Comparing 2006 and 2005 payout structure for the ME

[bgoalie35]

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, the 2006 payout structure is a joke, but this tournament is not about the players, its about good TV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, it rolls off the tongue better to talk about the "12 instant millionaires" for spots 1-12.

[NickMPK]

The 2005 pay-out structure was much better. They should give 1st place 10 million, spread the extra 2 million out to place 50-200, and round off all the high payouts.

[Vee Quiva]

I made a weak attempt at a chart in excel, but there are way too many data points to make a readable chart.

The funny thing is that Harrah's will make much more money from the tournament with a flatter payout structure.

Just think, if 1600 players were paid instead of 800. That would be 800 more internet players that had parlayed a small satellite into more than 10,000 dollars. They have money burning a hole in their pocket and ready to buy into the second chance bracelet events after they bust out.

Instead they ass rape the players by making them pay outrageous juice and send 7,800 players home unhappy. Another shining example of the intelligence of the Harrahs officials.

[stevepa]

Odd stats about the 2006 payout structure:

-1st place is a larger % of the prizepool in 2006 than 2005 (14.5% vs 14.2%)
-2nd place is a smaller % this year...
-Every other final table spot is a larger % this year than last
-The early payout levels pay a substantially smaller % of the prize pool this year

These make no sense to me...especially 2nd paying a smaller % and every other final table spot paying a higher % when the field is substantially bigger.

Steve

[BigBiceps]

[ QUOTE ]
Who was it that thought the main event should be winner take all? I can't recall where I read it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought it was Mike Caro.

[ohkanada]

You would get no where near 1000 players if it was winner take all.

Ken

[shaniac]

I agree with most of this. The money for the top three spots, however, does seem appropriate. I think paying 10/7/5 to 1-2-3 this year would be better than what they came up with.

If they get 12,000 players next year, what will the prizepool look like if they do it like they did in 2005/006. What would it look like if you could design it?

Btw, this is the sort of stuff you should be emailing Bob Feduniak about (too lazy to find a link).

[Dynasty]

Will somebody else do the #s for 2006?


2005: 5,619 players; $52,818,600 prize pool

1st: 7,500,000 (14.20%)
2nd: 4,250,000 (8.05%)
3rd: 2,500,000 (4.73%)
4th: 2,000,000 (3.79%)
5th: 1,750,000 (3.31%)
6th: 1,500,000 (2.84%)
7th: 1,300,000 (2.46%)
8th: 1,150,000 (2.18%)
9th: 1,000,000 (1.89%)

<font color="red">2005 Final Table: $22,950,000 (43.45%) </font>


2004: 2,576 players; $24,214,400 prize pool (plus extra $10,000 paid out by Harrah's to bubble players)[/b]

1st: 5,000,000 (20.65%)
2nd: 3,500,000 (14.45%)
3rd: 2,500,000 (10.32%)
4th: 1,500,000 (6.19%)
5th: 1,100,000 (4.54%)
6th: 800,000 (3.30%)
7th: 675,000 (2.79%)
8th: 575,000 (2.37%)
9th: 470,400 (1.94%)

<font color="red">2004 inal Table: $16,120,000 (66.57%) </font>


2003: 839 players; $7,802,700 prize pool

1st: 2,500,000 (32.04%)
2nd: 1,300,000 (16.67%)
3rd: 650,000 (8.33%)
4th: 440,000 (5.64%)
5th: 320,000 (4.10%)
6th: 260,000 (3.33%)
7th: 200,000 (2.56%)
8th: 160,000 (2.05%)
9th: 120,000 (1.54%)

<font color="red">2003 Final Table: 5,950,000 (76.26%) </font>

[Kevmath]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who was it that thought the main event should be winner take all? I can't recall where I read it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought it was Mike Caro.

[/ QUOTE ]

Keller on Tournament Payouts

Caro on Tournament Payouts

The email address Shane mentioned is [email protected] (for more info, do a search for BobFeduniak)

[DodgerPSU]

I like the 2005 structure better except for one glaring problem. 10th place pays out 600k. 9th pays 1mil. 8th pays 1.15 mil. That means you make 400k by going from 10th to 9th, but only 150k by going from 9th to 8th place. By the time the final table hits, we should be in the part of the exponential tournament payout curve that starts to increase its positive slope. At the very least, it should be a linear increase in payouts, but never a decrease in amount gained.

Sorry if I didn't word that clearly, but hopefully it makes sense.