Yeah!

Let's all kick in some money for him too!

glad she refused. glad everyone else is glad. glad glad glad.

Seems like a good rule.

I'm assuming that the people berating Barbara for her decision are of the age where everyone got a trophy in little league.

I agree with all y'all that most of the time paying the bubble should probably not be considered and it's fine to object to a motion to do so. I disagree as it pertains to the specific circumstances as I described them, which have been only partially addressed and mostly ignored here.

I doubt very much that any one of you would have had the balls to side with Babs last night, as everyone, the floor of The Bike included, thought it preposterous that this self-important and wholly misguided crank forced us into an excruciatingly long session of pointless hand to hand play over less than $200 out of a 10K prize pool.

I confess I did admire her courage, which was real and genuine, as opposed to the posturing here.

This probelm is rampant at the west palm beach kennel club/poker room. I spent 4 months down there grinding and literally had people wanting to fight me because i wouldnt agree to pay the bubble. The downside is that alot of them will spite call you for refusing so its def harder to make moves. But i applaud Barbara.

very well put

Seems like you are one of the few who realizes that she might have objected purely for strategic purposes rather than a desire to save a tiny bit of money or to be a stickler for the rules.

I disagree with personally attacking her and with pretty much everything else that you posted, but I disagree with the part quoted above because of an error in fact...not just my opinion.

When you are the chipleader of the tourney or even just a comfortable stack, paying the bubble does not only amount to the money actually coming out of your pocket to pay the bubble. You miss out on the opportunity to chip up against shorter stacks who are afraid of bubbling. Once you decide to stop hand for hand play and essentially cancel the bubble part of the tourney (that you are aware will be part of the tourney when you buy in), you change the whole game. You actually screw people over who took the appropriate risks based on stack sizes and blind levels who have shoved and lost assuming that the payout structure will stay as it was when they entered the tourney.

A competent player on the bubble is giving up way more when they play the bubble than the $200 when they win 1st in the tourney. I've played with Barbara twice, and believe she is aware of the strategical implications of bubble play.

this just creates a new bubble. What about the guy that got out 29th? it's part of poker, someone bubbles.

good for barbara

this

Paying the bubble just seems like the dumbest thing ever. Hey lets chip in to compensate 28th, but f 29th place. Like where is the line drawn?

Obviously shes completely fine to not give in and its silly to think otherwise.

This
contradicts this If it is "any players right", allow them to exercise it as this wish.

You cannot say it is their right, yet moan when they use it.

That's a cool rule, but I'm wondering, does that rule only stay in effect until someone gets busted? I would assume that someone refusing a chop 8-handed doesn't mean they're the only one who can bring up a chop the rest of the tourney.