Tournaments - Deals

Introduction

In this article

• The different type of deal methods
  
• Deal or no deal?
• Which deal goes with which stack?
  

Instead of playing out the tournament, the remaining
players of an MTT final table are able to agree upon dividing the
money amongst themselves. The option for a deal appears as soon as
the final table has been reached, but mostly it's only used when only
two to three players are left.

The fact that the blinds and
antes are relatively high compared to the average chip stack at the
end of a tournament, makes a deal rather attractive. This article
discusses the pros and cons of deal makings in MTTs.

The different possibilites for making a deal

A popular method which has been deemed fair is to divide-up the
prize pool according to the chip counts. The remaining prize money
for the open places is added up, the minimum amount for each player
is subtracted and the rest is proportionally paid out to the players
depending on the amount of their chips.

Three
players are still sitting at the final table. The payouts for the
remaining open places total up to:

• 1^st place: $ 50.000
• 2^nd
  place: $30.000
• 3^rd place: $20.000

Total: $100,000

The chip counts
of the players are:

• Player A: 200.000
• Player B: 120.000
• Player C: 80.000

Total: 400,000

In proportion to
the total number of chips in the game they have:

• Player A: 50%
• Player B: 30%
• Player C: 20% of the chips.

As the third place receives a guaranteed
$20,000 prize money share, this is used as the base for the deal as
every player receives this amount in any case. So first of all,
$60,000 will be subtracted (3x$20,000) from the $100,000, divided
amongst the players, and the remaining pool of $40,000 will be split
according to the chip counts. Player A receives 50%, player B 30% and
player C 20% of the money.

The bottom line looks
like this:

• Player A: 40.000$
• Player B: 32.000$
• Player C:28.000$

As seen in the example, the chip count method offers
every party a fair distribution. This is only the case, though, if the
players' stacks are very even. In the example, player C wins more as
a short stack than if he dropped out immediately, and the chip leader
receives less than he would for a regular tourney win.

This changes,
though, as soon as the chip counts of the individual players become
more imbalanced.

An example on the basis of the
PartyPoker payout structure:

$11 ($10 + $1 Fee) Regular
tournament with 500 participants, 3 players remaining

Prize
pool: $5,000

• 1^st
  place receives $1,250 (25%)
• 2^nd
  place receives $700 (14%)
• 3^rd place receives
  $413 (8,26%)

The players have:

• Player A: 80%
• Player B: 10%
• Player C: 10% of the total chips in play.

The remaining prize pool amounts to $2,363. As
the third place finisher receives $413, they're subtracted from the
prize pool. Thus $1,124 remain ($2,363 - $1,239), which will be
divided according to the amount of chips. So player A receives
another $889.20, and players B and C receive $112.40.

The
bottom line looks like this:

• Player A receives 1312,20$
• Player B receives 525,40$
• Player C receives 525,40$

In this example, the chip leader fares better
than the two short stacks. While in a normal payout he'd receive 25%
of the prize pool, he now receives 26%. This proves that the chip
count method, so dividing the prize pool according to the chip
counts, is more profitable for the chip leader if the stacks aren't
even.

You calculate the value of the chips with the help of
an ICM calculator and divide the remaining money accordingly. These
values are fairer than with a chip count deal. You can visualize what
is fair and try to convince the opponents to go in the direction which is
more profitable for yourself. Because generally, only a few opponents
actually know what would really be fair.

For the previously mentioned
examples it would result into:

Example 1 with 50%, 30%, 20%
stacks (chip count deal in brackets):

• Player A: $38,392, ($40,000)
• Player B: $32,750, ($32,000)
• Player C: $28,857, ($28,000)

Example 2 with 80%, 10%, 10% Stacks (chip
count deal in brackets):

• Player A: $1,133, ($1,312)
• Player B: $614, ($525)
• Player C: $614, ($525)

You can clearly see that the big stack gets worse
off, the middle stack better off and the short stack clearly better
off than with the chip count deal.

Another method, the post deal method, entails evenly
dividing the prize pool amongst the remaining players and to continue
playing for the rest. This method is often used with evenly big chip
stacks, as everybody receives the same share of the prize pool and
the rest will be played off. The players are left to take care of who
will receive the money – only the winner, or the remaining places
will be paid extra.

$11 ($10 + $1
Fee) Regular tournament with 500 participants, 3 players
remaining

Prize pool: $5,000

• 1^st
  place receives $1,250 (25%)
• 2^nd
  place receives $700 (14%)
• 3^rd place receives $413 (8.26%)

The remaining prize pool amounts to $2,363. The
players opt for the post deal method and divide the pool into three
equal amounts with a portion remaining. Thus everybody receives $700 and the
remaining $263 ($2,363 - $2,100) is attributed to the winner.

The
bottom line looks like this:

• 1^st
  place receives $963
• 2^nd
  place receives $700
• 3^rd place receives $700

It shows that this method is more profitable for
short stacks. The third placed finisher would at this time receive
the prize money for the second place. In addition there is still the
opportunity to win the $263 for first place. If you were chip leader
at this point though, this deal method is not the best as you are
worse off than with the chip count method, even if you win.

This method simply combines the post deal and chip
count methods. First of all, every player receives a fixed amount for
his seat, for still being at the table and having some chips, as
with the post deal method. On the other hand, the remaining amount will not be
played off, but divided via chip count deal.

This method was
created because short stacks often didn't want to accept chip count
deals for the reason that not only their chips have a value, but also
the seat they sit on. Because with this they still have the
opportunity to win the tournament. (“All you need is a chip and a
chair.”)

ICM calculations are fairer, but only a few people
understand them, let alone being able to work them out in their head. The shorter your own stack, the more you profit from a big share for the seat. As
a super short stack you should suggest such a deal.

Deal or No Deal?

Of course it's up to everybody to accept a deal or
not, regardless in which position you are in, at this point. Nonetheless,
there are some points which are in favour of a deal, and some which
aren't; and depending on the current situation, you should consider these points when coming to a
decision.

Pros:

• You are a big stack and could fare just as well or better with a deal than if you win the tournament.
• You yourself are too inexperienced in tournaments or final tables respectively, and rate the opponents to be stronger.
• You are tired or are out of time.
• The blinds and antes are so high that you could be blinded to death before you receive a good playable hand.
• You are on scared money and would rather have more security than the maximum EV.

Cons:

• As a short stack you barely get more with a deal than if you get busted in the next hand.
• As a chip leader the profit with a deal is considerably smaller than with splitting via chip count, or the prize money for first place respectively.
• The opponents are much weaker than yourself and the chances are high that you could just as well win the tournament without a deal.

Which Deal with which Stack?

Some rules of thumb which deals you should prefer
with which stack.

As a chip
leader with high blinds, where all your opponents have less than 10
BB, you should only accept a deal which almost secures the first
place win or corresponds with the chip count deal. This is because you can simply put every opponent under pressure with an all-in push. If the
opponents have 15-20 BB, it's more difficult as you'll risk too much
with an immediate all-in and aggressive players could re-steal.
Thus it depends on how passive your opponents are.

Here you should try to make a chip
count deal. This is good for you in that you have an  opportunity to bring in more than a first
place win, which is advantagous as nobody else might notice this fact, and even if they do, the
others might want to have the added security. If the opponents are on scared money,
the post deal method could have the negative effect of them playing
better, as they will then have more money. Thus the chip count deal is a better option than the post deal method for us.

Whether a deal is good or bad
often depends on the situation and the opponents' playing styles. If
you are put under pressure by the big stacks as you don't want to
bust before the short stacks, you often have no other choice than to
play very tight and slowly get blinded down. In such a situation you
should rather agree with the deal. If possible, you should try to use the ICM method.

As
a short stack, you should actually never agree to a chip count deal.
The prize money should either be divided via the ICM method or with a
share for the seat. The value a short stack has is often
underestimated by many, as it is often much easier to play it in an
optimal way. If e.g. you are the only player with less than 10 BB,
you can also push all-in with marginal hands against the chip leader,
whereas middle stacks are often forced to fold after a re-raise from
the big stack. Quite often you can get a short stack into the
heads-up like this and try your luck, as most players are simply too
careless with their chips.

Conclusion

Whether or not someone should look for a deal with their fellow
players is often an individual decision. Often the question is
simply: How big are my chances to win more if the tournament is
played off and not stopped prematurely, and am I willing to gamble
for such high amounts?

If you are in favour of a deal, the
chip leader should principally pick the standard chip count method, whereas the
ICM method is preferable for a middle or short stack.