by accepting this makes me a hypocrite from what i said in my previous posts, however there were about 4 short stacks left and they were VERY keen to get the saver so i just agreed for ease sake, however i did state i wasn't bothered either way and i thought it would change the game (and it did) - i moved all-in 4 times in a row after that. (one time too many) also - it was the big stacks offering a saver (none of the short stacks were asking for a saver, which is very wrong)

[way_too_tight]

I guess this probably depends on your motivation for playing. If you're just there to have a good time then it's nice to get your money back at least. As an amateur player I appreciate this and I'm happy to do a saver regardless of my chip position. I've done this from both first and last spot taking money from the top and won from both positions. The missing £20/50/80 ish quid didn't spoil my entertainment and I seriously doubt that it really hurts anyone's profitability.

I appreciate it's an individual choice though and I'm not remotely bothered when anyone doesn't want to do a deal. The question I wind up asking myself is - would I still have played if I knew this was going to be the payout structure. And of course I would - it's poker man....

I can see the other side of the coin too though - if you don't want a deal then you shouldn't get pushed into taking one.

I don't ever remember taking the saver where I would have bubbled - so it's not like this benefits me monetarily - quite the opposite. It does reduce my time on the bubble though - and as we all know, bubbling sucks.

YMMv - HAND.

  Bry

[Solver]

Interesting thread.

Reading the thread makes me think that savers are wrong but my actual experience makes me feel different.

Personally I can think of at least two circumstances where I have benefitted from a saver.

The first of which was when I was playing in a $40+1 rebuy/addon tournament at harrahs LV.  There was only 40 odd entrants and the top 4 players were going to get paid.  We were down the the last 5 and we hit a break.  During the break the tournament director came over to us to explain the payout amounts.

Being the short stack and the fact that there we were on the bubble during the break I proposed that we give a Saver to 5th place.  Everyone looked at me with blank faces and didn't know what I was talking about.  At this point the tournament director came to my rescue.  "Actually it's very common to have a saver for 5th place at this stage" she said.  She asked if everyone used their addon and everybody nodded (Including me which I feel a bit guilty about as I didn't use it).  With that information she proposed we take $40 of first and second place so that last place gets their buyin $ back.

Everyone was in agreement.  I now had nothing to lose in my mind.  I was very short stacked and what ever happend I was going to make a small profit (due to my little fib).  I can't really justify that lie, it's just that everyone else had already said yes and I didn't want to throw a spanner in the works when a saver was being suggested by being the only one who didn't use their rebuy/addon.  I doubt it made any actual difference to the result of the deal being made.

Anyway, my experience showed at the final table and for some reason people where laying down all sorts of nice hands to my allins as a short stack until I eventually started to get callers.  With a little bit of luck I managed to turn things around and win the tournament.  So great deal for me as it stopped all that silly bubble play and allowed me risk it enough to win.  Bad deal for the others (expect I'm sure whoever went out in 5th appreciated it).

The second example I have was the when I had a healthy stack on the bubble (unusual for me, I'm used to entering a final table as the small stack and turning it around).  I like small stack play, makes all your decsissions easy, fold or push...

Anyway, back on topic.  We are down to 10 players and somebody suggested a saver for 10th place.  It was only a £5 rebuy so as usual the suggestion was we take £10 from first and second to pay 10th place.  This seems to be common practice when get down to tedious bubble play in this tournament.  Anyway, the chip leader (who was very drunk at the time) objected to the saver.  Sure enough as you suggested everyone couldn't believe he was turning it down.  Second place was paying over £300 and first over £500, was £10 really going to make that much difference?  It's the principle he argued. 

So that was it, no deal made and a few hands later somebody bubbled.  I remember being angry with the guy refusing the deal at the time (along with everybody else).  At the time all I was thinking is that the saver amount being proposed was so insignificant to the top payouts that there was no harm in it. 

I think the post by way_too_tight sums up my feelings on this well.  I can't see myself ever refusing a saver being proposed.  But like you say, what about player who went out in 11th/12th?  Well they were not on the bubble, tough.  The fact that a deal was made for the bubble player is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

I'm going to throw an etiquette question in the deal now.  Given that saver deals are common place is it wrong to propose a saver deal as the short stack?  I personally think it's probably bad etiquette.  I think as the short stack you should wait and hope a saver is suggested by the other players who just want to speed the action up and get to the final table.

Stu