Deal Making in Tournaments: How to Negotiate

What is Deal Making

Deal Making refers to when multiple players remain in a poker tournament and they negotiate to distribute the prize pool early based on current chip counts or other factors, rather than continuing play until a final champion is determined. This practice is most common at the final table, but sometimes occurs earlier (e.g., when 4-5 players remain). The purposes of a deal typically include reducing variance, locking in profits, saving time, and mitigating the luck factor caused by high blinds.

Deals come in various forms: they can be a simple chip-chop (proportional to chips), an ICM-adjusted distribution, or a hybrid deal that "sets aside" prize money for the eventual winner. In large tournaments, deals often require approval from the tournament organizers and must be agreed upon by all remaining players.

Core Principle: The ICM Model

ICM is the most commonly used theoretical tool in deal making. It converts each player's chip stack into an expected monetary value (EV), accounting for the nonlinear relationship between chips and prize distribution—since tournament payouts are steeply tiered, the more chips you have, the lower the marginal value of each additional chip.

ICM calculation steps (in principle):

1. Assume all players have equal skill and the game is completely random (i.e., each player's probability of being eliminated on the next hand is proportional to their chip stack).
2. For each player, based on their stack and the stacks of others, compute the probability of finishing 1st, 2nd, etc.
3. Multiply each probability by the corresponding prize and sum them to get the player's expected prize value.

Note: ICM is a simplified model that does not consider position, hand ranges, player skill, or other dynamic factors, but it provides an objective starting point for negotiations.

Practical Example Analysis

Consider a standard tournament with 3 players remaining and a prize structure: 1st $5,000, 2nd $3,000, 3rd $2,000. Chip stacks:

• Player A: 500,000 chips
• Player B: 300,000 chips
• Player C: 200,000 chips Total chips: 1,000,000.

ICM calculations (typical values):

• Player A's EV ≈ $3,450
• Player B's EV ≈ $2,800
• Player C's EV ≈ $2,250 (Calculation details omitted; available via online calculators)

Negotiation Process

Typically, the chip leader (Player A) proposes a deal based on ICM values: A takes $3,450, B takes $2,800, C takes $2,250. However, B might argue they have a skill advantage (e.g., are better at short-handed play) and demand extra compensation. Player C, with fewer chips, might accept near-ICM values or ask for a slight increase.

Common negotiation points:

• Setting aside first-place money: For example, all three agree to reserve $500 for the eventual winner, distribute the remaining $9,500 proportionally, and the winner gets the extra $500. This "champion protection" deal encourages continued competition.
• Adjustment factors: Shorter stacks sometimes receive a "premium" because ICM underestimates the marginal utility of their chips.
• Time compensation: If the game is slow, some players may accept a lower amount to finish earlier.

Common Misconceptions

1. Treating ICM as absolute truth: ICM assumes equal skill and random outcomes, but in reality, short stacks may face higher risk due to forced all-ins, while big stacks have post-flop positional advantages. Negotiations should consider opponent styles, your own strengths, remaining player count, and blind structure.

2. Ignoring non-monetary factors: Some players value tournament titles or want to gain live tournament experience, which affects their willingness to deal. Forcing a deal may lead to rejection or even deliberate stalling.

3. Proposing a deal too early or too late: When few players remain, ICM variance is small, making agreements easier. With many players, negotiation costs are high and deals often break down. Conversely, when only 2-3 players are left, chip disparities are larger and deals are more common.

4. Lack of alternatives: If the other party refuses, you should be prepared to continue playing. Blindly raising your offer may put you at a disadvantage. Before negotiating, calculate your bottom line—the minimum amount you would accept, typically based on ICM minus a variance cost.

Negotiation Strategies and Tips

• Information gathering: Observe opponents' reactions and mental state before negotiating. Nervous or tired players may be more willing to accept a biased deal; confident, aggressive players may aim for the full first prize.
• Make the first offer: Proposing an ICM-based deal early often controls the negotiation tempo. If the other party counters, concede within reason but keep your bottom line.
• Use a "highball and lowball" framework: For example, start with a high demand, then gradually lower it, making the other party feel they've gained. But be careful not to appear insincere.
• Consider future cooperation: In large tournaments, you'll often face the same opponents. Maintaining good relationships helps build a reputation.

Special Case: ICM vs. Betting Odds

In some situations, ICM-calculated EV may conflict with actual tournament strategy. For instance, when a short stack faces an all-in decision, ICM would suggest playing more conservatively because elimination carries a steep loss (the drop from 3rd to 4th place). However, in deal negotiations, the short stack can leverage this, emphasizing they must continue to take risks, forcing big stacks to concede in the deal.

Conclusion

Deal making is an essential skill for tournament players. The core is to understand the ICM model as an objective baseline, while flexibly negotiating based on opponents' psychology, stage of play, and personal goals. Avoid rigidly applying formulas; learn to balance expected value against real-world risks. A wise deal can significantly improve long-term tournament returns, but greed or stubbornness might cause you to miss favorable agreements. Finally, whether a deal is reached or not, remain calm and polite, and respect all participants.