Tournament of Chopions?

Last night’s chop had me finally put down on paper, what I have been thinking about since the first chop reared its ugly head (I believe it was ScottMc). Please take these thoughts as an opinion, they are not intended to insult anyone or start shit. I am not here to start shit. I hate shit starters, but I do value opinions. We are allowed to disagree, so I encourage you to either agree or disagree (or be a fag and sit on the fence if that's your thing). Everyone has their own personal reasons for doing what they do (9 times out of 10, it’s all about the money). To me though, it’s all about having the least amount of players possible in the TOC, and that’s the bottom line, because Schaubs said so!

Here is the scenario:

You have already won your TOC seat (great job… you played your ass off, got some timely luck and now you have a very very coveted seat that is disgustingly tough to win!). You decide to continue to play in the BBT3 for various reasons such as side bets, monthly points (2k prize packages), year to date points (everyone wants a jersey right?), bragging rights, dead money etc.

You get down to the final two (wow you made it heads up again, you ARE good!) and the person you are heads up with is a very good player (let’s call him someone who is generally feared in the BBT and someone who should eventually win a TOC seat on their own merit).

In fact, you are very certain that over the long haul (the life session of poker), he (or she, but I will use he from now on) would beat you more often than you would beat him. He is just that good. You know this because he has numerous victories and cashes supporting this and he plays at levels that you rarely, if ever, participate in.

This player does not have a TOC seat yet, but you figure eventually it should happen based on the fact that he has won other BBT2/BBT1 events or other blogger events in general… along with various success in other MTT’s and cash games.

He is better than you. You know this.

Do you chop?

Why?

Here are my thoughts:

I don’t chop, no matter what. I don’t want to have this player playing in the TOC if I can help it (and neither should you… tell me why and I will listen). I would risk that chop buyout money just to keep that player out of the TOC. That is just me. I am competitive, and I want to win. What’s that extra money really going to do for you anyway? Afford you another two weeks of BBT3 tournaments? Why not just ask all the other TOC qualifiers to ship you 5 bucks each instead?

What about the points? What if those first place points that you gave up now cost you a top 18 overall? Ok, if you don’t give a shit about an ugly jersey (when are they going to give that thing an overhaul??) then what about the player of the month? Or was your goal just to get in, and screw all the extras that could be included if you won 2-3 more seats on your own.

I want to beat the best and strike fear into every other TOC participant. I want each and every one of them to know that I beat a player better than me and I want them to be thinking about this when we get involved in a hand. So that if I somehow get heads up with a player that is better than me, and I already have a TOC seat, then they are going to have to go through me to get it. They are going to have to EARN it and prove what I, and mostly everyone else, have though all along. They are that good.

If I beat him, then I probably got lucky, he got unlucky, my game was on, or his game was off that day. I got the better of him, and he is still not in the TOC.

Now I have two seats and he has none. Now there is one less person in the TOC and every seat is now actually worth more to everyone who has qualified.

I am sooooo confused as to why anyone would chop and give up a seat, knowing full well that when they get to the TOC, that very same person you chopped with could be the person that knocks you out and ruins your chances of actually winning the TOC and going to the WSOP (isn't that the goal here? Isn't that what Full Tilt wants?).

Unless you are colluding? That might be a reason, but I just don't see that happening. In theory though I guess two chances at the money are better than one, and you could always split the money if one of you won the TOC... which would in turn piss off a lot of bloggers because the underlying assumption is that the winner will actually represent the blogging world at the WSOP and not puss out and take the money that we've all technically chipped in for (ok it's Full Tilt's money, but still, you know what I mean... man I hope this is making sense).

Why make it to heads up again, and then just give it away. Were you playing for second when you signed up? Were you thinking that you could get first place money without even actually winning it? If it’s all about money, then you DO want fewer players in the TOC, no matter what. We are all smart here, so there is no need to explain why.

Ok I’m listening… and I don’t mind if you start your answer with “it depends.” It seems like that is the precursor to every poker answer anyway…

Again, I am not pointing fingers and I am not saying what anyone did, or will do in the future, is wrong. I am just saying I would never do it.

Would you?

I want to win the TOC, not just get in it. Get it?

Asssss iffff...........

One can dream can't they...

Good luck to all of you who have qualified so far, and to all of you like me on the oustide looking in... don't just try and win one... try and win as many as you can!