karma much like gohsts, dragons, and god, does not exist.

Bubble saving is normally done by the donkeys so at least it gives you a chance to see everyone's attitude to risk before politely declining the deal.

It should really be banned as i have been in a lot of situations where i turn it down and it has got quite nasty. The trouble is it is always the donkey old men regulars who play everyday and play all the pit games so you will always have TD's putting pressure on you to accept to keep them happy which, if you refuse, makes the situation worse still.

The hardest part of it all is people ask you why you dont want to do it and because you dont want to get into ICM , bubble abuse etc you cant justify yourself without educating them so you look like more of an a hole to them.

Good on Barbara for not wanting to change the rules mid game.

I'm generally a nice guy, I open doors for old ladies, but paying the bubble is not "being nice", it's plain dumb.

The real problem are the casinos and TD's that allow or encourage this discussion. They know it is a bad deal for some and will put others in a difficult spot. Heck, I might make a -EV decision just to avoid having some broke degen waiting for me at valet because he didn't min-cash a $70 MTT. I'm pretty sure Commerce will not stop a tourney to pay the bubble, it won't happen at WSOP, and is something better left for home games.

and this is why the bubble chop discussions have to be absolutely forbidden. there is just always a ****** (or a bunch) who takes it too far. i dont know who is her, but coming to the most frequent poker forum and start insulting someone because not wanting to change the rules that previously everyone agreed upon is just plain atrocious.

Such a good post and spot on. I used to play alot live some years ago and i dont ever remember it ever came up situation there was some talk about paying the bubble. Its such a incredible stupid idea becouse as some have said it all means the spot before becomes the new bubble. If its true players were berating Barbara for deny paying the bubble this casino should be ashamed of themself not throw these idiots out of the tourney. And the idea to think about 165$ payout when you are playing 70%rebuy tourney is so unreal i dont know what to say LOL.

It makes no sense to spend several hours figuring out which players are prone to making mistakes under pressure, and then to deliberately relieve the very high pressure of the bubble, when they are likely to be playing at their worst.. fearful, agitated and vulnerable.

On top of that, the bubble payoff denies weaker players an opportunity to become accustomed to playing while under pressure, and to improve their game.

So, who can possibly gain anything?

It can't be the person who accepts a charitable handout. That person only put him/herself in debt. And since the prize pool prior to the bubble has no definite ownership, there can be no pleasure or satisfaction in the giving because it is no one's to give.

Screw the bubble, it's poker, someone has to get cut off at some point. With that philosophy if you pay the "bubble boy", then you should pay the guy that busted right before the bubble boy, too. This isn't charity, it's a game, and a cut throat one at that.

I would of done the same thing as Barbra in this spot. I don't see any reason to pay an extra. If you bubble the mtt well then to bad that's part of poker and life.

Is that kind of questionable practices began after the arrival of the payment of the bubble to wsop? Or wsop began to provide a seat for the next year event following the proliferation of this ****ing dumb idea?

the best is when you refuse to pay the bubble and end up busting your stack before the money! and every old live nit at the table is fired up and says...."yea thats karma"
yea i personally love not paying the bubble cuz it just tilts the hell out of all the terrible regs at my local casino, and makes them play so much worse against you cuz they are just coming after you

I don't understand why casinos even do this, but if they do, the vote should be discreet. I don't know if that will take too much time, but it's BS when one person is bullied and threatened.

Wait, what? That's a terrible idea.

I don't think it's all that practical, but it does seem like the right way to do it.

same for deals, imo.
Barbara Enright did the right thing!


but since this is a ridiculous thread, it deserves a ridiculous answer:

i think paying the BB isn't enough. yearly there are millions of bubble-bubbleboy no one talks about. these poor souls deserve better and we really should allow them to re-enter the tournament for free.

i created some bumper sticks and for every $49.99 you pay for it, i'll send at least .99 to "The Heroes of the Bubble-Bubble" Foundation.
God bless this great thread!

Let me rephrase now that I'm sober...

If the tournament organisers are going to allow the players to change the payout structure on the fly to pay the bubble, I don't see why a simple majority won't suffice.

I don't understand the 'if only one player objects' rule.

You only need a 75% majority to change the US Constitution, but apparently a 100% majority to change a tourney payout. This seems perverse.

Personally I actually don't care if the bubble gets paid or not, I just want to get on with the tournament in a timely manner and without an overly acrimonious atmosphere. Also I'd rather play against the old nits trying to fold their way to the money because by this stage of the tourney I know who thay are and can exploit them. When the atmosphere changes after a big brouhaha over the bubble it can change the game's dynamic, not necessarily to my advantage.

I think that the last time I played a Caesers' they had a rule that they would not change the payout structure or get involved in any way with bubble negotiations, but would allow the players to collect new money to create a separate prize pool for the bubble boy if they wished to. The money would be held by a player, not by the casino.

Players who didn't want to chip in didn't have to and (presumably) wouldn't be eligible for the prize.

This sort of approach seems like an equable arrangement to me - and can be implemented in a reasonable time without arguements developing and any bullying occuring.

someone needs to tell her the internet has her back at the next 70r

^

winner should be forced to refund everyone's entry fee. Then everyone gets a cheap little trophy.

Lol, you fail so hard I'm still not even sure if you're being serious. Your thought process is so backwards you help point out why poker will always be profitable, since you lack obvious problem solving capability.

I don't think 5 hours were quite enough.

You really don't understand why your permission should be required to change the rules of a tournament that you're in after it has started? Really?

Solid comparison.

Honestly if you guys are feeling threatened or being berated heavily for not wanting to pay the bubble I assume you are handling it poorly. The cardroom by my house is right outside of Oakland, a notoriously ghetto and dangerous city, and is full of the sickest degens I've seen in a poker room. These people are poor as **** and go to the casino to play poker terribly and blast off their paychecks on a weekly basis. I have gotten to the bubble of easily 15 tourneys at this place, refused to pay the bubble every time except the time when I had 2 bbs and did bubble, and I have never once felt threatened or intimidated based on my decision to not pay. I've had people bitch at me obviously, but once they see that my decision is firm and I'm not being a dick about it, I just want to play the tourney the way it was designed, they get over it and we play. Don't try to change their opinion on whether the bubble should be paid, don't get into an argument about it, just make it clear immediately that under no circumstances are you going to pay the bubble once the subject comes up.

In a tournament I believe it was Commerce but not absolutely sure; we were at the bubble and I refused bubble pay. The game was crippled with all the talk about paying bubble to the point each hand took 10 minutes to play. It was absolute bull**** how the floor handled the situation. The TD didnt even allow me to call 'time' since it was taking insanely long to play each hand. In the end, every player except me paid a share to the bubble.

Due to what happened I never devoted a lot of my games to live tournament play.

The bubble is the most +ev time of the tournament for a good player.

The bad players want the bubble over as soon as possible, the good players want it to last as long possible.

It had nothing to do with the small reduction in the first place prize. She gains tons more ev growing her stack from people trying to hang on for the money.

A good player would never pay the bubble (unless they are afraid to speak up.)

Yes, correct. We should always have the right to redistribute somebody else's money by a simple majority vote, comrade. If there are dissenters they should be put into a reeducation camp or at the very least bullied, threatened and/or insulted.

During my first live tourney ever ($30~ with 50 players or something) I was chip leader on the bubble and let myself be 'bullied' into chipping in to pay the bubble. I could see why everyone else wanted to but had no incentive to go along with it, other than everyone trying to make me feel like an *******. I guess what Im trying to say is: good for her!

As others have mentioned, why not pay 29th if you're going to pay 28th? 30th? Better yet, why not just pay everyone their buy-in back at the end of the tourney if you don't want to actually play poker...

Pretty sure that had the person refusing to pay the bubble either been some young male kid or known male pro, this thread would not exist. Wp Barbara.

Op is such a massive fail, I almost feel bad for him.