Nothing and I mean absolutely nothing has any meaning beyond what we attribute to it. Life is empty and meaningless! Get it?

The TD does not approve the chop. The tournament has nothing to do with it. It's a deal along the players. The tournament does not enforce the chop either so caveat emptor at the pay desk.

Fatigue mostly causes chops. The players want to be done so they chop and yes, the person who ends up with the trophy ACTUALLY IS THE WINNER OF THE TOURNAMENT.

They don't play it out because of fatigue...That is the reason they chopped in the first place.

A better thread is on income tax ramifications pre and post chop.

Why didn't they just go all in every hand after chopping the money? That way the one most likely to win still has the highest chance of getting the worthless trophy but the others also have a chance.

I think the big problem here is that people might be betting on who wins the tournament.

If everyone agrees, players in a tournament can distribute prize money however they want.

However, the should always play it out for the title, especially in the case of a major tournament like this.

Winning a tournament like this is -not- meaningless. It has real effect on various player-of-the-year and tournament rankings. Some of these lists have real prizes attached to them, others don't but do affect a player's popularity and visibility. When a small number of players agree on who should be awarded this sort of title, they are essentially colluding against every other player who is in contention in these rankings.

That’s true in some cases, but certainly not in an event that awards a trophy. If the casino hands out that trophy to one of he players, they have approved the chop. There’s absolutely no way around that. Even if they said “we don’t approve the chop but here’s the trophy”, they did factually approve the chop because they had every opportunity to block it by saying “if somebody wants the trophy, play for it”.

The latter is what the WSOP would do for example.

Would the same people betting on who wins the tournament be ok if they agreed to stuff it in preflop every hand?

lol you baboons, it's bc an individual tournament is a ridiculously small sample of short stacked poker

a micro grinder probably plays in a month what a live grinder plays over the course of 2 years, so no there isn't really any real prestige (in terms of skill) in winning most mtts

That would be better as there would be no potential for manipulation. It could be possible that a couple of the billionaire fun players have a side bet that’s much bigger than the remaining prize money. Skill + luck would obviously be better than luck alone, but leaving things purely to luck would be better than predetermining the outcome.

Hey guys, Mike Del Vecchio here. Figured I'd pop in and clear some stuff up really quick. It was about midnight when the deal happened, and I was very drained. We had been playing HU for over 4 hours at that point and we were all pretty wiped. Andy really wanted to make a deal, I knew Bryn would want a lot of money plus the trophy so I wasn't into it. I had the CL over Bryn by only 2 BB's. I decided to give up the trophy but only under the condition I get my full ICM value. Bryn and Andy negotiated with each other on how much Andy would pay Bryn, I didn't really care as long as I got everything I was entitled to. They settled on 21k, which put Bryn getting a few hundred dollars more than me.

In the moment, staring nearly a million USD in the face, only having to give up a trophy sounded a lot better than grinding short handed until 4am, with huge ICM considerations because of an awkward pay out structure. I feel a bit bad only because of how anit-climactic it became, but at that moment ensuring a good payout that I was happy with was more important to me than putting on a show.

this sounds a bit defensive, which is kinda strange because only detached observers with a warped worldview and weirdos like brynn would actually care about taking home a trophy they didn't earn, as if it means anything at all sitting up on their fireplace mantle or wherever the **** people put these things

pretty sure you owe no explanations to anybody- congrats on the score, wp and gl

congrats Mike, sick to make back to back final tables.

not sure how you got the sat winner to call off with 4s.

Because people are proud of winning competitions? It's a cool accomplishment to win a big poker tournament?

I mean, why does anyone care about any trophy? Because it is a reminder of a proud moment in your life.


EDIT: I should clarify that buying or just being given the trophy is not a cool accomplishment.

well thats kind of the point... saying you really want it isnt earning it. having someone give you a chunk so you end up with 1st place money isnt really winning it. they agreed to a deal and i could care less but putting importance on the trophy seems strange.

are you gonna tell your grandkids one day, "and this trophy i won by arguing really well because it sounded better"

talk about hollow "wins" lol, I could never claim ive won a tournament without actually doing so

I thought I read that both Del Vecchio and Hinrichsen were disappointed they didn't win the title. How you could walk away from a deal with regrets is beyond me

Is there an English translation available?

I don't see how determining a winner without actually playing isn't some sort of collusion. I don't play tournaments, but aren't there a bunch of rules (TDA) in place so there isn't the threat of collusion? Like all ins cards are face up, can't check back the nuts, etc. Chopping is whatever, but shouldn't they be forced to play until a winner? Just sounds like collusion to me to say one guy wins. What if this was some player or the year race or some **** and it was 2 friends hu for the title and one just gives it to the other one so he racks up more points with the win. Am I totally off base here?

Well played. I don't think you lost anything on the deal, and taking ~$100k more than 2nd place is a great outcome. If anything, Bryn was probably in the most +EV spot and screwed up the deal. He had the momentum and experience and could have easily forced a better deal or set aside some money to play for. In your spot I would have snap-taken that deal.

Yes you are totally off base here. This is idiotic. They are the only three left and was no one to collude against. Good grief.

well his question regarding points going towards a player of the year type scenario is valid. What would you say if they did this in the WSOPME?

In a couple of years time, no one will remember who won this event but you'll always remember the new house/whatever you were able to buy. Wp Mike.

They can’t because the WSOP forces players to play it out.

Are you sure, because how did they decide who got paid what if everyone just got up and stopped playing after the deal was made? Seems like they did approve of the deal.

Sounds like a **** tourney, after a certain hour just call it a ****ing night. After reading I wanna punch Bryn and whoever runs the tourney in the mouth.