Imaginary Arbitration

[pleno1]

Hi,

Player 1 is 1/100/15000 in Mini FTOPS $75 buy in, guaranteed $850.

His internet is about to die because of a thunderstorm and due to the Tilt t&c's he gives his username/password to a friend who has railed for the last 30-60 minutes.

He does not return for the rest of the tournament.

They agree to arbitrate on Blonde the next day. What % should both players keep and why?

[Simon Galloway]

A) "Here is my username and password.  You are playing for X% ~ GL"

B) "Why don't you win 15k and then we have a really big argument afterwards about how much is yours?"


As it is an imaginary situation....

I don't think you can set a blanket %... will all depend on how long the clock is etc as to how many hours this is likely to go to the decent ladder spots ITM.

As the account holder, I'd try and figure out a fair (and then some) % that would be worth his while to grind it, and then I'd prolly also try and create a sliding scale to really reward them if they FT+'d

[pleno1]

player A said he was too tired to work out what a fair % was and both agree dthey would arbitrate the next day.

[outragous76]

Agree it before hand and dont make this silly idea once there is money at stake!

as for now 50/50 (but player 1 keeps the 850 already made)

[The Camel]

Agree it before hand and dont make this silly idea once there is money at stake!

as for now 50/50 (but player 1 keeps the 850 already made)

50/50 seems far too weighted in favour of the player taking over.

Something more like 70/30 seems fair to me.

[Simon Galloway]

player A said he was too tired to work out what a fair % was and both agree dthey would arbitrate the next day.

Player A is making a bad decision which is going to cause him more tiredness tomorrow than just figuring it out right there.

"The reason why some are sat in the shade is they planted a tree previously."  - Tikay (kinda)

[pleno1]

but you are tired/tilted at your internet and have 2 seconds to work out a % that could potentially cost you tens of thousands, or you could agree the next day with people who have time to think. I think it is the best way to do it.

[Simon Galloway]

I'd prolly use a telephone.

[Yian]

The answer is not fixed in all scenarios. If player 2 finishes 99th he should be entitled to nothing. It kind of depends on what player 2 goes on to do with the stack player 1 has already amassed. The % should gradually climb the deeper player 2 gets in the tournament, capped at something like 40% if he wins it.

[AndrewT]

Ignore the $850 that's booked and then the split is whatever Player A would want to buyin Player B into the tourney as a one off with no makeup.

As Keith said, these type of deals are generally 70/30 in the backer's favour.

[Yian]

Ignore the $850 that's booked and then the split is whatever Player A would want to buyin Player B into the tourney as a one off with no makeup.

As Keith said, these type of deals are generally 70/30 in the backer's favour.

This is probably the correct technical answer.

The answer is not fixed in all scenarios. If player 2 finishes 99th he should be entitled to nothing. It kind of depends on what player 2 goes on to do with the stack player 1 has already amassed. The % should gradually climb the deeper player 2 gets in the tournament, capped at something like 40% if he wins it.

But doesn't this feel more right because if he goes on to finish 50th, he's kind of flopped it from being 1/100 so should probably get nothing.

[outragous76]

Agree it before hand and dont make this silly idea once there is money at stake!

as for now 50/50 (but player 1 keeps the 850 already made)

50/50 seems far too weighted in favour of the player taking over.

Something more like 70/30 seems fair to me.

Player A is likely to realise about an extra $350 by blinding out

By taking the 850 he incentivises player B to go deep

By not taking player B offer he can only get the 350

I think 50/50 is fine here

[pleno1]

Agree it before hand and dont make this silly idea once there is money at stake!

as for now 50/50 (but player 1 keeps the 850 already made)

50/50 seems far too weighted in favour of the player taking over.

Something more like 70/30 seems fair to me.

Player A is likely to realise about an extra $350 by blinding out

Hm I'd sya more than that, around 120bbs with v good structure, lots of small stacks and bigger pay jumps.

$250k ftw btw.

[outragous76]

Well I was obv having to guess, but the principal remains. You can't win 125k if you blind out, you can if you take 50%

[GreekStein]

Players are both stupid