Pokerbase
04-04-2005, 12:43 AM
Obviously it's not a great strategy to simply dump all the teams chips
off to one player right away. But if most of the player's on the team
play better than the field, it would certainly be an advantage to have
3 or 4 players left when you get down to 3 tables, soft playing and
dumping chips to keep each other from busting. Unless the team leader
has another source of income, it must be working for him ok if he
still has money to play.
"Paul L. Schwartz" <see-text@aaa.aaa> wrote in message news:<vhtlnsgab8p9be@corp.supernews.com>...
> "Jim Geary" <jaygee@netaxs.com> wrote in message
> news:vKzTa.29$OM2.25727@news.uswest.net...
> > One, it's bad math.
>
> To elaborate on this point, consider the following exaggerated example.
> Imagine a ten player single table tournament which has you, one team of
> five, and a second team of four. Top three places pay. The two teams each
> dump chips to their "expert" player. In this tournament you are guaranteed
> third every time just by waiting for the teams to eliminate themselves
> dumping chips. Sometimes you'll even get lucky and win first or second.
> The two teams will win first and second most of the time but their winnings
> will not cover their combined entry fees. This phenomonon is present in all
> percentage pay back tournaments.
>
> Paul
>
> > "The Insidious Dr. Fu Man Chu" <elvispamless@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:5447af8f.0307230815.754617ee@posting.google.com...
> > > Once when I was at a major tournament, a couple of guys were pointed
> > > out to me as being in the tourney with the express duty of dumping
> > > chips to a very well known player. Some other guys were pointed out
> > > as being there for the same purpose for a different player. These
> > > last guys were rumored to be well known enough to have their own group
> > > nickname.
> > >
> > > Does anyone want to comment on this practice?
off to one player right away. But if most of the player's on the team
play better than the field, it would certainly be an advantage to have
3 or 4 players left when you get down to 3 tables, soft playing and
dumping chips to keep each other from busting. Unless the team leader
has another source of income, it must be working for him ok if he
still has money to play.
"Paul L. Schwartz" <see-text@aaa.aaa> wrote in message news:<vhtlnsgab8p9be@corp.supernews.com>...
> "Jim Geary" <jaygee@netaxs.com> wrote in message
> news:vKzTa.29$OM2.25727@news.uswest.net...
> > One, it's bad math.
>
> To elaborate on this point, consider the following exaggerated example.
> Imagine a ten player single table tournament which has you, one team of
> five, and a second team of four. Top three places pay. The two teams each
> dump chips to their "expert" player. In this tournament you are guaranteed
> third every time just by waiting for the teams to eliminate themselves
> dumping chips. Sometimes you'll even get lucky and win first or second.
> The two teams will win first and second most of the time but their winnings
> will not cover their combined entry fees. This phenomonon is present in all
> percentage pay back tournaments.
>
> Paul
>
> > "The Insidious Dr. Fu Man Chu" <elvispamless@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:5447af8f.0307230815.754617ee@posting.google.com...
> > > Once when I was at a major tournament, a couple of guys were pointed
> > > out to me as being in the tourney with the express duty of dumping
> > > chips to a very well known player. Some other guys were pointed out
> > > as being there for the same purpose for a different player. These
> > > last guys were rumored to be well known enough to have their own group
> > > nickname.
> > >
> > > Does anyone want to comment on this practice?