Originally posted by Lyle Waldman:
Same situation, I say to you, “I'm going to the GP, and I think having byes gives me <some percentage> additional chance to get <some amount of prizes> at the GP. Therefore, I value the byes at <some value>. Let me have the byes, and you can have <equivalent value> extra prizes”. This is…ok? Maybe?
Originally posted by Mark Brown:Lyle Waldman
Same situation, I say to you, “I'm going to the GP, and I think having byes gives me <some percentage> additional chance to get <some amount of prizes> at the GP. Therefore, I value the byes at <some value>. Let me have the byes, and you can have <equivalent value> extra prizes”. This is…ok? Maybe?
It's been pointed out to me by a couple of people that this could just mean an un-even split.
So to clarify -
If the prizes are say 24 boosters and 2 byes for First and 18 boosters for Second. The player wanting the byes could say - “I value the byes at a box, so you can have 36 boosters and I'll take the remaining boosters and byes.”
This would be ok.
If with the same prize structure the player wanting the byes says “I value the byes at $200 so you can have all the boosters and $100 and I'll take the byes.”
That would not be ok.
Originally posted by Lyle Waldman:And here's why we have an exception, for the finals. When that exception doesn't apply, any prize split in favor of the conceding player is likely Bribery. This exception allows such uneven prize splits, in the last round of single-elimination.
I mean an uneven split of the prizes that are already in the prize pool in favor of…
Replies have been disabled because this topic is closed.