Perhaps there should be another option there.That would be playing a 9 handed final.
Then you will have 2 tables of 5 and non of the usual complaints etc. Also these flatter prize structures are so much easier if you are only paying 9 and not 10.
Or pay the 10 and play 9 handed.

?
Yogi
Only having 9 prizes / players on the final table is a solution but i think this would be an unpopular move where ten prizes have been the norm for so long.
another solution would be to introduce a prize for 11th and therefore have a balanced hand for hand scenario with 6 on each table.
it is the imbalance that is created by having 6 players on one table and only 5 on the other that creates the problem here.
on the table of 5 all players (regardless of stack size) are forced to blind in 40% of the hands whereas
on the table of 6, players blind in only 33.333% of the hands
if hand for hand only lasts for a few hands it is not a real problem, but is it fair for some players to blind more often than others if hand for hand extends over many hands?
would another solution be to move a player from the table of 6 to the table of five after a certain number of hands?
i totally agree with the comments about the importance of this stage of a tournament and the intricacies and exitement of play around the bubble, and i don't believe that there will be any alteration as a result of this poll (i am expecting a 50/50 split on this anyway) it has certainly provoked some interesting responses so far (keep 'em coming guys!)
If reducing the prizes to 9 is a solution that would imply that for larger attendances there would be 18 prizes with hand for hand @ 19 players... this creates an imbalance in the tables which 20 prizes does not: 9/10 as opposed to 3 x 7