Duke & Hellmuth chop Tournament of Champions prize money???

Any2ForU · #1 10-19-2004, 06:57 AM

Last weekend a dealer at the Bellagio said that Phil Hellmuth and Annie Duke chopped the $2 million free roll Tournament of Champions event that was aired on ESPN. Does anyone have any insight on this? It completely makes sense that a side deal would be made given the fact that second place paid $-0-. I think it would be in both players best interest to make a deal. Why would anyone want to walk away empty handed when they could be guaranteed $1,000,000, or whatever agreed upon amount. I've heard that Harrah's has tried to discourage this practice, but as far as I know there hasn't been any real consequences established, such as, banning people from future events, imposing monetary sanctions, etc.

If it’s true, I can understand why certain parties wouldn't want things like this to become public knowledge. The integrity of the televised event might be jeopardized. It seems, however, that such a deal would just be a sound financial decision for the players as long as there are no real consequences. I think anyone would take a guaranteed payday of $1 million in that situation regardless of the opponent, or their skill level, when the result of losing would be walking away empty-handed. Therefore, I don't think it's a knock on any of the players involved if it's true. Has anyone heard anything about this?

CrisBrown · #2 10-19-2004, 11:06 AM

Hi Any2,

Annie has said on this forum that there was no deal. You can search for posts by her for the info. Now, I suppose you can say she was lying, and that the dealer at the Bellagio knows the real story. I suspect the dealer was just talking through his/her hat.

Cris

DimensionPresident · #3 10-19-2004, 12:16 PM

I don't think anyone wants to call Annie a liar, but IF there was a deal, do you actually think Annie would come right out and say so?

Sponger15SB · #4 10-19-2004, 12:22 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think anyone wants to call Annie a liar, but IF there was a deal, do you actually think Annie would come right out and say so?

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

slickpoppa · #5 10-19-2004, 12:26 PM

This is pure speculation, but I'm guessing that ESPN made all of them sign an agreement not to make any such deals in order to keep things interesting.

Bernas · #6 10-19-2004, 12:54 PM

World Poker Tour makes everyone sign these but I witnessed deals. Well before the final table but there were still deals.

Daliman · #7 10-19-2004, 02:08 PM

It is common knowledge that most high-limit pros confide possible prize-jeopardizing information to dealers at any casino they play in, who, in turn, disseminate said information to random people they deal cards to.

eh923 · #8 10-19-2004, 02:21 PM

I would think it's interesting enough on the merit of having world-class players play with their pride on the line.

Perhaps I'm odd, but a winner-take-all prize structure doesn't mean anything to me as a spectator. Sure, it definitely affects strategy, but since the show is so condensed...it's tough to see WHEN the strategy changes happened.

slickpoppa · #9 10-19-2004, 02:28 PM

Well, at the very least the winner take all prize structure encouraged a good old fashion Phil Hellmuth tirade [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

private joker · #10 10-19-2004, 03:24 PM

That said, I wouldn't believe they cut a deal until I saw the evidence. The fact that it was winner take all changed everyone's strategies, most notably Daniel Negreanu's. If he knew he could cut a deal with Duke or Hellmuth by coming in 2nd to make a million bucks, he wouldn't have played so many pots and tried (unsuccessfully) to get such an early big chip lead. Even Hellmuth played to win, not get second. If Duke says there wasn't a deal, and if the other players would be hella mad if there was, I believe there wasn't a deal.