Do you allow players to cut deals in league play?

[Catch22]

I am just about to kick off a poker league and I am trying to make sure that all of my ducks are in row before it goes live.

In the regular home game that I have been running, from which this poker league is emerging, the final two players in a tournament would frequently cut a deal to split the prizes in some fashion.

I am considering not allowing this in league play.

My main reason is that I do not want a situation where the final two players include one guy who is on the bubble of having enough points to make the TOC cutting a deal with the other player who is either out of the running or already assured of is place in the TOC. The player on the TOC bubble may try and cut a deal where he gets first place points, but the other guy gets extra cash.

This would not be fair to other players who are close to making the TOC.

What do you think?

[austin5string]

You could include a rule that deals made to chop will affect monetary results only, and that tourney points will be given based on the chipstacks at the time the deal is made.

Although unless your point structure is drastically skewed from 1st to 2nd place, you should just average the points and I wouldn't think it would make a big difference.  For example, if 1st gets 12 pts and 2nd gets 10, then they should just each get 11 pts.

[Catch22]

I have a non-linear point system, so there actually is a signifcant point difference between 1st and 2nd. For example: In a 14 person tournament, 1st place receives 11 points and 2nd place receives 7.

You could include a rule that deals made to chop will affect monetary results only, and that tourney points will be given based on the chipstacks at the time the deal is made.

Although unless your point structure is drastically skewed from 1st to 2nd place, you should just average the points and I wouldn't think it would make a big difference.  For example, if 1st gets 12 pts and 2nd gets 10, then they should just each get 11 pts.

[austin5string]

I have a non-linear point system, so there actually is a signifcant point difference between 1st and 2nd. For example: In a 14 person tournament, 1st place receives 11 points and 2nd place receives 7.

Even so, averaged out, that's only an additional 2 points.   Certainly, though, that could make a difference if it's on the bubble.  I suppose you could just have a rule that there are no chops, but I think I'd still go w/ my first suggestion.  Chops will affect monetary payout, but points will be assigned based on chipstack.

[Wedge Rock]

Or Bubble Boy could say, I'll give you first place money, you dump your chips to me so I have the chip lead when we chop, so I get first place points.

I don't have a rule against it, I've never even had someone suggest a chop, but if you're seeing it already, I'd recommend anticipating it before it becomes a problem.

Maybe a rule that any chop requires that money and points be shared evenly (for example, a 1st-2nd chop would mean the each get 1/2 the first and 2nd money and 9 points)...

[Jaxxvain]

Just say No to chops.

They are a dangerous gray area with tons of possible collusion possibilities.

[BCR_9er]

I don't know much about running a league but I don't think they should be allowed.

[theplant]

You could have them make their deal for the money and continue playing for points, or a deal for 90% of the pot left and the remaining 10% plus points must be played on.

[Spessartine]

The final two (or even three, once) players in a league have chopped the pot in our weekly league games, however, they are required to play on for points in the standings.

Most of these chops do end the game quickly.  Once you know how much you've profited from the game, you tend to be looser and more aggressive.  The money is cut perfectly equally and given out.  I do not allow players to discuss taking different percentages, or to talk about their hands with an eye on fixing the standings.

As the TD, you'll be there watching the game.  Set the rule up so that only money, not points, can be split, and police the collusion yourself. 

I don't know about the people in your league, but the guys in my league are competitive and view their point standings with pride.  They aren't going to give Bubble Boy a pass because he wants the final table.  Maybe, just maybe, he has a friend or two who want him to be there... but out of 30 people they probably won't have much to say about it.

Lastly, if two people with a deal already in place make the finals at your table, you've probably got much bigger problems than just who's on the bubble.

[razorbacksam]

I ran into the same situation when I started up my league...

League rules state that you must chop before the first hand of heads up play, if you are going to chop.  It must also be a 50/50 chop and the points are also chopped 50/50.

It's about even as to whether or not the pot is chopped since our league started.

[sazqatch]

Our chop rules are really much simpler.  All players must agree to a chop, one veto cancels a chop. Person with larger chip stack gets higher place points. Players can divy up the prize money any way they see fit. 

In practical terms, I put the money on the table when there are 3 people left. If I gave it out exactly as planned, each player could do whatever they wanted with the money after I gave it to them. Therefore, there really isnt a way to prevent people from arranging different percentages. I used to be against chopping, but Ive come to understand its practical appeal. Personally, Ive never chopped - I want to earn it.  There's nothing more gratifying than coming from behind in heads up to win.

I actually changed our percentage payouts after our first season because I used to more heavily favor first place. It lead to a couple of the more seasoned players always suggesting a chop.  I evened out the percentages and now a chop only tends to happen if a game is taking so long that people want to start the next tournament b4 it gets too late.

I dont think weve ever done a 3 way chop, but Ive heard the short stack suggest it many times.

-Saz
www.theTILTroom.com

[Reed-Money]

I allow deals in my league. However, everyone involved must agree to the deal. If a deal is agreed upon and the the tourney is not finished out, then I base their points on their chipstacks at the time of the deal. Largest stack is rewarded 1st place points and so on.

[MooseWizard]

The only deals we have encountered was where the last two players (after working on eliminating me in 3rd for well over an hour) decided they would rather split the 1st & 2nd prize money.  They did so, and that ended the tournament.  However, as other have said--only money was affected.  The points and position were determined by the chipstacks at the time they ended. 

Personally, I wouldn't allow any arrangements that allowed for sharing of prizes in an open game, as it absolutely opens the door to collusion.  Also NO deals involving points!  They should be earned, or it is a sham to call your championship a "Tournament of Champions."  Perhaps a "Tournament of Best Deal Makers" would be more appropriate?   

[WirdPair]

In my league, I do not allow any chops, for either points or money.  Additionally, it is explicitly stated in the league rules.  There are a few issues when you start allowing chops:
1.    A player who needs the points more than the money can wait until he has the chip lead, and then offer the other player a 60-40 or 70-30 split, as long as he gets 1st place points.  This obviously compromises the integrity of the tournament, league, and standings.
2.    Once you have taken a portion of the money or the points out of play, the paly of the participants has a chance of changing.
3.    I agree with the poster above, chops open up a huge gray area, and it is best to avoid them in league play situations.

[Pops28]

We had this come up in our league two seasons ago and do not allow chops. There are just too many ethical problems with deals in league play.

[4ceps]

i've allowed a chop in my game

i've allowed the chop only for the money.

the players must still play out to determine ranking & points...usually after that point (because it's 3am in the morning) they just go all-in in the dark until one player has all the chips

[Dr. Neau]

Yup. Chop the money all you want (what's to stop them from exchanging cash in the driveway anyhow), but someone is getting 1st place points and someone is getting 2nd place points.

[Martini]

I vote for no chops period. As Neau said, there is nothing to prevent people from exchanging money afterwards but that is out of your control. I agree with other posters that there are just too many potential ethical issues. In a single tournament, I don't mind it so much. But in a league, two people making a deal can adversely affect others and I think it is better to avoid that situation. If there is a time issue with wanting to get a second tourney started then I would be open to allowing the remaining players take places based on chip count immediately after someone busts out if everyone remaining agrees to it. No negotiating of points for cash or anything like that.

[Junior]

This situation didn't come up in our first season at all.  If it does, my ruling on it would be to only allow it when down to heads up. (no particular reason)
Also, it too would be for money only.  Both players would understand and have to agree that when the chop takes place, chip count then awards points accordingly.  A chop would not be allowed if both players had exactly the same amount in chips. (Rare, but it DID happen one satellite this year when all in heads up)

After reading this thread, I'm thinking I will add this into the rules sheet somewhere so that it's clear when the season starts and there are no debates if it comes up.