You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
I've just finished watching the tv coverage of the EPT 100 (that slow roll guy was hilarious).
To me it was quite noticeable, once the deal had been made, the dynamics of the game changed. I know its a highlight show, so it could just have been the editing. However, a very telling comment was at the end when Phillips turned to his rail and said "but who won the most money?" Maybe he was just licking his wounds after finishing 2nd, who knows.
It just seemed to me to detract from the spectacle a bit once the money had all but been sorted (I know they leave 10%)
I know its wrong to say "no deals, play to the end, always" especially if you are talking about life changing sums of money for people. But when its 3 wealthy poker pros going for a prestigious title should a deal be off the table???
I'm not even sure if I agree with my own OP lol, just throwing it out there..........
Whaddyareckon???
Comments
The reality is pretty much no one is as wealthy as you think and flipping for such large amounts of money is a bad idea so deals of some sort tend to make sense as most people don't get in these spots enough to even out the variance of them.