Deals in the WSOP ???

The Al Lad

Does anyone ever hear of deals (for the cash) being done in the WSOP bracelet events???

It's just you never hear on pokernews, cardplayer etc of any deals being done so just curious

RichieLawlor

The Al Lad wrote: »

Does anyone ever hear of deals (for the cash) being done in the WSOP bracelet events???

It's just you never hear on pokernews, cardplayer etc of any deals being done so just curious

Not allowed afaik, but probably some sneaky deals done on the side, like there will be in the delayed main event this year for sure

HIVeindhoven

Of course there is although i'd say its just as common for people to give up a bit of cash to secure their "precious" bracelet. Heard a rumour thats how Ram Vaswami secured his last year. I think the WSOP should go the whole hog and introduce WWF style belts instead of the bracelets. If your gonna do tawdry, tacky bling you might as well go the whole hog.

sickpuppy

Im sure loads of deals are done probably away from the glare of the cameras.
Probably much better for a bracelet winner to say he won or she:pac: won the game outright.

bohsman

Theres deals done all the time.

pierce hard

i remember when padraic parkinson got 3 or 4 handed at an event last year, he said they discussed a deal but he turned it down.

Four of a kind

I was in the Rio last year when Phil Helmuth won number 11 and there was def a deal been done when they got down 5 handed. Well thats what was said at the time. So yeah like most be tourneys...deals are made on the qt alot of the time.

Maybe the deal was...they split the money 4 way and he takes home bracelet number 11

cuterob

all tourneys are played to conclusion .. there's always spectators so they wouldn't just stop it 3 handed etc i would think.. i'm sure there's deals on the cash though.. i'd be more interested whether or not there has been deals in the main events over the years??

dan harrington offered a deal when he was on the final table of the main event(the year he won it) where he told everyone to split the cash evenly, play for the bracelet and he'd give them advice on investing their winnings and turning it into more.. they declined and he went on and won it anyway

Ollieboy

a lot of final tables included deals for the cash, but only a few have ever included the bracelet. I think HIVeindhoven has the wrong player, as I was told a English player done a deal the year before to win the bracelet and gave up a big amount of the cash for it. He thought the media coverage he would have got in the UK would have made up for the cash deal. The heads-up was played out where the other player more or less through the game.

His bracelet result wasn't that well covered and a lot of people weren't happy about how he won the bracelet, so I guess it left a bad taste in most peoples mounth. But he his a top class player, but a bit of a dick. Anyway, he still has the bracelet.

In the older days, they always did a deal up to the 80's, where they more or less award the main event bracelet to the best vote player. If you read Gordon Wilson book "ghost at the table" it makes interesting reading.

mewso

Regardless of deals being done or not I would be pretty certain pokernews and cardplayer have their precious access to the action on the basis that they are not allowed to report deals.

phantom_lord

i can't remember the details, but didn't someone who had a prop bet about winning a bracelet with barry greenstein make a deal 2/3 handed so they'd win the event?

Scouser in Dub

wasn't it the case that Amarillo Slim didn't get a bracelet due to his win being set up?

bohsman

English guy, Julian Gardener I think rejected a deal the year Varkoni won it.

HighFinance

musician wrote: »

Regardless of deals being done or not I would be pretty certain pokernews and cardplayer have their precious access to the action on the basis that they are not allowed to report deals.

Nowhere in the official media guidelines is this either implied or explicitly stated. There are many other reasons for reporting (or not) whether a deal was done (or not) and this is not one of them.

mewso

HighFinance wrote: »

Nowhere in the official media guidelines is this either implied or explicitly stated. There are many other reasons for reporting (or not) whether a deal was done (or not) and this is not one of them.

I'm not talking about Media Guidelines. I'm talking about specific deals done between Harrahs, ESPN, Pokernews, Cardplayer. I'm speculating but I wouldn't be surprised. If you have read their contracts then I stand corrected. It's certainly not unheard of for Casinos to push the "no deals were done" line and that was back in the day when there were no big money contracts.

hotspur

Eli Elezra effectively bought his bracelet when heads up against Scotty Nguyen when Eli had a bet regarding winning a bracelet.

HighFinance

musician wrote: »

I'm not talking about Media Guidelines. I'm talking about specific deals done between Harrahs, ESPN, Pokernews, Cardplayer. I'm speculating but I wouldn't be surprised. If you have read their contracts then I stand corrected. It's certainly not unheard of for Casinos to push the "no deals were done" line and that was back in the day when there were no big money contracts.

I agree its not unheard of, for sure, and still happens, usually in events which are being televised in some fashion. However, that doesn't stop the info becoming public like happened in the Irish Open before last.

CP has no 'contract' with either Harrah's or ESPN - its two years since CP was the official media partner of the Series.

We all know the prize money awarded may differ from the result as published but it is down to the individual journalist and/or editor to decide if that info (providing they are privvy to it at the time of writing their piece) can or should be used.

I've done both - it just really depends on the context much more than being 'contracted' to say (or not say) something.

For example, sometimes a deal might come to light days, weeks, or months after the fact in a relatively benign way (say, someone mentions it in an interview) or it could be something as straight forward as the writer of any given piece not knowing or caring that a deal has taken place.

As i say, there are many reasons.

But your point does raise the question about reportage on deals done between July and Nov. this year for the main event. Will players be able to keep any deal quiet? Will they want to? Can they be made to? Should the media badger people about their personal financial situation? Is the fact that they are now 'celebrity' (either welcome or unwelcome) enough to have people pry into these aspects of their life?

b.

cuterob

Ollieboy wrote: »

a lot of final tables included deals for the cash, but only a few have ever included the bracelet. I think HIVeindhoven has the wrong player, as I was told a English player done a deal the year before to win the bracelet and gave up a big amount of the cash for it. He thought the media coverage he would have got in the UK would have made up for the cash deal. The heads-up was played out where the other player more or less through the game.

john gale was it?

cuterob

hotspur wrote: »

Eli Elezra effectively bought his bracelet when heads up against Scotty Nguyen

in what way? i saw it play out.. i cant really see scotty giving up the chance of another bracelet for money