Deal Making in Poker Tournaments: Negotiation Strategies and ICM Application

Definition and Background

Deal Making refers to the negotiation among remaining players at the final table of a poker tournament to divide the remaining prize pool in some agreed-upon manner, rather than playing out the tournament to a single winner. This typically occurs when the prize money is large, players are of similar skill, or both sides wish to reduce variance. Deal making can take the form of a Chip Chop (dividing proportionally by chip count), an ICM Chop (dividing according to the fair value calculated by the Independent Chip Model), or a hybrid approach that reserves part of the prize for the eventual winner.

Principle: Why is ICM Needed?

The Independent Chip Model (ICM) is a mathematical tool used to evaluate the real dollar value of chips in a tournament. Because tournament payouts are tiered, holding more chips does not increase your expected value linearly. For example, a player with 50% of the chips may have an expected prize lower than 50% of the total prize pool, because large stacks can be “inflated” under future blind pressure. ICM converts the chip distribution into a fair value for each player given the current structure, and is the foundation for deal‑making negotiations. Most online platforms offer ICM calculation functionality at the final table.

Common Types of Deal Making

1. Chip Chop – The prize pool is divided simply according to each player’s percentage of total chips. Suitable when the payout structure is flat and blinds are very low, but it usually disadvantages short stacks (whose ICM value tends to be higher than their chip percentage).
2. ICM Chop – Distribution based on the expected values calculated by ICM. This is the fairest method and is accepted by most players and tournaments.
3. Structured Chop – The majority of the prize pool is split according to ICM, but an additional amount (e.g., the winner’s prize or the largest share) is reserved for the eventual champion to maintain competitive incentive. Common in live tournaments, e.g., “Reserve $10,000 for the winner, split the rest by ICM.”
4. Deal with Leader – The chip leader demands a higher percentage, sometimes threatening not to agree. However, according to ICM, the leader’s true value may already exceed his chip percentage, so negotiation requires strategy from both sides.

Negotiation Principles and Techniques

1. Know Yourself and Your Opponent: Calculate ICM Values

Before negotiating, use an ICM calculator (available offline on your phone or computer) to input the current chip distribution and prize structure, obtaining each player’s fair value. This is your baseline. For example, you may hold 40% of the chips, but your ICM value might be only 37% of the total prize, while a short stack with 10% of the chips might have an ICM value as high as 12%. Understanding these differences prevents you from being lowballed.

2. Set Your Goal: Insurance or Maximization?

• If you are a short stack, a deal usually locks in a prize higher than your current standing, reducing variance.
• If you are a big stack, a deal may sacrifice some of your advantage. If you believe your skill is significantly superior, you may decline and continue playing; but if your opponents are not weak, locking in profit is often wiser.
• If the prize is large and meaningful in your life, many professionals will first secure a portion of the money, leaving only a small amount for the winner’s competition.

3. Negotiation Tactics

• Open high: Even if your target ICM value is $5,000, ask for $5,500 first to give the other side room to negotiate.
• Provide reasoning: Use ICM numbers to support your request, making it appear fair. For example, “According to ICM, my fair value is $8,200, so I’d like at least $8,000.”
• Create urgency: If the opponent hesitates, remind them that the blind structure is about to increase (especially if the big blind level is approaching), adding to chip volatility risk.
• Be careful with short stacks: Sometimes a short stack would rather gamble than accept a small leftover deal. You might offer them slightly more than ICM to secure the agreement and reduce your risk of being knocked out.

4. Consider Leaving Some Prize Money

Many players agree to leave a chunk of money (e.g., 5–10% of the total prize pool) for the eventual winner. This preserves the competitive nature of the game. When part is reserved, the remainder is split by ICM, and both sides are usually satisfied.

Practical Example (Typical Situation, Not a Real Event)

Suppose a tournament has three remaining players with the following prize structure: 1st $10,000, 2nd $6,000, 3rd $3,000, total prize pool $19,000. Chips:

• Player A: 500,000 (big stack)
• Player B: 300,000 (medium)
• Player C: 200,000 (short stack)

First, without a deal, each player’s expected value according to ICM (using a standard ICM calculator, assuming relatively small blinds):

• A: ~$8,100
• B: ~$6,200
• C: ~$4,700

Player C proposes a chip chop: C gets 20% of $19,000 = $3,800, which is obviously lower than his ICM value. Player A can point out the ICM value and suggest leaving $1,000 for the winner, then splitting the rest by ICM. Final proposal: Reserve $1,000 for the winner, split the remaining $18,000 according to ICM proportions (total ICM sum is $19,000; after reservation, distribute proportionally). Specifically, after reservation, ICM proportions remain the same: A = ($8,100 / $19,000) × $18,000 ≈ $7,684, B ≈ $5,874, C ≈ $4,442. The reserved $1,000 goes to the eventual winner, but the three players continue playing. If Player C accepts, he is guaranteed $4,442, higher than the chip chop; A and B also receive amounts above their chip percentages but below their full ICM. This is a typical fair compromise.

Common Misconceptions

1. Believing chip percentage equals fair distribution: Ignoring the nonlinear value caused by the payout ladder leads to short stacks being exploited.
2. Negotiating while emotional: Immediately after eliminating an opponent, emotions run high, making it easy to accept an unfair deal. It is better to calm down first or request a break.
3. Ignoring the blind structure: If blinds are high and the next level is approaching, a short stack’s expected value drops sharply, so they should be more eager to make a deal.
4. Refusing all deals based on feeling: Some big stack players are overconfident and reject all deals, but if opponents are skilled or variance is high, they may lose more.
5. Not confirming prize distribution details: In live tournaments, the host will write down the distribution. Always verify that the prize for each finishing position matches the agreement. Online, ICM divisions are usually automatic, but live events require extra caution.

Summary

Deal making is an important tool in the later stages of a tournament, helping to reduce variance and lock in profits. The core is understanding the ICM model and negotiating based on it. During negotiations, remain rational, set clear goals, and use chip distribution and blind structure to persuade opponents. Based on your own skill level and your read on opponents, decide whether to accept a deal or reserve part of the prize. Ultimately, a fair deal should leave all participants feeling slightly better off than continuing to play, thereby reaching consensus.