Tourney AITAH for not wanting to add a bubble payout spot as the tournament chip leader? (1 Viewer)

[WedgeRock]

Does not wanting to add a modest bubble boy payout when I am the tournament chip leader make me an a-hole? Its never offered as an ICM chop, just $x from first and half that amount for 2nd and a few bucks from 3rd to payout an extra spot (usually their money back or 50% ROI, something modest). Essentially, the chip leader funds half or more or the extra payout.

Online or live tournament, does that change your answer?

FTR, if I am the short stack, I will agree if offered, but I won't solicit offers to chop from the others. Also, once we are ITM, I will always agree to a reasonable money chop. Always.

 

[Josh Kifer]

 

[TheOffalo]

I don't think it makes you an asshole not to agree to a chop (edit: specifically to adding a paid place for the bubble, as you did say you'd agree to a chop once ITM). It needs to be unanimous.

But as far as more money coming out of 1st place to create the bubble, I think it makes sense and that's what I've seen done both in live and online tournaments. The amount is roughly funded by the percentage of payouts to the original # of places paid, so 1st place naturally ends up funding more of it.

 

[digirati]

I was up for most anything, I just wanted it agreed to BEFORE anyone busted out (not after the fact). I wouldn't criticize any chip leader for not wanting to reduce their potential winnings for a bubble player. That said, it really depends on the situation. When we were asked, you had the top two players having four times as many chips than the bottom two players each had (so it was really lopsided at that point). I just enjoy playing poker with you guys.

 

[TheOffalo]

Question since OP mentioned ICM. As I understand it, ICM is usually used to end a tournament early, with payouts based on chip stacks at that point in time. Is ICM used when adding a paid spot to determine how much to pay when the game would continue to be played?

I was up for most anything, I just wanted it agreed to BEFORE anyone busted out (not after the fact). I wouldn't criticize any chip leader for not wanting to reduce their potential winnings for a bubble player. That said, it really depends on the situation. When we were asked, you had the top two players having four times as many chips than the bottom two players each had (so it was really lopsided at that point). I just enjoy playing poker with you guys.

In our particular scenario when @BigSlick4523 asked if the four of us remaining could at least get a modest sum, as you said two players had large stacks and two players had smaller stacks. So an ICM chop may have been something like $55, $50, $25, $20 if the game ended right then. But that payout structure doesn't make sense when the two short-stacked players were still relatively competitive (I think we had at least 15 BB each) and gameplay would continue.

 

[digirati]

I’m no expert (and never heard of the term ICM until tonight). That’s why I deferred the decision to Wedge.

 

[BigSlick4523]

I will always bring up something even if I was chip leader just cause u are chip leader 4 handed doesnt mean you will end up winning the tourney

I was just bringing up everyone get like $15-$20ea leaving $70-$90 still up for grabs for 1st , 2nd and 3rd plus the $15 or $20ea

Or when it was brought up 70-45-20-15

Just figured see if everyone wanted to make it to where even 4th got something for sitting in the game for 3hrs

Never hurts to ask

No hard feelings

Again just cause you have a chip lead doesnt mean anything ive had chip leads with 4 people to go and bust out bubble plenty of times esp online

Congrats on the win

 

[BigSlick4523]

I was just trying to get alil something for whoever busted out 4th place that was all

 

[BigSlick4523]

Yeah I wasnt asking to end the tourney I was just asking so 4th got alil something and didnt bubble and get nothing any one of us could have bubbled 4way doesnt take much for things to shift fast

 

[BPTDirector]

I would not be in favor of this. If you are going to post 4 places just structure it that way up front. If not, just pay three and everyone knows where the bubble is.

 

[WedgeRock]

I would not be in favor of this. If you are going to post 4 places just structure it that way up front. If not, just pay three and everyone knows where the bubble is.

This. It's a never ending loop, and leads to an 18-way chop, @CraigT78.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Dara O'Kearney' got an ICM book, Endgame Poker and speaks to this idea. Bubble boy payouts are the worst for the chip leader for a few reasons: 1, it takes away from his equity the most because its money out of the possible prize pool, but 2. It ends the bubble, a very profitable place to be chip leader! Lean on them, you don't want them unionizing lol. You worked hard and risked to get to this point knowing the structure and now you can reap crazy amounts of ICM pressure on players trying to squeak into the money.

If its friends at a home game that I crush, Ill almost always say yes because I want everyone to keep coming back. If were equally matched or its just randoms, nope.

Question since OP mentioned ICM. As I understand it, ICM is usually used to end a tournament early, with payouts based on chip stacks at that point in time. Is ICM used when adding a paid spot to determine how much to pay when the game would continue to be played?

ICM takes into account everyones stack size, so its less about just adding another paid spot and more for chopping, like you mention. If you use an ICM calculator you can figure out what everyone's stack is worth but thats considering them still in the tournament, so that stack value includes the chances that they win first place. A way to pad it is to pay everyone what the 4th place stack is worth and then play for the same percentage of the remaining pool but eh, not worth it in small home tournaments.

 

[WedgeRock]

FTR, this came up during the break at last night's P* online tournament (I was second in chips, not chip leader), but I am talking *in general* at live tournies and online tournies.

Adding a pay spot almost necessarily affects the 1st place payout the most. And I do realize that sometimes, variance happens. A chip leader is not guaranteed to win first, or anything at all.

 

[Highli99]

I almost never agree to pay bubbles or splits. I enjoy short handed play and especially heads up play. I will for the host as a courtesy or when a juicy cash game awaits.

A few years ago at @krafticus year end game (which is a freeroll), a bubble payout was proposed. I declined, saying “there must be pain!” And a few minutes later I was richly rewarded when I bad beat the person clamoring loudest for the bubble payout. He was so mad, and stomped away grumbling. As soon as he was gone the other players burst out laughing and agreed that pain was totally worth it.

I justify all of this because they declined my ICM chop offers after winning the blinds in hand #1. Offering early chops is a good insurance policy allowing you decline offers later.

 

[BGinGA]

Live or online, I never ask the remaining players to pay an extra position, but rarely refuse to if approached. As a TD, that 'extra payout' has already been calculated into my existing payout structure, so no need to add another one in the heat of the moment.

My biggest criteria for saying 'no' is what percentage of the field is getting paid. It's pretty unlikely that I will agree to any more than 1/3 at most. Paying four of ten? No way.

 

[buffalojim]

I'm never adding extra spots after a tournament starts. It's always the short stack that brings this up. Just play better and stop being a bitch.

 

[krafticus]

For a non-bounty tournament, I wouldn't add a bubble spot honestly. My monthly game, when down to 6 handed, everyone usually tosses in a bounty chip to pay the bubble. That gets them their buy-in back. 1st payout is usually 150% of the buy-in

 

[dpeks13]

Unless it's something egregious, I always push back on any rule changes after the cards have been dealt. So I wouldn't have even entertained adding a prize

But I'm generally an ahole so Idk what the ruling is

 

[divinerites]

A simple way to understand ICM : any chips worth MORE than his tournament value, because you CAN still win the tournament. And actual chip leader can bust next, even it is unlikely, but he can bust. And you can win.

So when you deal ICM : shorts stacks get more than the chip ratio (chip chop).

During the play you have to consider the extra money you can win by folding because you have some short stacks remaining and they will likely bust before you (a bigger stack).
This will be more important when you ladder because $ gaps are huge in the 3 or 4 first places.

An extreme case : 2 shorts with 4 & 5 bb.
Chip leader shove. You can fold AA without any problem (unless you do not care being ITM and play for the win). It is a bit of caricature but not so much.

And if you get the previous infos, you understand that there is no real ICM for the short stack.

Those are really simple example to help understand ICM and his consequences.

 

[buffalojim]

I've played in pool tournaments my whole life and never, not once, has a player brought up the idea of paying out a bubble spot, and pool players are special breed of whiners. Not exactly apples to apples but that is how I see it.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

A simple way to understand ICM : any chips worth MORE than his tournament value, because you CAN still win the tournament. And actual chip leader can bust next, even it is unlikely, but he can bust. And you can win.

So when you deal ICM : shorts stacks get more than the chip ratio (chip chop).

During the play you have to consider the extra money you can win by folding because you have some short stacks remaining and they will likely bust before you (a bigger stack).
This will be more important when you ladder because $ gaps are huge in the 3 or 4 first places.

An extreme case : 2 shorts with 4 & 5 bb.
Chip leader shove. You can fold AA without any problem (unless you do not care being ITM and play for the win). It is a bit of caricature but not so much.

And if you get the previous infos, you understand that there is no real ICM for the short stack.

Those are really simple example to help understand ICM and his consequences.

I find this part of the game equally frustrating and fascinating. Bubble is a whole different game and its fun shifting priorities in a tournament like that.

 

[upNdown]

Short answer is no, you’re not an asshole, for all the reasons of @NotRealNameNoSir

Personally I have really hard time shaving off the already thin rewards for first and or second to pay a bubble in a 1-2 table online game.

 

[Dbxela]

NTAH, the players delaying the game to beg you for a handout are.

 

[Dbxela]

It's also interesting to think that if there is a cohort of players who ask for this sort of concession, they are probably a cohort who plays especially badly at the bubble if they don't get it. So it costs more than just the sticker price.

 

[Tonysquander]

NTAH. Payouts were established before game began and should not change other than for a chop agreement only amongst those qualifying for the established payout.

 

[JustinInMN]

Does not wanting to add a modest bubble boy payout when I am the tournament chip leader make me an a-hole? Its never offered as an ICM chop, just $x from first and half that amount for 2nd and a few bucks from 3rd to payout an extra spot (usually their money back or 50% ROI, something modest). Essentially, the chip leader funds half or more or the extra payout.

Online or live tournament, does that change your answer?

FTR, if I am the short stack, I will agree if offered, but I won't solicit offers to chop from the others. Also, once we are ITM, I will always agree to a reasonable money chop. Always.

NTA. No chops mean no chops. The one live casino tournament win I had, we made two deals. One at the bubble like what you describe, and one with 3 players left (and I was in 3rd at the time.) But that's how $4300 for first becomes $3400.

All that said, this is going to seems counter-intuitive, but if x per player for a bubble prize is the proposal, as the favorite to win first place, you are giving up far less as a percentage of your prize than the person likely to get the first in the money prize.

If paying 5 players and the prizes are something like 500/400/300/200/100, and you want to do 10 bucks per player for the bubble. Then the 5th place prize is losing a full 10% whereas the first place prize is losing 2% to this deal. So counter-intuitive as it sounds, the lower finishers are actually taking the worst of this deal, but by that token, I guess they "gain" the most by locking up $50 whereas they would be the more likely players to bubble out.

 

[JustinInMN]

An extreme case : 2 shorts with 4 & 5 bb.
Chip leader shove. You can fold AA without any problem (unless you do not care being ITM and play for the win). It is a bit of caricature but not so much.

ON an aside, and as a blatant derailment of the thread, this is the source of my complaint that tournament play tends to only reward tighter strategy and is therefore inferior to cash games.

Late edit: "mostly reward" would have been a better phrasing than "only reward" but since @upNdown has quoted this post, I will leave it.

 

[divinerites]

I find this part of the game equally frustrating and fascinating. Bubble is a whole different game and its fun shifting priorities in a tournament like that.

And this is why a chip leader will always keep short stacks at the bubble (and refuse to pay an extra spot). He will spot medium stacks and keep alive the short.
He can "Bubble abuse" by opening almost any 2.

If other players understand ICM obviously.

 

[upNdown]

ON an aside, and as a blatant derailment of the thread, this is the source of my complaint that tournament play tends to only reward tighter strategy and is therefore inferior to cash games.

This is not true. People who win tournaments are people who bring huge stacks into the late stages of tournaments. Those don’t tend to be people who played tight.

The truth is that tournament play tends to reward people who can adjust their style of play to whatever the situation requires at the time. Which is why tournaments are better than cash.

 

[JustinInMN]

Giving this some extra thought, this is how I might converse if I don't want to make a bubble deal...

"You guys can do a bubble prize if you want. You are essentially betting x dollars on who will be the next one out. That's not a prize I am interesting in winning, if I am the next one out I get nothing and I can live with that. But if you guys can't and want to make this side wager without me, feel free."