I didn't say that you can't be upset when it doesn't affect you, it just adds to it in this case. A cow is an animal, an animal isn't necessarily a cow. So yes, you can be upset about something that doesn't affect you but less so.

And I agree Mike Leah is a tool, but if he gets off on something he didn't truly accomplish then that's fine by me. Where I think you're wrong is that you think there should be sports like integrity in poker, when it is paid for by the customers (players) and because of that the market decides. If the majority of players cared this much about the title then nobody would play another WPT because they let their brand devalue.

What do you know, we can reach agreement on something.


It's not just player reactions that is the issue here. Though I still believe the majority of players do care about the Title/Trophy, and would still enter tournaments even if they disagree with what happened in this incident.

But, what about the TV partners like FOX Sports (or whoever broadcasts WPT these days) that purchase episodes from the WPT? You think FOX would continue to pay the same price if they get episodes delivered to them where the Title/Trophy was chip dumped in 3 hands to the big chip dog? I doubt that's the kind of content they're seeking.

(Yes, I know this particular WPT tournament wasn't televised).

You think the WPT makes any kind of serious money from that Fox TV deal? Cute.

Yes. But if you differ, please enlighten us on your inside knowledge of WPT/Broadcast Partner contracts. Cute!

But point was if WPT delivers a product with a chip dumped end to it, FOX isn't going to be excited about having to sell advertising around that kind of product. Not exactly good for ratings to have a {cheating} chip dumped ending.

Well obviously WPT can suffer consequences if they allow deals to be made, so it does affect them in some degree. The thing is, what is to keep someone from making a deal in the bathroom and go home? Are they going to make it policy that you "have to play seriously" or something like that? Or that you must remain on your seats at the final table or....?

I mean they charge rake to host the tournament. If they make additional profit from it and the players don't get a cut then why should they play nice? Either change your pricing to accurately reflect your costs, put excessive rules in place that scares players away or facilitate deals. I know what I would do.

Easy fix would be for WPT to facilitate money chops, but mandate that some amount of money and the title/trophy be left to play for. And those that violate this condition, like leaving the table or chip dumping, would be banned from registering for future WPTs.

It's not an unreasonable request for WPT to expect an honest and competitive fight for the trophy, they certainly don't want to have to edit around an absurd chip dump or empty stack being blinded off because of some bathroom deal.

WPT could start by banning Mike Leah as far as I'm concerned.

See the thing is that they are collecting rake and also getting the (however much it is) value of broadcasting the event. So players are paying them to provide a service, that they then also make money off. Someone who doesn't care the slightest about the title is forced to play "seriously" so they can make more money while getting no benefit himself?

But let's say they do this. Players can still make secret deals and just play weird/bad in a way that pretty much guarantees an outcome. Instead of making it super obvious, raise/folding some hands 20bb deep goes a long way. Also that means you really have to start banning people that claim they are going to the hospital. Would you really want the backlash of someone getting banned and going to pokernews etc telling "his story" about how they banned him for going to his sick wife?

(I'm using the hospital story as an example, you could claim anything and unless they follow you they have no way of checking)

I just go back to the simple answer that chip dumping and soft play is against all tournament poker rules, just like string betting or illegal raise amounts would be.

I think it's a very small set of players that would agree to dumping the title as part of a money chop, obviously "Mr. Integrity" Mike Leah being one of them.

In the 10+ years of WPT there hasn't been an issue of FT players suddenly needing to visit the hospital or whatever other fake reason to abandon a stack. Sure there may have been money chops, or "parking lot deals", to chop the prize pool that we didn't know about, but in all the episodes I watched I never thought I was seeing a chip dumped title.

In fact, I'd say the majority of players at a WPT FT are actually interested in winning it. We know Mike Leah was because he no doubt offered the moon to buy it.

I'm not sure why you think chip dumped titles and "sick kids" will suddenly be the norm at WPT Final Tables when it really hasn't been that way in the past, well that is until "Mr. Integrity" Mike Leah came along.

Because you get banned if you don't give it all you have.

Anyone know the premium over buyin that Mike Leah is paying if you dump a WSOP stack to him? I keep hearing various amounts, just want clarity.

Some folks made a deal near the end of a poker tournament to benefit themselves?? Why I am shocked to hear that! Shocked I tell you!

PLEASE LET IT GO ALREADY

In the end, did he really benefit? He paid a guy for a title that no one cares about, and now he's infamous for doing so. Must suck to want a title so bad that you pay for it, then everyone finds out and respects you even less.