Tourney Chip Chop Trouble (1 Viewer)

[upNdown]

And P3 should STFU.

Yeah he should. I assume he was waiting on a post tournament cash game and was pissed when the chop didn’t happen.
That’s no excuse for him not minding his own business, of course. But these are social situations. If you’re being perceived as the guy who’s holding up a bunch of guys waiting for a cash game, because you’re nickel and diming a chop, you have to own that, fair or not.

 

[CHP TD]

Um, it was headsup when he proposed the chop. He could've walked away from the table and been blinded off and still got second place money.

yep noted i made an error there.

i thought there were 3 people in the deal. yeah person 3 eliminated doesnt have a say.

Person 3 - lets call him "upset dude" was not a part of the deal? you put him in there because you feel he should have not said anything right? he doesn't figure in the deal?

 

[WedgeRock]

I think that's correct, @CHP TD. P3 was mentioned because he interjected himself into the dispute.

In a 3-way chop, everyone gets third place money and then the rest is chopped according to chip stacks. It is possible for the person who is second in chips to get less than 2nd place money.

 

[BGinGA]

In a 3-way chop, ..... It is possible for the person who is second in chips to get less than 2nd place money.

That's pretty rare, and requires that:

a) 2nd place chip stack size is barely larger than the 3rd place chip stack size, ~and~

b) the chipleader's chip count advantage over the other two players is very large, ~and~

c) the bump between 2nd and 3rd place prize money is substantial in relation to the payout amounts.

It does happen, but not very often.

 

[CraigT78]

This is why I don't chop

 

[Mojo1312]

A proper two-player chip equity chop will never result in the smaller stack getting less than the posted payout..... because the two players are not chopping the entire prize pool. Each gets the 2nd place amount, and then the balance of the prize pool is distributed according to the stack sizes -- 14/74 and 60/74 of the balance, in this case.

Perhaps you were not clear in your offer.

^^ Nailed it. Two ways of looking at this. I misspoke, or I was not giving a chance to clearly explain myself. Either way, a chop by definition means you are asking for or expecting to settle for something above what you are already guaranteed to win. I don't fully understand the reasons why player three tore into me as hard as he did. He was no longer in the tournament. They did have a cash game going in the other room, but in no way does that justify his behavior. (Which caused the host to suspect I was angling him.)

Secondly, we are talking about a 2x pay jump. A $185 difference in this case, which means I am playing for the win if there is no chop of some kind, even if I am out-stacked 9 to 1.

Common sense doesn't always prevail. However, cool heads sometimes do.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Never-the-less, the previous week, you raped your opponent's ignorance when they offered you a 50/50 chop as the 2.5:1 dog. This time their ignorance beat you back a little. Call it a wash, and don't get bent over it.

I've often said, if the game is getting chopped regularly, the game is broken. Either blinds or payouts need to be fixed. This game has lost a significant number of it's players, so I'm not the only one that thinks your best bet it to find another game and let this one die.

 

[Ronoh]

Never-the-less, the previous week, you raped your opponent's ignorance when they offered you a 50/50 chop as the 2.5:1 dog. This time their ignorance beat you back a little. Call it a wash, and don't get bent over it.

I'm sorry... are you saying he should have just bit the bullet and accepted the chop for less than the amount of money he was already guaranteed because of their ignorance? Or that he shouldn't be a bit peeved that multiple people jumped on his back in genuine anger because they somehow thought he was trying to give away money that he'd already won?

I'm an extraordinarily laid back person and still can't grasp accepting either option.

 

[Poker Zombie]

I'm sorry... are you saying he should have just bit the bullet and accepted the chop for less than the amount of money he was already guaranteed because of their ignorance? Or that he shouldn't be a bit peeved that multiple people jumped on his back in genuine anger because they somehow thought he was trying to give away money that he'd already won?

I'm an extraordinarily laid back person and still can't grasp accepting either option.

That one. It would irritate me, but I strongly suspect that there other things wrong in this game.

I once played in a game that was impossibly soft. So soft that I would tip the host $40 each night just to make sure that I stayed "on the list". But it had flaws. Terrible, terrible flaws. Procedures, blind structure (Blinds remained 25/50 until someone was eliminated, then they would double each time there was an elimination) - those kinds of things. Eventually I dropped it because I knew that some rulings were being made that were clearly (to me) wrong - and they always fell back on "that's how we do it".

Eventually, dumb players with dumb hosts are going to make decisions that go against you. Even if you tip well, a poorly run game that's run for a long time isn't going to be fixed by one person, no matter how right they are. In such a case, I say "let it go".

Would Mojo have even brought it up if he was getting the lion's share? It sounds to me like he had to teach them what an equity chop was. He then failed to teach it clearly, as multiple people got it wrong. There are a lot of fish to fry, and Mojo is at least partially responsible for the error, because one person cant fix it, no matter how right they are. Move on, and explain to your friends that talked you into going; "That's why I didn't want to go back to that game."

 

[detroitdad]

I once played in a game that was impossibly soft

I hear there is an open seat at a soft game on NOV 4th https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/nov-4th-ypsilanti-mi-cash-game.23430/

 

[Craig D]

I've often said, if the game is getting chopped regularly, the game is broken. Either blinds or payouts need to be fixed. This game has lost a significant number of it's players, so I'm not the only one that thinks your best bet it to find another game and let this one die.

So true

 

[Poker Zombie]

I hear there is an open seat at a soft game on NOV 4th https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/nov-4th-ypsilanti-mi-cash-game.23430/

Paulo, Fink and Forrest?

 

[detroitdad]

Paulo, Fink and Forrest?

I know, lol . I'm the fish at the table

 

[AWenger]

I asked the host if he wanted to split the prize pool according to our chip stacks. Neither he nor the last player eliminated had any idea what I meant. (Surprisingly) I stated the prize pool would be chopped based upon the percentage of chips we had before us. The two took my words literally. Thus, they thought the game was over. I back-pedaled, trying to explain to them that a split only makes sense if it gives that player more money then what they are already guaranteed to win.

They either ignored or didn't understand the premise. The player who finished in third really lost his cool, telling me a deal is a deal, and calling me a liar for backing out. He threw fuel on the fire by raising his voice and not allowing me to explain myself further, so I simply stated three or four times that I wanted to play it out.

I remember being confused the first time I learned what a chop or "equity chop" was, (when I made the money at a 4-table tournament, and we were down to the last 4 or 5 players)

I was hesitant, until it was best explained to me like this: (in this example, 4 people left) the equity chop is: everyone gets paid 4th place money, and then the remaining prize pool left over gets split according to % of chips left.

That's what your mr angry guy/mr. no common sense guy didn't understand. Maybe he would have understood better with a clearer explanation, but it's no reason for his blow-up.

[EDIT: I might be using the term "equity chop" wrong, that may be more for individual pots in cash games where people are all-in.]

 

[justsomedude]

I remember being confused the first time I learned what a chop or "equity chop" was, (when I made the money at a 4-table tournament, and we were down to the last 4 or 5 players)

I was hesitant, until it was best explained to me like this: (in this example, 4 people left) the equity chop is: everyone gets paid 4th place money, and then the remaining prize pool left over gets split according to % of chips left.

I didn't know what an equity chop was until this thread.

Ya learn something knew every day.

 

[BGinGA]

the equity chop is: everyone gets paid 4th place money, and then the remaining prize pool left over gets split according to % of chips left.

That's the simplest way to do it, but not the most accurate (nor the way most equity formulas handle it).

Let's use a simple three-way chop as an example, where chip stacks are 50%, 30%, and 20% of the total chips in play, with stated payouts of $60, $30, and $10 (totaling $100).

The 'easy' way is to award $10 to each player (3rd place money), and divide the remaining $70 according to the chip stack sizes ($35, $21, and $14), making the chip chop values $45, $31, and $24 (totaling $100).

But that totally discards the probabilities of each player's chances of winning money by finishing 2nd or 3rd.. There are six possible outcomes with three players (each with a specific probability of occurring): ABC, ACB, BAC, BCA, CAB, and CBA. The correct way to calculate the equity chop is to determine the probability of each outcome, multiply it times the payouts, and sum the totals of the six outcomes. This is how equity calculators perform chops.

The actual equity chop values for the example above is $41.79 / $32.50 / $25.71, not $45 / $31 / $24 as previously stated.

Doing the quick-n-dirty will always overcompensate the chip leader, because it assumes that he is a favorite to win money at all three places, when in fact, he is only a favorite to win 1st place money. By default, he must be an underdog to win money at the other two places, because his total probability to win money at all cannot exceed 100%.

 

[AWenger]

I just have to say, when it comes to anything tournament-related -- in @BGinGA I trust.

 

[Poker Zombie]

That's the simplest way to do it, but not the most accurate (nor the way most equity formulas handle it).

Let's use a simple three-way chop as an example, where chip stacks are 50%, 30%, and 20% of the total chips in play, with stated payouts of $60, $30, and $10 (totaling $100).

The 'easy' way is to award $10 to each player (3rd place money), and divide the remaining $70 according to the chip stack sizes ($35, $21, and $14), making the chip chop values $45, $31, and $24 (totaling $100).

But that totally discards the probabilities of each player's chances of winning money by finishing 2nd or 3rd.. There are six possible outcomes with three players (each with a specific probability of occurring): ABC, ACB, BAC, BCA, CAB, and CBA. The correct way to calculate the equity chop is to determine the probability of each outcome, multiply it times the payouts, and sum the totals of the six outcomes. This is how equity calculators perform chops.

The actual equity chop values for the example above is $41.79 / $32.50 / $25.71, not $45 / $31 / $24 as previously stated.

Doing the quick-n-dirty will always overcompensate the chip leader, because it assumes that he is a favorite to win money at all three places, when in fact, he is only a favorite to win 1st place money. By default, he must be an underdog to win money at the other two places, because his total probability to win money at all cannot exceed 100%.

 

[rjbf65]

So true

Agreed. Local charity tourney typically pays out top 8 or 10 players depending on the crowd. ALWAYS gets chopped before playing to a winner. Usually with atleast 5+ players remaining. Fast structure and top heavy payout contribute to it. However, the single biggest reason it gets chopped so often is the guy in charge of handling the payouts is always "reminding" players of what the chop values are. If they don't chop at 8 players he will chime in when it's at 7 with whatever it is. It annoys me. Atleast wait until the players suggest it. I think a lot of times they chop because they feel pressured to do so.

 

[Mojo1312]

Never-the-less, the previous week, you raped your opponent's ignorance when they offered you a 50/50 chop as the 2.5:1 dog. This time their ignorance beat you back a little. Call it a wash, and don't get bent over it..

Pay-out is 66.66/33.34 like most tournaments that have less than 9 players. I don't believe he wanted to play heads-up. (How often does a player with a 2.5 to 1 chip-stack advantage initiate a chop?)

BGinGA also astutely picked up on the fact that I may have shorted myself by agreeing so quickly to his offer. (The inputs speak for themselves. 8 buy-ins plus 1 or 2 re-buys at $50@.) House takes $50. I benefited from the chop, but only by a few dollars

 

[BGinGA]

8+1= 400 raked pool less 50 entry = 225/175 actual chop (vs actual equity chop values = 229/171)
8+2 = 450 raked pool less 50 entry = 250/200 actual chop (vs actual equity chop values = 257/193)

If one re-buy, you came out ahead by about $4. If two re-buys, you gained about $7 in equity. Pulling the entry fee significantly alters the actual equity of an otherwise 50/50 split.

Regardless, not what I'd call rape.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Pay-out is 66.66/33.34 like most tournaments that have less than 9 players. I don't believe he wanted to play heads-up. (How often does a player with a 2.5 to 1 chip-stack advantage initiate a chop?)

Rarely, which supports my perspective...

• The guy isn't bright. If fact, when calculating odds, simple math, etc. he's downright stupid.
• You can't fix stupid. Even if I didn't understand equity chops, I would easily understand getting at least the 2nd place money, or the desire to play it out. But you can only try to correct the problem with logic - and since stupid is immune to logic, you were in the no-win scenario that is inevitable in this kind of game.