Having someone raise the question of splitting the prize pool near the end of a tournament is common, especially when (as is often the case) the pay-out structure is top heavy and the blinds are high relative to the stack sizes. Ordinarily, I let the tournament run its course, leaving it up to my opponents to raise the subject.
Last night I broke with convention after having failed to get a semi-bluff through against one of the remaining two players earlier in the evening and losing a hand to the player to my left who flat called with pocket Kings after I raised with A,J off-suit from the button.
Summary:
Two players folded to my raise, including the BB. UTG also called. Three to the flop: 4c, red ace, 7c. Check, check, Hero makes a C-bet. SB spends two or three seconds considering his move before pushing all-in for around 55 to 60% more. UTG folds. Hero makes the call and loses to a King on the river.
Hero recovers. The SB along with another player busts. We are down to three. Pay-outs are $300 for first, $200 for second and $100 for third. Hero had multiple reasons for offering the split. 1) There was a four player $1/$2 game underway in the other room. 2) It was quarter to midnight and Hero had a hour drive ahead of him. 3) Hero knew there was 47BB's on the table by doing the division after he multiplied the starting stacks and buy-ins. (Hero had 15BB's behind and his SB in front. The other two players were equally divided in chips, so no one had a chip advantage.) 4) There was 3:19 left on the clock before the blinds doubled.
The player who had called Hero's semi bluff earlier in the evening rejected the offer stating that he was in for a $100 and wanted to play it out. He was eliminated three hands into the next level when he shoved all-in with A,10o and got a call from the other player who had Q,Jo. Flop: 10 high, turn card: a queen, and a king on the river.
Hero, out-stacked two to one, offered a $235/$265 split that was graciously accepted.
I played in a three table tournament at the casino on Easter where an offer to do a three way split was also turned down. The pay-out structure for that tournament was 40%/30%/20%/10%. The prize pool contained $2505. First place paid out $1005, second $750 and third $500. Hero and player A who proposed the split were evenly stacked. Player B, who rejected the offer, had us out-stacked by 20%.
Three hands later, Player A jammed all-in post flop with an inside straight draw. Hero called holding the same ranked card that gave Player A the inside straight draw while having also hit bottom pair. Hero won the hand when he faded his opponent's over card and the straight failed to materialize. The very next hand Hero limped in with Q,9 off suit and Player B checked with 10,6 off suit. Player B subsequently shoved all-in on a 6,7,8 board. Hero called, hitting a ten on the turn and surviving the river.
In both of these cases, a split would have given all the players involved second place money. In addition, no one held a significant chip advantage at the time of the offers. In the latter case, a heads up all-in loss by Player B to Player A or Hero would have left him at a 5 to 1 and 10 to 1 chip disadvantage.
By refusing a split under these circumstances, both players must have had extreme confidence in their ability to defeat both of their opponents, or they had designs on doing a two way split. Either way, these two players chance to gain an advantage only if they doubled up before going into heads up play, for they would lose their power to negotiate if one of their remaining opponents doubled up through elimination.
In short, they are putting at risk what they chance to gain under the best of outcomes if they had agreed to a split.
Sometimes a negotiated guarantee is +e.v.
Last night I broke with convention after having failed to get a semi-bluff through against one of the remaining two players earlier in the evening and losing a hand to the player to my left who flat called with pocket Kings after I raised with A,J off-suit from the button.
Summary:
Two players folded to my raise, including the BB. UTG also called. Three to the flop: 4c, red ace, 7c. Check, check, Hero makes a C-bet. SB spends two or three seconds considering his move before pushing all-in for around 55 to 60% more. UTG folds. Hero makes the call and loses to a King on the river.
Hero recovers. The SB along with another player busts. We are down to three. Pay-outs are $300 for first, $200 for second and $100 for third. Hero had multiple reasons for offering the split. 1) There was a four player $1/$2 game underway in the other room. 2) It was quarter to midnight and Hero had a hour drive ahead of him. 3) Hero knew there was 47BB's on the table by doing the division after he multiplied the starting stacks and buy-ins. (Hero had 15BB's behind and his SB in front. The other two players were equally divided in chips, so no one had a chip advantage.) 4) There was 3:19 left on the clock before the blinds doubled.
The player who had called Hero's semi bluff earlier in the evening rejected the offer stating that he was in for a $100 and wanted to play it out. He was eliminated three hands into the next level when he shoved all-in with A,10o and got a call from the other player who had Q,Jo. Flop: 10 high, turn card: a queen, and a king on the river.
Hero, out-stacked two to one, offered a $235/$265 split that was graciously accepted.
I played in a three table tournament at the casino on Easter where an offer to do a three way split was also turned down. The pay-out structure for that tournament was 40%/30%/20%/10%. The prize pool contained $2505. First place paid out $1005, second $750 and third $500. Hero and player A who proposed the split were evenly stacked. Player B, who rejected the offer, had us out-stacked by 20%.
Three hands later, Player A jammed all-in post flop with an inside straight draw. Hero called holding the same ranked card that gave Player A the inside straight draw while having also hit bottom pair. Hero won the hand when he faded his opponent's over card and the straight failed to materialize. The very next hand Hero limped in with Q,9 off suit and Player B checked with 10,6 off suit. Player B subsequently shoved all-in on a 6,7,8 board. Hero called, hitting a ten on the turn and surviving the river.
In both of these cases, a split would have given all the players involved second place money. In addition, no one held a significant chip advantage at the time of the offers. In the latter case, a heads up all-in loss by Player B to Player A or Hero would have left him at a 5 to 1 and 10 to 1 chip disadvantage.
By refusing a split under these circumstances, both players must have had extreme confidence in their ability to defeat both of their opponents, or they had designs on doing a two way split. Either way, these two players chance to gain an advantage only if they doubled up before going into heads up play, for they would lose their power to negotiate if one of their remaining opponents doubled up through elimination.
In short, they are putting at risk what they chance to gain under the best of outcomes if they had agreed to a split.
Sometimes a negotiated guarantee is +e.v.
Last edited:
