DTD's new policy on deals

[FUN4FRASER]

Hi All

Lively thread as expected.

When we first opened we didnt allow deals or savers. We stuck to our guns re savers but decided no deals was too radical and hard to get players to accept. Now 4 years on our Deepstack guarantee has gone from £25,000 in Feb 2008 to £250,000 in March 2012. Imagine what the fields would be if we didnt guarantee them and therefore if we think the best experience in the long run will be to establish outright winners getting paid as per our payout schedule are we not entitled to do that?

Yes, many of our players have been given a fantastic opportunity for a big return on as little as a €2 investment via one of our online satellites but once they min cash at £750 i am sure the majority feel anything more is a bonus and it is a real thrill to ladder to the final table, ok, previously they could deal and get £10,000+ 5 way but how are you ever going to learn to win if you keep chopping events and you will never get that buzz of playing heads up for the first place and prize.

I have a thread on FB re this subject that has had 121 replies mostly in favour of our brave stance. As always we like to lead and inevitably others will immitate, we make tough decisions but usually we get it right and i believe this is the right thing to do.

Cheers

ACES

dont know how you can ever police it
if 6 left 5 dtd reg quiet word in card park (between the 5 ) deal between them selves possible colude to take none reg out atleast chip count deals are open

As with a backed player or somebody having a percentage this is not official and outside of DTDs policy hence they are not  answerable...the same can be said of any " under the table deal " if anybody gets involved and it goes " tits up " then they have to suffer the consequences.

As regards collusion well thats a whole different thread....

[Solaris]

Think it's a tremendous decision that has to be applauded. Favours those who are brave enough to go for the win.

I've stated my opinion's before on this subject, but I find the animosity shown towards people who don't wish to deal to be a disgrace. People shouldn't be put under severe pressure to do a deal just because it benefits others.

[PizzicatoXev]

George is my hero...

[aaron1867]

How would someone not wanting to deal have anything to do with Karma, what have they done wrong ?

I have made nearly 200 live finals and the amount of times someone refuses a deal then is soon knocked out is unreal. The only people it does not se to happen to are Lawrence Gosney and Alli Mallu. I played some shocking school night comps on Yorkshire where they woul usually chop the final ten ways. One night in Sheffield 88 runners paid ten and with 17 runners left Keith Littlewood wants to chop £11k up Ffs. (and this man was leading the wsop after day 1 one year)

Gosh, I remember that night, I was one of the final table and at that point I didn't know Keith that well and wasn't sure if he was serious or not, but he genuinely was.

i said on the Facebook page that it's good that there is a no deals policy, because surely as gamblers/poker players, you have to have some ambition and want some limelight, not to take a deal? You only live once!

I am not fussed on deals, I never make them, just listen in and if I think it's an OK deal, then that's fine. The only thing about deals is that sometimes you can make enemies by declining them and it's annoying really. Not also to mention there are lots of people who will not deal with certain people because they simply do not like them (I am one of those).

[smashedagain]

How would someone not wanting to deal have anything to do with Karma, what have they done wrong ?

I have made nearly 200 live finals and the amount of times someone refuses a deal then is soon knocked out is unreal. The only people it does not se to happen to are Lawrence Gosney and Alli Mallu. I played some shocking school night comps on Yorkshire where they woul usually chop the final ten ways. One night in Sheffield 88 runners paid ten and with 17 runners left Keith Littlewood wants to chop £11k up Ffs. (and this man was leading the wsop after day 1 one year)

Gosh, I remember that night, I was one of the final table and at that point I didn't know Keith that well and wasn't sure if he was serious or not, but he genuinely was.

i said on the Facebook page that it's good that there is a no deals policy, because surely as gamblers/poker players, you have to have some ambition and want some limelight, not to take a deal? You only live once!

I am not fussed on deals, I never make them, just listen in and if I think it's an OK deal, then that's fine. The only thing about deals is that sometimes you can make enemies by declining them and it's annoying really. Not also to mention there are lots of people who will not deal with certain people because they simply do not like them (I am one of those).

welcome to Blonde sir. one thing tho, please dont come on here confirming my tales. some people like to think i'm full of shit 

[tikay]

For a few years, I seem to recall that DTD had a policy that Deals at the Final Table could ONLY be done if they represented chip equity.

As a suggestion, where does that stand, between "do as you like", & "no deals"? I guess the answer would be 50% for, 50% against, & 50% not fussed. (Let's see if Herbie spots the error there).

Also.....

What are players views on people not involved in the Final - being friends, railers, or most specifically, investors - being consulted by the player during the play? "I'll have to go & ask my mate, be right back".

[robyong]

I have read these comments with interest. Myself and Simon differ in our core reasons for agreeing that "no deals" in the way forward, we had a long meeting about this subject this evening, Simon is a poker purist, he wants players to improve their game playing short handed and the trophy means as much to him if not more than the 1st prize, he polishes his poker trophies each morning and night  

My personal reason for wanting a no deals policy is;

1. The protection of inexperienced players, which DTD has a disproportional amount to traditional casinos, due to our satelitte programs and £15 FO evening comps

2. The atmosphere and ambience of the club, promoting good relationships between our members, whether local regs < 30 miles (30% footfall) or travelling players + 30 miles (70% footfall)

Here are a list of facts;

1. Streamed events were not invented when we opened, DTD opened its doors with a no deal policy

2. The no deals  policy will cover every comp at DTD that we GTE the prize pool, approximately 50 comps per month, of which between 1 and 4 will be  streamed

3. Every deal at DTD has been looked at over the least 14 months, all deal details are all logged at DTD, there is a clear pattern of non club regulars and/or satelitte qualifiers agreeing to extremely bad equity deals

4. Myself and simon have personally witnessed at least 20 incidents of aggressive player behaviour (swearing, shouting, personal insults or worse) regarding deals

5. Myself and Simon have personally witnessed at least 6 incidents of threatening behaviour as a result of the negotiation of deals

6. Simon can name 15 deals that he had to intervene where he believed a inexperienced player was about to agree to a grossly unfair deal relative to chips and the deal was renegotiated

7. A no deals policy will cost DTD money, through more dealer and supervisor hours, and less cash game action

8. Simon has been told on at least 4 occasions by stakeholders in a player at the final table that a deal cannot be agreed to without their approval

9. Simon has been verbally abused on at least 3 occasions when trying to mediate a deal

10. Deals volumes in Super £50 or higher events have doubled over the last 14 months (no real change in £15 comps), I believe (my view only) this is partly due to the growth in player staking, you would expect the opposite, especially if players are in make-up, therefore I believe backers/not players are influencing the dynamics of the final tables if their player is in make up - of course, prize pools have grown, so this would also be a reason for the increase

On the basis of the above, I don't see how we advocate deal negotiation between players, whether that be chop up x % of the pot or chop up the lot, and anyone that thinks we would make such a controversial decision that we didn't really believe was right for our members, just 4 weeks before £250,000 GTE event, well, god bless you, is all I can say

Cheers Rob

PS. Can I add that I believe that our members are on the whole very well behaved, more than any other venue that I know, but some of the incidents we remembered when we were going through the tourney sheets were just so out of character we were like "can you believe so and so said that" when recounting the situations

[tikay]

Here are a list of facts;

1. Streamed events were not invented when we opened, DTD opened its doors with a no deal policy

2. The no deals  policy will cover every comp at DTD that we GTE the prize pool, approximately 50 comps per month, of which between 1 and 4 will be  streamed

3. Myself and simon have personally witnessed at least 20 incidents of aggressive player behaviour (swearing, shouting, personal insults or worse) regarding deals

4. Myself and Simon have personally witnessed at least 6 incidents of threatening behaviour as a result of the negotiation of deals

5. Simon can name 15 deals that he had to intervene where he believed a inexperienced player was about to agree to a grossly unfair deal relative to chips and the deal was renegotiated

6. A no deals policy with cost DTD money, through more dealer and supervisor hours, and less cash game action

7. Simon has been told on at least 4 occasions by multi-stakeholders that a deal cannot be done without their approval

8. Simon has been verbally abused on at least 3 occasions when trying to mediate a deal

9. Every deal has been looked at over the least 14 months, all deal details are all logged at DTD, there is a clear pattern of non club regulars and/or satelitte qualifiers agreeing to extremely bad equity deals

10. Deals volumes have doubled over the least 12 months in line with the growth in player staking

On the basis of the above, I don't see how we advocate negotiation between players of the prizepool, and to be honest, anyone that thinks there is an advantage to us for making a decision that we we know will be controversial before a £250,000 GTE event, well, god bless you, is all I can say

Cheers Rob

Item 10 - enboldened - that's a surprise, to me, at least. Staked players are MORE inclined to want a deal? I'd have assumed the opposite.

[robyong]

TK

Example:

Player A is in make up for £2000 and on a 50% deal, chips are fairly even

1st Prize is £3000
2nd Prize is £2000
3rd Prize is £1000

Deal done £2000 each, backer receives £2000, player receives £0

No deal done, player finished 1st £3000, backer receives £2,500 (+£500 better than a deal), Player A receives £500 (£+500 better than a deal)

Player finished 2nd, backer received £2,000 (same as deal), player receives £0 (same as deal)

Player finished 3rd, backer receives £1000(-£1000 worse than a deal), player recieves £0 (same as deal)

If players are of equal ability, no brainer for backer to encourage a deal and extra pressure to do deal on backed player and other players

Cheers Rob

[tikay]

TK

Example:

Player A is in make up for £2000 and on a 50% deal, chips are fairly even

1st Prize is £3000
2nd Prize is £2000
3rd Prize is £1000

Deal done £2000 each, backer receives £2000, player receives £0

No deal done, player finished 1st £3000, backer receives £2,500, Player A receives £500

Player finished 2nd, backer received £2,000, player receives £0

Player finished 3rd, backer receives £1000, player recieves £0

If players are of equal ability, no brainer for backer to encourage a deal

Cheers Rob

Ahh, I see. Players being in make-up is something a bit alien to me, like playing on credit, so it's not a subject I much understand, or care for. I guess it would influence the thought processes though.

[leethefish]

Unless I've missed it ... When dtd first opened chip count deals where allowed but no other
Is this still the case?

[George2Loose]

Unless I've missed it ... When dtd first opened chip count deals where allowed but no other
Is this still the case?

NO deals

I repeat

NO MORE DEALS

again

No deals


Wp DTD

[rex008]

Unless I've missed it ... When dtd first opened chip count deals where allowed but no other
Is this still the case?

When it first opened, there were no deals at all. Then it moved to chip count for a bit, then anything. I'm a DTD £50FO regular and I'm ambivalent about deals. I like playing to the end, but the thought of locking up a few hundred with 3 or 4 to go usually means I end up agreeing to deals if something fair is proposed. I don't think I've ever proposed a deal personally though.

[The Camel]

Tough one this.

While all those points Rob makes are excellent and very valid reasons for not allowing deals (in particular I hate the bullying of players to agree to deals. I was once invited "outside" by a regular at Blackpool when I refused to agree to a saver in a GUKPT event) I am not altogther comfortable with a cardroom telling players what they can and can't do with their money (the prizepool is, after all, the players money, not the casinos).

If there was added money in a tournament, I'd absolutely agree with the no deals policy. I guess limiting the no deals policy to guaranteed events is a halfway house.

Interesting to see what hapens - hope deal making isn't forced "underground" which would lead to even more intimidation and be impossible to police. (This happened in a cardroom I used to go to in Portsmouth).

[pleno1]

everyone gets given a queen and a king. If they want to deal they put the queen in the hat facedown, if they don't they put the king.

if there is one king in the hat then play goes on till the end. anyone who complains gets a 1 round penalty.