Am I out to lunch on this?
A player at my game decided to have a tournament at his house for the first time. When the smoke cleared there were four people left with three being paid. I was knocked out fifth so I have no vested interest but I watch it unfold. After the bubble boy got knocked out the host asked if the people in the money wanted for give the bubble $20.00 each. One of the players said the time to ask was before the bubble burst and it was not fair to ask him to give $20.00 to someone when there was no possible benefit to him (as the cashing player). When the host complained to me that the players were cheap, I said that he asked at the wrong time, and they did nothing wrong. He then sent out an invite to his next tournament with a line saying that we would have to discuss the bubble before we start because some people obviously do not understand the concept.
Am I wrong? Is ok to ask to kick something to the bubble when the bubble has already been broken?
I now have those two players who are regulars at my game saying if he is there, they will walk out as they know they are right and they feel they have had their integrity questioned. Also, the bubble boy was a friend of his and they wonder if they went out would he have said the same thing.
9 Replies
If you have a tournament where 3 people are paid, and the 4th person gets money, then 4 people get paid. If you know that 4 people will get paid, maybe you should kick $10 to the 5th player. Etc.
When you are down to 4, and nobody knows who will get knocked out next, it seems perfectly reasonable to discuss giving something to number 4. And if all 4 people agree, then it seems fine to me. All 4 players have some vested interest in the decision, because even the chip leader could end up running bad for a few hands and get knocked out. Once that bubble bursts, you are now simply asking 3 people to give up their own money for no reason other than that they did better than the other guy. Giving $20 each is particularly unfair to the guy in 3rd place, because his winnings are a lot lower than those of the other two.
So no - you are not wrong. The host of the tournament is the one not clear on the concept. But that doesn't mean he is wrong. He can ask people anything he wants, and since they said no, he can either live with that; stop hosting; work out something at the start of the tournament or simply get different players. Any decision made at the start is fine, because everyone has a say, and everyone has a chance at being effected by the decision. Doing it after the fact is simply not a fair way to approach it.
But I would talk to those who will leave your game if the other guy is there. I can't see why they would potentially break up your game just because they had a disagreement with someone else. I don't think that host was being a terrible person, he just didn't see things the same way that you (or I, or your friends) do.
Hopefully you can all come to an understanding and move on.
Two guys dropping out would not kill my game but one of the guys I have known and consider a good friend for 40 years. They object to to being called cheap and also that they are embarrassed by the host in his email. When one of the guys phoned him he was very arrogant and told him dont worry about it , I gave him $60.00 because you are cheap and dont understand bubbles.
Two guys dropping out would not kill my game but one of the guys I have known and consider a good friend for 40 years. They object to to being called cheap and also that they are embarrassed by the host in his email. When one of the guys phoned him he was very arrogant and told him dont worry about it , I gave him $60.00 because you are cheap and dont understand bubbles.
I would not play a game hosted by someone who talked to me like that. "You are cheap and don't understand bubbles". No you are an ******* and don't understand bubbles
Yeah, host doesn't understand paying the bubble.
After the bubble boy got knocked out the host asked if the people in the money wanted for give the bubble $20.00 each. One of the players said the time to ask was before the bubble burst and it was not fair to ask him to give $20.00 to someone when there was no possible benefit to him (as the cashing player).
The best time to ask is when the game was 4 handed.
-- Prior to that, it changes it from 3 paid spots to 4 paid spots and trickles down to a bubble for 5th.
-- After that it's just begging.
Haven't been in a home game tourney hosted by a player in a long time. Make sure to take care of the host. Other players are on their own.
I'd give a friend the benefit of the doubt in not knowing how things (are supposed to) work. I'd provide an explanation, maybe even pointing to this thread.
I'd probably even give a client (player from your home game that isn't a friend) the same benefit and explanation.
I now have those two players who are regulars at my game saying if he is there, they will walk out as they know they are right and they feel they have had their integrity questioned.
Re: Those 2 regs not playing in your game if that tournament host (TH) shows up.
Without other information, I'd say I'd rather have those 2 and might suggest the TH take a break until they are able to apologize and/or make peace with the 2 regs.
He then sent out an invite to his next tournament with a line saying that we would have to discuss the bubble before we start because some people obviously do not understand the concept.
--- That part is true, but not for the reasons the author thinks.
Am I wrong? Is ok to ask to kick something to the bubble when the bubble has already been broken?
No, you are right.
It's OK to ask, but not OK to expect and be petty and passive aggressive about it.
Also, the bubble boy was a friend of his and they wonder if they went out would he have said the same thing.
My confident guess is that TH would not have asked for just anyone.
I sent him a message politely asking him to consider what he said and how he said it. If he feels an explanation is needed, or he would like to apologize contact the users, otherwise I am not taking sides but I have known the other two players for over 20 years so I am afraid you are not welcome. I once got barred from a home game for being too good (I won 8 out of 11 times I played anywhere from 15 to 18 players each time) so I know how he feels.
I'll put in that the host should not be asking this. Maybe mention that, "hey, here's an idea," before the bubble. Definitely not implying that there's something necessary about doing so.
Imagine the floor at Horseshoe (or wherever) implying that the remaining players should ignore the posted payout structure and kick $X toward the bubble. No. Just no.
If players in the tournament, near the bubble, want to make an agreement that "bubble person will get $X from each of the winners," that's fine.
I recommend you to find a competent person (it could be one of the players) on a role of judge. Different situations all the time happens on all kind of tourneys. When all players agree who is a referee at the beginning it will prevent potential conflict. More players- higher chance of unusual situation.
You don't pay, or agree to pay, the bubble after it bursts. Dude is a piece of work for saying remaining players are cheap/don't know how paying the bubble works.
Unreal
AS others said, you decide on paying the bubble before someone gets knock out. Makes no sense the other way. Sounds like the TD is mixed up here. Someone needs to chat with him by voice, not email. Explain the reasons why
