Congrats on hitting the jackpot buddy! Bring that money back to the local poker community

I know the OP and his best friend and can probably guess at the other two people involved. The key part of the story in my opinion is prior times where you have done this type of deal and when you moved to other games that didn't offer the bb jackpot, one of the group verbally said you weren't eligible if they hit it. If that is the case I don't think you owe them if they weren't in the room playing.

I don't like making these types of deals for just this reason. Lots of ambiguity and they invariably cause problems.

how much did you get?

Sup JB? Thanks man! Pretty wild! Glad you chimed in. Yeah I really dislike agreements like this as well and you're right about everyone involved. Sucks but it is what it is…

Don't worry Maybe I'll find ya and tilt off some money in a game soon!

It was quite a large jackpot actually, but the amount is not really relevant to the thread...

OP, I think you did fine and are better off without "friends" that expect a payout in this situation.

Keep the money, buy them dinner.

To me there's two possible ways to handle such agreements:

1. You chop the BBJ if anyone of you wins it anytime during this trip. No matter what the other people are doing at that time.
2. You only chop it under certain circumstances. What happens if people are not in a BBJ eligible game? What happens if people are on dinner break? What happens if a player is out to smoke or in the bathroom when the jackpot hits?

Option 1 is clear cut, but puts the guy who plays the most hands at a disadvantage. For option 2 you kinda need a rulebook and that's nothing you usually want to do among friends.

If you aren't good enough friends to do option 1 and don't care about maybe giving up EV because you play longer hours than they do, I wouldn't do it at all tbh.

If in the past, you've agreed that you wont get a split if you weren't at the same game, than they shouldn't get the split since they weren't in the same game. Simple as that, I think.

Don't know what the bad beat jackpot was, but they're friends. Like many other said, just buy them a dinner and a couple of beers or anything.. No need to lose friends because of money imo.

I think it's relevant. If it's such a large amount I think you could have thrown them something. How much? Idk, that's why I asked how much was won.

Sure, he "could have thrown them something." He could have done that no matter what the amount was, or if he'd simply found a briefcase full of C-notes on the sidewalk. But then we're talking about an entirely different question—how OP's generosity is affected by how much money he has.

I'm with you OP. The agreement in the past was no cut when you weren't playing in an eligible game. Same should apply here.

I'm also OK with you paying for the hookers and blow, as it was quite a large jackpot.


If I do a promo split with anyone again, I'll be sure to hammer out details.

I agree. If there is a normal arrangement that is followed then it should apply here.

The only thing that seems to murky it up a little is the fact that they called prior to getting there to get in on it if he hit before they got there. This apparently goes outside of the normal agreement, so it is hard to simply say we have the same rules all the time and we only follow those rules as they were not exactly followed here if I am reading it correctly.

Is there any way that the friends thought that there was an agreement that if anyone hit it during their whole stay then they would be splitting it as opposed to the normal you have to be at a table in a qualifying game agreement?

See now this is where the problem lies. They apparently claim that in all intent was that this time it was if any of us hit it anytime during the weekend of staying out there. Which I have a problem with because the other 3 guys came out together and I came out solo. I wasn't even sure if I was going to play Saturday or go home. I was talking to my girl the night beforehand saying that I may just get up Saturday and come home. And I don't even know if they were planning on staying the whole weekend or leaving Saturday or what? How would we have worked it out in that case had I left and they hit it. I shouldn't have been paid either. Just as I shouldn't be paid if I'm in a different game that doesn't qualify.

This was why I thought about it immediately after being asked and asked where they were at. Because what if I hit it right now? They were 30 minutes away so I didn't worry about it that night. If anything the real agreement should have only been for that night since we really didn't know each others plans. At least between myself and them. Obviously they were more able to iron out details and assumptions between them about what to do in the event it hits since they rode out together.

Me on the other hand I'm just left with what's been done in the past and how that is connected to this situation. And obviously have some friends (maybe not so much anymore?) that will most likely only see it their way just the same as I see it my way. It is what it is...

I guess I'm sort of in the opposite camp on this one. IMO, in the absence of specified details, then if anyone hits the BBJ during the trip, it gets split. The agreement was simply to chop the BBJ. If you wanted details or conditions to that, anyone could have added them. But no one did. Then you hit it, and want to apply conditions and restrictions that no one mentioned as part of the deal.

So I'd say you should chop it based upon the fact that the only thing you guys did agree to was chop it during this trip. If you didn't specifically exclude sleep time, or meal times, or say you have to all be present with chips on a BBJ eligible game at the instant the BBJ is hit to win, then those restrictions can't be applied retroactively.

So IMO, you actually do have an obligation to pay them their share. That's what you agreed to before the BBJ was hit.

No, read OP:

"Also I've done this before with them and when I've jump onto a 5/10 NL game where the bad beat is not valid I've been told by these guys that the bad beat is off for me if I switch games. Same thing with Omaha in the past... "

So this BBJ deal was apparently done with the same people on other occasions, and it was apparently clearly specified then by them that OP wouldn't be eligible for a share if buddy hit it while OP was actually playing a non-eligible game. Presumably this applied equally to entire group. There was no indication that this time was any different (until after OP hit BBJ, at which point his "friends" retroactively declared what their different "intent" had been this time).
Obviously this was a poorly thought-out and fuzzy deal at all times (because no one really expected anyone to hit), and memories quickly become highly selective when money gets involved, but I think OP should stand his ground, point out above, offer to buy all a nice dinner, and move on.

The big problem here is that they were on their way to the casino. What if you all had arrived at the same time but there were only two sears available and it hit? Would you cut in the guy sitting in the lobby waiting on the list? I'd say probably. That's a lot different than someone leaving after a session, or changing games.

That's why these things really need to be ironed out ahead of time. No matter the result, I can't imagine the friendship will be what it was. Sucks.

I saw that in the OP. But I think that's a different issue. It's one thing to make a chop deal with other players, who will all be playing a BBJ eligible game. No one, for example, would make a chop deal if one of the players said "I'm only going to be playing 5/10". Eating and sleeping are different, IMO. And as you might notice, the OP, while pointing out that they had an agreement about not paying when he was playing a noneligible game, did not say anything about them not paying if someone was eating/sleeping. So I don't think it is a logical extrapolation to use the "can't win when playing 5/10" into a "can't win unless you are at the table at the exact instant I win the BBJ".

I would take them out for a night to a bar, club or restaurant and show them a good time. Giving them money, whether for just a buy in or a full share, betrays the terms of the agreement in my opinion. Such a contingency wasn't planned for and you should not feel morally obligated to fulfill it. Everybody learns a lesson and your true 'bro' seems to understand the situation.

Its unfortunate you guys didn't have solid details worked out, but who really thinks you're going to hit BBJ when someone pitches this at you. My first instinct would be to tell them no, you were off property and not playing, money is mine.

However, I'd be a little salty if I were on the not getting paid end. Especially if these are good friends, I'd work something out. Defiantly not the full split, but I'd explain to them very firmly your stance on the situation. After a little convincing I'm sure they'll be able to see your side. Only after that, I'd slide them some cash, and take everybody out for a good night. I don't know what "decent" jackpot entails, but say your end of it paid out $15k, I'd explain how you're paying taxes on that full amount, and slide them each 300-500 or so, and take them out. Either way, you're coming out on top, (not having to pay full split deal), and also probably keeping your relationships in tact.

Why don't you pay them half of what they should get, and then iron out the details for the next time it happens? When I read the OP, I felt the agreement covered the whole weekend. So, I guess it depends on what kind of friends they are, close friends, poker friends, childhood friends, and if you want to remain friends. But after reading these posts, it seems you never wanted to pay, and was looking for people to agree with you to justify the fact that you'll sell out your friends rather quickly. I hope that little amount of money is worth it to you.

atleast your "friends" know now that you are not a true friend and they can act accordingly.
how cheap can someone be to even try to angle his way out of a big win "out of the blue" ?
and i would also like to add that playing a whole night on a not bbj egible table or arriving 30 min late or making a dinner/smoke break are very different things.

just judging the situation objectively. has nothing to do with personal feelings, i do not even know the op at all, just judging from what i have read in this thread.

I do not get what this anecdote has to do with the situation in this thread ?
maybe it shows that you are a better/more generous friend than op, but otherwise i do not see the purpose

First of all I didn't insult you so I would appreciate you not insulting me.
Second, if you did read the original post you would see that I didn't play "a whole night" at a BBJ ineligible game. I changed games before in the middle of sessions. Or even closer to the end of the day.
And third, yes some of those are different things. But some of them are not.

Again your opinion seems to be based on as if we all came out together and were staying together all weekend to play or what not. And that's simply not the case. I mean nothing was even said in the text about the whole weekend. So if we're looking at agreements then there wasn't one for Saturday. But I'm willing to overlook that. If they had been there playing I would have paid them a share.

If a player gets up to go smoke or eat and has money on an eligible table then obviously he should get a share.

If I'm not eligible when playing 5/10 cuz I'm not playing an eligible game then how can they be eligible when they're not even on the property?

this..