uneasy chop

[Ironside]

this will now lead to 5 players playing agaiant you to maximise there profit
which means you need to bring the TD into this
you should now be awarded first prize and they can chop the rest of the money as they see fit
i believe yogi did this back in blackpool a few years back

[The Dundonian]

I still think the initial problem is agreeing to do a deal. Once you've done that it leaves you open.

You are happy to do a deal, but not the deal that everyone else at the table wants.

To that end the rest have agreed to do a deal with everything else except what you win. I'm not for one minute condoning what happened, its crass and close to bullying but you have in principle agreed to a deal.

I still maintain it is best to not talk about a deal (especially any savers, as is pointed out it changes the dynamics of the game) until all those that are left are part of it. That way if the other players do talk about a deal without you then what Gatso and Ironside have said would be correct.

Maybe a lesson learned CF, but a good point to bring up nonetheless!

[kinboshi]

I still think the initial problem is agreeing to do a deal. Once you've done that it leaves you open.

You are happy to do a deal, but not the deal that everyone else at the table wants.

To that end the rest have agreed to do a deal with everything else except what you win. I'm not for one minute condoning what happened, its crass and close to bullying but you have in principle agreed to a deal.

I still maintain it is best to not talk about a deal (especially any savers, as is pointed out it changes the dynamics of the game) until all those that are left are part of it. That way if the other players do talk about a deal without you then what Gatso and Ironside have said would be correct.

Maybe a lesson learned CF, but a good point to bring up nonetheless!

Once one player doesn't agree to the terms of a deal, I was always under the impression that the deal was off.

[Longy]

Total bs imo, if everyone doesn't agree to a deal then the original payout structure should stand.

One of the number of advantages you have over these numpties, is that are totally clueless in adapting there games to different payout structures. Letting them have their own prizepool is totally ridic as they can play now without fear of "bubbling", taking away your ability to bully them into submission. Which therefore reduces your ev.

[BulldozerD]

i would have kicked up a stink about this Charles. If one doesn't agree then there is no deal imo.

There is definitely a deal addiction in Leeds (although i did do one myself on Friday in Leeds lol) its like people can't stand to miss out on min cashes and stuff

[George2Loose]

Agree. If you disagree they have NO right to suddenly creating a prize structure of their own

[salfi]

somet similar was done to me in vegas. i played some 60/70man tourney and on the bubble of 8 left and 7 gettin paid they wanted to deal. i said no and they all put 20 dollars into a cup and used it as a saver excluding me from the pot obviously. this killed the bubble and in my mind took my fold equity that i would often chip up in a live weak tourney with.  dont seam fair to me as shud be all agrea or no deal play on. anything that changes the schedule of the payout is some what collusion if everybody isnt involved and agreed to the changes of payout.

[robbiebox]

Isn't this the same as them all having a % of each other.

Do people think that shouldn't happen

I tend to think one says no deal, then there should be no deal. But they haven't agreed a deal they have agreed a % of each other or not??? I'm confused.

[Jamier-Host]

this will now lead to 5 players playing agaiant you to maximise there profit
which means you need to bring the TD into this
you should now be awarded first prize and they can chop the rest of the money as they see fit
i believe yogi did this back in blackpool a few years back

The same happened in what i believe was a Festival event some years back in the Vic.  There were 3 or 4 players left and someone refused to discuss a deal.  The others tried to work something out themselves and so Jeff stepped in and awarded the non-dealer 1st place and split the remainder between the others.

[Jamier-Host]

By the way I was in playing in the Flamingo on the strip recently and it had some $2k freeroll for regulars.  I heard someone comment that they always chopped it with 2 tables left for $100 each!

I really wish i'd played a few hours there earlier in the trip so I could have got involved and tried to make them play for their money 

[StuartHopkin]

I dont really think this is a huge problem as I think it would increase your edge CF?

Shorties would be happy with their saver and call/shove light.
Anyone working together could land themselves in a right mess.

Personally though I do like the DTD rule on this.

Deals if everyone agrees no problem.
Savers if everyone agrees your all barred.

[Cf]

Personally though I do like the DTD rule on this.

Deals if everyone agrees no problem.
Savers if everyone agrees your all barred.

Players aren't even allowed to agree private savers between themselves?

[Longy]

I dont really think this is a huge problem as I think it would increase your edge CF?

Shorties would be happy with their saver and call/shove light.
Anyone working together could land themselves in a right mess.

I don't agree with this Stu.

Surely we want them to play tighter around the bubble, so we can push them about. I suppose it is dependent on your chip position but in a crapshoot as this sounds give me a tight table any day of the week.

[StuartHopkin]

I dont really think this is a huge problem as I think it would increase your edge CF?

Shorties would be happy with their saver and call/shove light.
Anyone working together could land themselves in a right mess.

I don't agree with this Stu.

Surely we want them to play tighter around the bubble, so we can push them about. I suppose it is dependent on your chip position but in a crapshoot as this sounds give me a tight table any day of the week.

Yeah I see your point Mark.
Actually something I should change my thinking on, I know how to exploit the bubble but for some reason I still love that arrange a saver and the shorty busts the next hand cus they have £12 locked up.

[StuartHopkin]

Personally though I do like the DTD rule on this.

Deals if everyone agrees no problem.
Savers if everyone agrees your all barred.

Players aren't even allowed to agree private savers between themselves?

Unless it has changed in the last month this is definately DTD policy.
If a deal is done that creates a prize for someone who would otherwise not have been paid in the normal structure you will all be barred.