Players agreeing to split a prize


#61

If I had to guess, I’d say when IFPAPA merged rulebooks, but that’s just a guess. I can tell you definitively it went IN THERE because of one particular group of jackasses that wanted me to rewrite their checks three times at PAPA 16 or 17.


#62

Your baseball analogy did not support your point at all; it’s a completely different situation.

I saw a pot split when my friend Josh made it to B finals at PAPA some years ago. I am pretty confident the prearranged split did not lessen his desire and effort to win. I made it to Pinburgh C finals a couple years ago, and while the prize money was nice, it’s long gone and I value the plaque I won more than it. Getting hardware from the biggest tournament is what it’s all about.


#63

Certainly not to me. YMMV. Whether Zach and Bowen were playing for a NIB Stern or just a dollar in NO WAY affected my enjoyment of watching that awesome match. Really, it was tremendously enjoyable to watch them compete and I couldn’t care less what the prize was for the winner. Now I’m sure they cared what the prize was, and that’s because they earned the right to be there at the end. So what they decide to do with it is none of my damn business. Again, don’t know, don’t care.

Certainly not to me. YMMV.


#64

That won’t work, because the TDs would still DQ anyone they see saving a ball with a bangback, regardless of what the players agree on. Pot splitting after a tournament is over with is out of the control of the TD.


#65

TBH I find this whole discussion insanely hilarious when poker, a much MUCH worse entity in terms of oversight and regulation, has absolutely no problems at all with splits and the resulting playing out of the match.


#66

This same comparison was brought up in a sidebar conversation on the topic. Poker is a different competition IMO and certainly operates with a different mantra. I think poker (IMO) is more prize driven and less about ‘competition’ tho. aka… more cutthroat with less emphasis on ‘fair and balanced’ and rules focused more on eliminating cheating. Poker is driven by the $$ pot. And has a heavy emphasis on statistics… hence its more in-line with objectives to think a ‘financial’ decision makes a lot of sense and would be embraced.

Also, in poker it’s also a means to advance a completion of a game… which is less of an issue in pinball.

But I did like this excerpt from the WSOP rulebook

"This rule shall include, but is not limited to, any participant whose personal hygiene has become disruptive to the other participants seated at their table. The determination as to whether an individual’s personal hygiene is disruptive to other participants shall be determined by the Tournament Staff which may, in its discretion, implement sanctions upon any such participant who refuses to remedy the situation in a manner satisfactory to Rio. "


#67

The rules in WPT are so deep. I didn’t know the split was an option :grin:.


#68

Sure, play as serious as you choose no matter what the stakes. However if you support winner take all, looking at the other way, splitting the final 4 pot ahead of time knowing that a “you gotta be kidding me” house ball on ball 3 is not going to cost you 100k, would certainly be more comforting.

There is a running understanding with our local club members that we don’t need to play for money, because you will get the same level of fierce competition playing for a Post it Note that has 1st place scribbled on it with a Crayon. And I’ve seen all out war happen whether big trophies or dime store trinkets. :slight_smile:


#69

That’s how it is with our crew too. But what if the crowd knew about the winner take all agreement before the final group started? That would be pretty exciting for them even if it didn’t affect the players from a “will to win” standpoint.


#70

With all these ‘money doesn’t change anything’ opinions… No one has addressed why the IFPA needs to boost prize pools to take pinball to the next level…


#71

Players simply need to do any pot split discussions off of camera. Problem solved.


#72

It seems to me that this discussion is essentially moot. Not because of any difficulty deciding whether splitting should or should not be allowed, but because making splitting illegal is completely unenforceable.

What is the IFPA supposed to do? Require me to forward monthly copies of all my bank account statements? Maybe they would like to make surprise visits to my home to check under the mattress? Maybe the mattresses of my parents and in-laws too, just in case?

If players want to split, they will find a way to do it, whether there is a rule against it or not. Hence, having a rule against splitting seems pointless.


#73

So if you we don’t believe its easy to enforce we should just skip it… So you support throwing out the sandbagging rules too then right? For the same unenforceable reasoning…


#74

And never admit to sandbagging… problem solved.

Oh wait…


#75

Because splitting a BIGGER amount is better :slight_smile:


#76

To the OP: There seems to be some underlying axe to grind. Not sure what it is, and I am not prying. None of my business.

However I don’t see how the final players agreeing to split the winnings is “colluding”. That word has sinister overtones, as if some other party is getting hurt. If the people who have earned their way in to the finals all agree to split the purse, I don’t see that as a devious act.

With respect to the question of why the IFPA feels it necessary to do what it does, I am pretty sure Josh will chime in :slight_smile:


#77

There’s only one true way to settle these playoffs with multiple players.

Two words:
Hunger Games


#78

Sandbagging rules aren’t unenforceable, and there is no rule against splitting.


#79

This whole conversation is silly to me. We aren’t talking about a lot of money here with the exception of pinburg. For the most part you are looking at basically $1K to $1.5K difference between 1st and 4th in some of the bigger tournaments and MUCH less in the rest. Most splitting I’ve seen was basically, “hey, let’s just make sure we all make enough to pay for our trips” types of things.

In a hobby where thousands of dollars are exchanged on toys and you aren’t going to make a living winning every tournament available getting this bent out of shape is rediculious.

To say that now because a group of 4 people are guaranteed ____ amount means they wont compete is beyond conceivable for me when the major tournaments are offering point differences between the placing for the Stern Pro circuit and SCS standings. Shoot, I see tournaments more as qualifying events anyways for those two things which for me personally is my main goal. Heck, when I took 4th place at TPF my disappointment was with all the points I just threw away having a crap game 3 vs any relative money considerations.

Flynnibus - You still haven’t answered spaynards question. What examples of recent events have you seen to where a spit occurred and the players didn’t try to win still? You seems to want to throw out meaningless examples that have little to no relation to pinball but when point blank asked to provide proof of your theory you avoid it. If pot splitting “undermines the competitive aspect” then this would be obvious and their would be dozens of examples. If you want to talk about things that “undermines the competitive aspect” of pinball you should be talking about trying to fix qualifying brackets. That does occur where players will try to finish in certain places to help elicit an outcome to where their bracket doesn’t include certain players.


#80

This all sounds great, until you’re playing a $100 game of Flash Gordon like I did in Louisville Classics a few years ago. Then tell me you’re not chopping a pot!