[ QUOTE ]
I think first and second should both be half as much and then more than 2 people could actually make some money.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think many people here will agree with you. Play to win is the motto, so getting as much money possible for a win is the preference.
I'm not sure where I stand - I've yet to win a 'big field' MTT. My best is 3rd in a $3+r, but I have hit a few FT's. So a flatter payout structure would have been better for me results-wise.
But I'm a hobby player, not a grinder.
Stars has the 20% payout structure to appeal to the fish -> let more of them cash, so more of them come back. I was surprised, however, at the FT payout structure for the sunday 100k. I figured it would be a flatter structure than it is.
Are there any other arguments against a flatter structure, other than "I'm the best player, I expect to win, so I want most of the money to be for 1st place". I don't really buy that argument - there are too many chops in big tourneys to believe that's the case.
Take for example the Sunday 100k structure from last week. Here it is with a flatter structure too. What are the pros and cons of this type of flat FT structure?
(I'm by no means advocating this structure - just want a better discussion than the usual "I'm the best, so make 1st 100%" argument that I usually read.)