Poker Articles

Let's Do A Deal, Part I
Introduced by Tina Napolitano

Tina Napolitano asks players their opinion on dealmaking and all of its intricacies especially when it comes to corporate sponsorships. Read her question or choose one of the responses below.

Louis Asmo | Phil Hellmuth | Mike Caro | Tim Kopp
Andy Glazer | Matt Savage | Nolan Dalla | Wendeen Eolis
Simon Trumper | Mike Sexton | Doyle Brunson | Lyle Berman

The audience has been sitting patiently with bated breath on the uncomfortable metal bleachers for hours now, waiting in anticipation for the final heads-up battle to find out which player will be crowned the champion.

The camera crews move silently around the arena in hope of catching that look of despair or pure excitement as another big pot is won and another player is busted out, cutting the field down to the final 3. The dry ice is now settling on the carpet as the sound and special effects fade, these are purely for the benefit of the TV viewers at a later date. Others around the world are sitting by their computers listening to the audio broadcast, with the professional team painting a realistic picture via the Internet.

The spotlight is pointing at the mounds of money sitting on the table, waiting to be taken home by the victor. I am sure that I am painting a picture of both excitement and anticipation.

Then, the players all get up and go for a bathroom break. "Nothing unusual," you say. But when they return the play takes on a totally different perspective. The next hand is an all in. How unusual, as there have not been many of those in the whole 5 hour event. The 2nd hand is the same. Before you know it the winner has been crowned in the space of 20 minutes.

The audience is happy that the event is finished and the final gasps of excitement express mixed emotions, as it becomes very evident that a deal was made.

When the players carve up the prize pool in the bathroom, is there really the incentive for one of them to win the title, or does it really matter? Is it the money that is of the utmost importance?

Corporate sponsorship has been the mantra for improving tournament poker for years now, in order to bring it into the public eye and put it alongside Golf and Tennis, etc.

But...How will a corporate sponsor feel if their freely given prize pool is divided up in the restroom, and even if it is not made public knowledge at the event, the whispers of the poker world soon carry the rumor around the globe like wildfire. Will a corporate sponsor allow a prize pool to which it has contributed to be divided up in the restroom?

There have been events recently that have not allowed deals: the TOC, and the Poker Million. But what if the deal was made anyway? Who would be the wiser? What penalties could be put in place to prevent that?

We asked several top players, writers and tournament directors to offer their opinions and insights on this issue of final table deal making. Read on to find out what these poker pundits are thinking...

Wendeen Eolis
Poker Player and Poker Advocate

Dealmaking is a reality of final table play-especially among the top three positions and even more frequently between the top two players. Today, the reasons are financially sound given the increasing luck factor as the competition reaches its final confrontations.

If the bleacher and Internet crowd could be privy to the negotiations by requiring such dealmaking to be done in public view, there might be several benefits. First, there might be less of it by the top braggarts in the crowd who don't want their fans to know that they have a little less in the way of nerves of steel than meet the eye. 2nd the dealmaking is often a show on its own, filled with emotion, humor, and intellectual prowess. Third it would go a long way toward curing the appearance of under the table machinations by the skeptics in the crowd.

For the moment, I think that major television coverage is a tougher nut to crack here with hundreds of stations than in the UK with four. (Beyond the hype of participants and enthusiasts an analysis of ratings of LNP is instructive). The glass table for viewing hands in progress that Henry Orenstein has patented creates drama, and there may be additional methods by which others may create this excitement for a viewing public. Still I think we need to work hard on transforming the image of the poker player from intriguing character to respectable competitor.

Then, perhaps major network television coverage and/or corporate sponsorships become realistic prospects and the pressure on the player will be reversed-to compete to the very end of the game. The competition will be naturally keener if it is for genuine stardom that pours out beyond the self-acclaimed poker fraternity into the mainstream viewing population.

In the interim, we must be creative to turn the anti-climax of play after a deal is done into the ultimate contest for genuine stature whether it be a tournament pro,or a lottery winner. Either is good for promotion of the sport and the latter is better for television.

Return to Top

Simon Trumper
Famous Poker Tournament Champion

Currently the problem we have, obviously, is it's the players money and they are entitled to do deals if they wish. I have always thought that in a major tournament if a deal is done a substantial sum should be put aside and the title continued to be played for.

Once a sponsor is providing the prize pool I think the way to avoid deals is by suggesting a flatter payout, because usually the difference between 1st and 3rd or 4th is what leads to deals taking place.

However it is our duty as players to adhere to the sponsors requirements, and as we would now be on a freeroll, providing the payout is not overly disproportionate we should be happy to accept whatever we win, and always play our best to the end, providing maximum drama for the viewers and further encouraging other sponsors to want to become involved.

After all, this is what many people involved in poker have been trying to achieve for years, so when it arrives we should embrace it and realize that no matter how long it has taken to attract sponsorship, it will be very easy to lose if we don't all act professionally and responsibly.

Return to Top

Mike Sexton
Famous Tournament Player and Poker Advocate

The TOC was the trend-setter in a "no deal" policy. I'm confident that no player violated the 'no deal' policy at the TOC (in any year). However, I believe the TOC was a special event. That policy was implemented because we fully anticipated corporate sponsorship (and television coverage) for the TOC.

My thoughts on "Let's Do a Deal" have always been - If there is no money added to the prize pool and/or no best all-around player award (where money is awarded), the players should have the right to make a deal if they so desire. After all, it is their money.

I believe that if corporate sponsorship was available pending a "no deal" policy, that all players would respect that policy. They would appreciate the added money and not abuse the "no deal" policy. And I would suggest that anyone even "proposing" a deal to someone else (whether or not it was made) should be barred from any future sponsored events.

I also feel that championship events (which include any televised event or any broadcasted on the Internet) should also come to their rightful conclusion. You could/should force players to play for a substantial amount of money - even if they opted to make a deal. In other words, let them make a deal if they wish, but make them play for at least $50,000. This will get you an exciting finish and true champion you are looking for. (Such a deal was just made with three players remaining in the championship event of the LA Classic.)

The only way deals will be completely (or as completely as possible) eliminated is to revise the payout structure where the increase from every position to the next is minor - where no one would even talk about making a deal. This would be a payoff structure that might look like: 1st = 18%, 2nd = 16%, 3rd = 14%, 4th = 12%, 5th = 10%, 6th = 8%, 7th = 6%, 8th = 4%, 9th = 3%, and 10-18th = 1% each.

Every time a proposal or suggestion like this appears (to shrink the money at the top), you get a roar from the opponents (usually from the higher stakes players and tournament regulars). And it is these people that are in fact the primary supporters of the major events.

I believe that prize pool distribution is an issue you will not get everyone to agree to - regardless of how you distribute the prize pool.

Return to Top

Doyle Brunson
Famous Tournament Poker Champion

That is a tough one. There is so much money involved it is hard to keep players from not making a deal if they need the money. All that can be done is to appeal to the players sense of right and wrong. It is impossible to stop if all the people left want to make a deal.

Return to Top

We at Poker Pages would love to hear your views on this subject: from the angle of the player, the audience and the views of 'the corporate sponsor'. So if you have comments, please post them in our Poker Forum.