Tourney Tourney Points Advice?? (1 Viewer)

Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
6,669
Reaction score
18,573
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
I am looking for constructive thoughts on how to score a tournament that ended abruptly and unexpected 2 weeks ago.

Background info:
  • This is a 10 person tourney to send 1 player to the WSOP Main Event.
  • We play 12 games throughout the year. This was the 9th, and there are 3 remaining.
  • Points are given each tourney based on a player's finish. 10 points for 1st, 9 for 2nd, etc.
  • The player with the highest cumulative score after 12 games gets a free ride to the Main Event.

What happened?

Here's the tough part, but it's important context so everybody knows that we CAN NOT simply play it out with the remaining players.

We were down to 4 players when one of my buddies had a massive heart attack and passed away ): Yup...sucked beyond belief!!

The players that were left, me included, decided to apportion the points based on chip stack. As it turns out, my buddy who passed away was the chip leader, so as small of a consolation as it was, it put a smile on his wife's face to know that he passed with friends, winning at what he loved doing.

So what's the problem?

We are very tight at the top of the leader board with only 3 games left. Less than 2 points differentiate the top 3, and the player who finished 2nd that night is one of the top 3. While all remaining players were fine with apportioning points based on chip stacks, one of our other players (who was not one of the last 4) asked if we can discuss it. He is close to the top (1 point out of first).

So, my question is two fold.

  1. Has anybody ever played in a tournament with an unusual stoppage? If so, how was it handled?
  2. Any recommendations on what to do for points other than what was done?

I just basically want to get some thoughts in advance of speaking with him.

Thank you!!
 
I wonder if this would be a perfect time for you all to come together and all go to the WSOP and all play in a smaller buy-in tournament in his honor? Any winnings and 25%-50% could go to his family if so desired.

Sometimes there's more to life than taking each other's money and this would be an amazing gesture to your friend and his family.

Sorry for your loss.
 
We have had a game stoppage because of an acute illness. We halted the game for about 30 minutes while discussing whether or not to call an ambulance. She didn't want the ambulance called, so I monitored her vital signs until she recovered enough to feel safe being driven home.

Afterwards, the game continued.

Having someone die is radically different. I would be fine counting stacks and awarding points as they stood as if the game was complete, but if feasible would prefer to continue the game at a different time.

Of course, continuing the game would involve knowing exact chip counts (easily done if they were counted at some point) and the blind level. That might be ridiculously difficult, because if my buddy drops over I am not thinking about pausing the clock.

Since the remaining players agreed to just call the game (like playing 5 innings in baseball), I would make that call stand.

Because of this thread, I will be adding a rule to our group that will allow the game to be called as complete after the second break, if it is unlikely that the game can be completed (I already have a plan for a power outage, but unforeseen circumstances can occur) chips will be counted and points awarded if the game must be stopped after the 2nd break.

Sorry for your loss. Thanks for sharing. I would also propose @Jonesey07 's idea to the group - that would be a great gesture.
 
I wonder if this would be a perfect time for you all to come together and all go to the WSOP and all play in a smaller buy-in tournament in his honor? Any winnings and 25%-50% could go to his family if so desired.

Sometimes there's more to life than taking each other's money and this would be an amazing gesture to your friend and his family.

Sorry for your loss.
Yes, definitely. And thank you very much!!

We are an EXTREMELY close group of friends, that just happen to like poker :) A number of us go every year, and more will likely go this year. Your idea of buying into a small tournament and donating winnings is a great one!

In the past 2 weeks, we've raised thousands for his wife and will continue to do so because there will never be enough at a time like this. Also, we are each entitled to an equal portion of any winnings at the main event, and his wife will get his portion (and then some I suspect).

Thanks again for the suggestion because you are correct, the game itself isn't even a distant second :)
 
Last edited:
We have had a game stoppage because of an acute illness. We halted the game for about 30 minutes while discussing whether or not to call an ambulance. She didn't want the ambulance called, so I monitored her vital signs until she recovered enough to feel safe being driven home.

Afterwards, the game continued.

Having someone die is radically different. I would be fine counting stacks and awarding points as they stood as if the game was complete, but if feasible would prefer to continue the game at a different time.

Of course, continuing the game would involve knowing exact chip counts (easily done if they were counted at some point) and the blind level. That might be ridiculously difficult, because if my buddy drops over I am not thinking about pausing the clock.

Since the remaining players agreed to just call the game (like playing 5 innings in baseball), I would make that call stand.

Because of this thread, I will be adding a rule to our group that will allow the game to be called as complete after the second break, if it is unlikely that the game can be completed (I already have a plan for a power outage, but unforeseen circumstances can occur) chips will be counted and points awarded if the game must be stopped after the 2nd break.

Sorry for your loss. Thanks for sharing. I would also propose @Jonesey07 's idea to the group - that would be a great gesture.
Thank you!! I do know the exact chip stacks and could probably figure the blind level. We start at noon, play 1 hour blinds, 10 minute break every 2 hours, and he passed at 5:30pm.

To complicate things, my wife, one of my buddies, and I stayed around after to have a few drinks. Mostly because nobody wanted to be alone I suspect. Anyway, we turned the cards up and played out the hand. My buddy who passed had 77, the 2nd place finisher had KK, I had A4 off, and the 4th player folder. I would have hit an A on the flip, but I doubt I would have called pre flip given the fact that one of them would have raised significantly, and then there would have been a re raise. Even on the flop I would not have been comfortable with top pair and a 4 kicker. Who knows.

Anyway, I'm rambling. Thanks again!!
 
I think the way you handled was more than fair given the circumstances.

Totally okay to hear out the other player and see what they have to say. I would just listen first and then offer to get back to them. No need to agree it disagree during the discussion.

The only alternative I can think if is splitting the top 4 points evenly (ie (10+9+8+7 ) / 4) I think that's 8.5 points each.
 
I think the way you handled was more than fair given the circumstances.

Totally okay to hear out the other player and see what they have to say. I would just listen first and then offer to get back to them. No need to agree it disagree during the discussion.

The only alternative I can think if is splitting the top 4 points evenly (ie (10+9+8+7 ) / 4) I think that's 8.5 points each.
All excellent thoughts!! I didn't think about a split on the final 4 points. I like the idea, bit there was a pretty big chip difference between the top 2 chips stacks and the bottom 2, so that might be an tough sell. 90k, 80k, 30k, and 15k.

Thanks again!!
 
For starters, very sorry for your loss. I've had people require medical attention at events before, but thankfully, nothing fatal. I can't imagine.


In our points-based tournaments, we don't allow point chops ($$ chops are fine), but as a director, you can't control or prevent an all-in shove-fest if that's what two (or more) players really want to do just to end the event. However, in the event of a unexpected and required premature hard-stop, I would suggest a similar but slightly different solution as was done by your group: total available cash to be distributed however the remaining players agree, and total available points to be distributed per ICM/chip stack percentage (not by the order of the stack sizes). If unable to come to an agreement on the cash, it would be distributed in the same fashion as the points. *see below

That may or may not skew the awarded points in a direction that favors Mr. Left_Out, but I do think it's a more fair distribution of the available points (especially when the points are not linear, as they are in your example). Regardless, I personally don't like the equal-split-of-points solution at all. The involved players each had a corresponding equity in the game when it was stopped, and it would be unfair to ignore that equity when distributing either points or cash, and could even conceivably be unfair to player(s) shortly behind the others in the point standings if all four players received an equal number of points (or if they received more points than their respective stack was 'worth').

The only other equitable solution is to resume the event and play it out to completion. It would resume at the point of stoppage, with the four remaining stacks in play with the remaining three players and an empty chair (who's stack would get blinded out). This solution mimics what would normally occur if a player had to suddenly leave (for any reason) and the tournament continued on without him/her. Having already made an alternate decision (and possibly already distributing the cash) certainly makes implementing this solution more difficult (if not near-impossible) at this point in time.

All that said, I'd tend to stick with your original decision, although I'd certainly be willing to listen to what the concerned player has to say. In my group, any change from the original decision would require a unanimous decision of all active players to override.


90k, 80k, 30k, and 15k.
* Based on the stack sizes you listed, the 34 total available points (10+9+8+7) would have been awarded as follows:
90K = 1st = 9.14 points
80K = 2nd = 9.04 points
30k = 3rd = 8.19 points
15K = 4th = 7.63 points

I'm assuming (possibly incorrectly) that you awarded the points as 10-9-8-7, based on the finishing order of each stack size. The ICM calculations are a better reflection of the equity that each stack represented at the time of stoppage, and imo, is more fair to both the remaining participants and the other players who were already eliminated but impacted by how the awarded points affected the resulting point standings.
 
For starters, very sorry for your loss. I've had people require medical attention at events before, but thankfully, nothing fatal. I can't imagine.


In our points-based tournaments, we don't allow point chops ($$ chops are fine), but as a director, you can't control or prevent an all-in shove-fest if that's what two (or more) players really want to do just to end the event. However, in the event of a unexpected and required premature hard-stop, I would suggest a similar but slightly different solution as was done by your group: total available cash to be distributed however the remaining players agree, and total available points to be distributed per ICM/chip stack percentage (not by the order of the stack sizes). If unable to come to an agreement on the cash, it would be distributed in the same fashion as the points. *see below

That may or may not skew the awarded points in a direction that favors Mr. Left_Out, but I do think it's a more fair distribution of the available points (especially when the points are not linear, as they are in your example). Regardless, I personally don't like the equal-split-of-points solution at all. The involved players each had a corresponding equity in the game when it was stopped, and it would be unfair to ignore that equity when distributing either points or cash, and could even conceivably be unfair to player(s) shortly behind the others in the point standings if all four players received an equal number of points (or if they received more points than their respective stack was 'worth').

The only other equitable solution is to resume the event and play it out to completion. It would resume at the point of stoppage, with the four remaining stacks in play with the remaining three players and an empty chair (who's stack would get blinded out). This solution mimics what would normally occur if a player had to suddenly leave (for any reason) and the tournament continued on without him/her. Having already made an alternate decision (and possibly already distributing the cash) certainly makes implementing this solution more difficult (if not near-impossible) at this point in time.

All that said, I'd tend to stick with your original decision, although I'd certainly be willing to listen to what the concerned player has to say. In my group, any change from the original decision would require a unanimous decision of all active players to override.



* Based on the stack sizes you listed, the 34 total available points (10+9+8+7) would have been awarded as follows:
90K = 1st = 9.14 points
80K = 2nd = 9.04 points
30k = 3rd = 8.19 points
15K = 4th = 7.63 points

I'm assuming (possibly incorrectly) that you awarded the points as 10-9-8-7, based on the finishing order of each stack size. The ICM calculations are a better reflection of the equity that each stack represented at the time of stoppage, and imo, is more fair to both the remaining participants and the other players who were already eliminated but impacted by how the awarded points affected the resulting point standings.
Thank you very much for the condolences, and for the suggestions.

The cash was easy to figure out. We pay 3 places, and the remaining 4 players all agreed to donate all winnings to my buddy's wife :)

For the points, both the ICM/chip stack percentage, and playing it out are very helpful. Especially since Mr. Left_out mentioned possibly playing the game out, and I wasn't sure what to do with the remaining chip stack. Blinding it out makes total sense.

You are correct, we assigned points as 10, 9, 8, 7. With respect to ICM/chip stacked percentage, the 9 would actually go up a bit from to 9.04, so that might tilt mr left out even more, but it makes sense why it is fairer.

Thanks again, this is very helpful!!
 
What’s the tiebreaker procedures? If you’re considering fractional points in only this instance this might matter
If we end 12 games with a tie, all 10 players have agreed to play 1 extra game as a tie breaker. Only the players tied for 1st count for points (i.e., somebody in 2nd can not actually end up winning).
 
What’s the tiebreaker procedures? If you’re considering fractional points in only this instance this might matter
Not really. Would only make implementing the tiebreak less likely.
I think you're both saying the same thing. Yes it might matter, but in the sense that using fractional points now changes the possibility of a tie by making it less likely. At least that's how I read it. :)
 
I think you're both saying the same thing. Yes it might matter, but in the sense that using fractional points now changes the possibility of a tie by making it less likely. At least that's how I read it. :)

No, I think using fractional points in only one instance actually can add (or subtract) value from the participants left, to the detriment (or benefit) of those not in the top 4. I believe it depends on whether the fractional point values add up to 1,2 or 3 points. If it's a single point, the 4 remaining come out ahead. If they are splitting 3 points, they are slightly harmed. And 2 is roughly a wash.

Now, in this specific situation, none of this is anywhere near as important as minimizing controversy during this difficult time for your group. The best result from those perspectives is just do what everyone is comfortable with, and hear everyone out. Fair options would be play it out or split it somehow. I would disagree with nullifying the result or giving everyone 4th. And assigning position based on stack size - I don't agree with it, but the concession might be worth it for group cohesion.
 
No, I think using fractional points in only one instance actually can add (or subtract) value from the participants left, to the detriment (or benefit) of those not in the top 4. I believe it depends on whether the fractional point values add up to 1,2 or 3 points. If it's a single point, the 4 remaining come out ahead. If they are splitting 3 points, they are slightly harmed. And 2 is roughly a wash.

Now, in this specific situation, none of this is anywhere near as important as minimizing controversy during this difficult time for your group. The best result from those perspectives is just do what everyone is comfortable with, and hear everyone out. Fair options would be play it out or split it somehow. I would disagree with nullifying the result or giving everyone 4th. And assigning position based on stack size - I don't agree with it, but the concession might be worth it for group cohesion.
Thanks, I see. Definitely worth considering.:tup:
 
Sorry for your loss.

Some good suggestions here already. Is it possible to omit that whole tournament result and "replay" it? That gives everyone an equal chance again. I wouldn't say this is ideal, but thought it could be considered.
 
Very sorry for your loss Kevin, and I am sure no matter how you proceed, your players will understand. I have no real advice to give on points, but I feel like what you did was correct, and probably would have been what I would have done as well. Having never been in the situation, I can't speak from any experience.

I know as my regulars feel like family, that will be one of the toughest parts about resuming the series. My thoughts and prayers are with you and your players during this difficult time.

Mark
 
Sorry for your loss.

Some good suggestions here already. Is it possible to omit that whole tournament result and "replay" it? That gives everyone an equal chance again. I wouldn't say this is ideal, but thought it could be considered.

Thank you!

That will be of the options, but won't likely get much traction. The woman who was in 1sr with a 6 point lead got knocked out 2nd, which closed the gap between 1st and 3rd significantly. Plus, the game had fully played out for the other 6 players, so their chances of winning or losing was not impacted by what happened.

Thanks again!
 
Very sorry for your loss Kevin, and I am sure no matter how you proceed, your players will understand. I have no real advice to give on points, but I feel like what you did was correct, and probably would have been what I would have done as well. Having never been in the situation, I can't speak from any experience.

I know as my regulars feel like family, that will be one of the toughest parts about resuming the series. My thoughts and prayers are with you and your players during this difficult time.

Mark
Thank you very much Mark!! We are such a close group of people that this was by far the worst thing most of us ever experienced. We lost a brother ):

We are playing for the first time since it happened this Friday, so it will be pretty tough.

Thanks again!!
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom