Poker Forum

the players own the prize pool so if they want to chop it up they can, just because there's less drama doesn't make it wrong....you make it through that many people and only get 40k for 9th compared to 1.6 million for first? C'mon there's your problem right there....

This is one of the worst articles i have ever read on pokernews. What was so dishonest about the 9 way Sunday Million chop? Noone was bullied into making this deal. Didnt they earn the right to decide whether they want to chop up this money by making it this far? Also, How is chopping bad because it reduces variance? These players went through over 59,000 people, i think they got lucky to get to the point of being able to chop it. IMO, your points hold very little credence. I guess knowing a thing or two about poker isnt required to write about it, as this article leaves much to be desired.

Clearly one of the worst articles ever in poker news history. This is what happens when you go cheap and let go the experienced writers for learn on the job bust outs.

Here is why your article is horrible
1) If they don't make the deal you have no guarantee that this plays out exactly the same way or that the players make exactly the same decisions.
2) Just because most of the players are avg buy in 10.00 doesn't mean they are bad. Were they winning players or loosing players ?
3) The blinds and ante were so high relative to the stacks that this tournament was on the verge of being a shoveament which minimizes badbeatslyrs edge. So locking up the biggest score in the history of ones career is hardly ever a mistake.
4) as far as the "poor 10th place guy" he only got what would be 6th place money on any other sunday million so I'm not crying too hard for him.
A+ for structure C- for content and logic. Tell Tony G to open the wallet and hire some real writers rather than guys that do half-assed analysis and reprints from 2+2 threads...

I've been reading Pokernews for a long time and this article actually motivated me to sign up for an account and comment on it. While I understand that it was a lame FT to watch..no one cares about the spectator in this case.

Rich Ryan....what YOU would do if YOU were at that final table?????????? Are you going to say no to $200k if you're the shortstack??? You would chop too and you know it.

Aswell as those guys, I've signed only to say this is by far the worst article I've ever read. I played this tournament and since the start I was really mad about the poor structure(showement) and the horrible payout structure. Come on, 42k for 9º and 1k6M for the 1º??? The difference is so insane that even if you make the tournament of your life, with 2 flips you can pass from winning 1M to getting 42k, and not everyone is Ivey to play flips for 500k$ pots.

So when I heard that the final table chopped and the last guy got at least 250k I was really glad. Everyone who had made a final table know that your goal is top3 and the possibility to get 600k in a 215$ tournament without winning a single all-in cant be missed.

The autor also criticate the lack of regulars in the final table, but little does he know that those are who want to reduce variance, and the recreational players are the gambling folks. Really really low quality article, i hope Tony G reads some of us and make the necessary adjustments.

Am I really the only one who thinks variance is more fun?

Also to answer prtz666 if I were top three in chips I would never have taken the chop.

Chops suck, and a 9 player chop is ridiculous, play to f***ing win and grow some balls. At the end of the day if they weren't pros then the original payout for 9th was pretty good anyway, go for 1st, the best pros always do.

Pokerstars does a chip chop not an ICM chop, at least get your facts straight FFS

Great article!! Something I've been saying for years + years.
If you have 9 players wanting a chop then there is something definitely wrong with the payout structure!!
A more balanced payout structure with a policy of "No Deals" would add much to the integrity of poker tournaments.
Imagine the Wimbledon Tennis Final, 2 sets all going into the 5th......and suddenly the 2 players and organisers take a break and decide to chop up the prize money!!??
You might say a PokerStars event is not a sporting/spectator event, well tell that to the thousands and thousands who were logged on watching this Final Table!@!
BTW for those interested I have made good extra $$$ from doing deals in Major events from inexperienced players but I still think deals like this are bad for both the excitement and credibility of Poker.

I don't think it would have been entirely out of the question for the larger stacks to wait until one, two or three people were eliminated before then talking about a deal. That's a lot of extra money they could have to chop up. If they happened to lose one or two pots and get back to the middle of the pack, you could always bring up the idea of a chop once again seeing as everyone was all for it already. Originally two places were going to lock up $1M in prize money, but it turns out no one got $1M. I believe that all of poker should disallow chops period, that's just my standpoint. It would cause people to really force themselves in pressure situations where big money is on the line. It would also get rid of the fact that when someone disagrees with a chop, they will get bullied by the others in most cases. They don't allow chops to be made at the WSOP and there's a really for that. Any chops must be done on the side, but it's all under the trustworthiness of the players, no one enforcers or overseas the issue.

PokerNews really knows how to get new signups: publish a really stupid article. Previous comments have it covered well. $1.6 mil vs $40K for 9th? That's indefensible.

#6-8 Posts: that was my point exactly. As amateur players you see spewing money like fun, but I doubt you have a real possibility to be in a Final Table like that, for you that 200k$ isn't real, as much the wage of Kobe Bryant or the Prize of a Grand Slam tournament.

This is real livechanging money, you can't just gamble 500k$ because it's fun, thats what donating monkeys does. If you pick somebody who plays for the money and his bankroll doesn't excede the 3st prize I can guarantee you that 99% will accept that deal in that circunstances. There was no room on chips for confortable playing and the Prize structure was so deficent that the deal was mandatory.

Everyone who has played online has experienced the one, or two-outer, bad beat that sent them to the rail. Who on that final table, wanted to risk hundreds of thousands of dollars on what surely would have produced one or two EPIC beats?! Or when the blinds and antes are so great that they force a shoving match, why would a low-stakes player want to chance $200k on a coin flip? Those kind of flips are for high-stakes, prop betters who have the gamble (and more importantly bankroll) to fool around.

A low-stakes, player's perspective changes dramatically as the stakes go up. If I was deciding chopping a $100k combined, final table prize pool, where $30k goes to first, and something like $2,500 to 9th, I wouldn't be so quick at discussing a chop. But I might walk with a guaranteed 1/4 or $1/2mil, even if I had a strong chip position, if I thought I was a beat away from leaving with $50k.

It is, and will always be, about the cash. That said, I don't understand where "mystique" should influence PokerStars' policy of allowing players the option of making a responsible, financial decision for themselves and their families.

pokerstars doesnt chop icm

full tilt is so much better, they have the deal making integrated in their software