Some comments about the WCOOP structures

[FellKnight]

On many tables that I have observed, people (generally observers but sometimes the players) are complaining about the long structure and the fact that the tournaments are lasting 12-18 hours to complete.

I want to personally give mad props to Stars for such an awesome structure. It is so rare that we see a strcuture online that actually lets the skill factor come out in a big way. I've been watching so many different tables since 300 left and the good players are getting their money in good and increasing their stacks. If they get unlucky in a given hand, it will often not end the day. There is enough play to get away from 2nd best hands, and enough chips to survive more orbits if you get hurt.

As for the players themselves, do you not think that they would prefer to be tired the next day when they have just won $1k? How about $10k? $100k?

One other point worth mentionning is the idea of 2 day tournaments. The idea is a good one, in theory. But in practice, it falls apart. How many players would sell their seats to more established pros? Even 1 is too many. I believe that Pokerstars would catch people abusing the rules of such a 2 day tournament, but why force the issue? Why compromise the integrity of the tournament in the first place? If you don't open Pandora's box...

So like I said... mad props to Stars. Mad props to the players who go the distance. It's fun to watch.

Fell

[ZBTHorton]

I have no problem with long structures. I do have a problem with long structures that aren't 2 day events.

IMO. Anything over 16 hours needs to be divided into a 2 day event. Event #5 we are watching right now is prob going to top out around 20 hours, and I think that is too long.

[plzbenice]

20 hours is ridiculous.

is selling accounts really that much harder ina 1day event?

and anyway, if one account is being played from an IP in new york one day then on one in LA the next, cant they just ban the account then?

[Daysleeper]

It sure is awesome for people living in Europe...

If I by some freak streak of luck was still in the latest event I would hand of my account to a friend who had gotten some sleep and take a nap.

[Jackal69]

event 5 has been going 17.5 hrs, its 3pm in the UK and there are still 10 players left. I sold most of the w% i bought after playing the first days events as the only way i would ever make it through one of these things is by account sharing with someone in a different hemisphere.

Whoever came up with these structures as one day events should be shot...

[FellKnight]

[ QUOTE ]


Whoever came up with these structures as one day events should be shot...

[/ QUOTE ]

Today's ignorant hyberbolic post has been brought to you by Jackal69

[KneeCo]

[ QUOTE ]
One other point worth mentionning is the idea of 2 day tournaments. The idea is a good one, in theory. But in practice, it falls apart. How many players would sell their seats to more established pros? Even 1 is too many. I believe that Pokerstars would catch people abusing the rules of such a 2 day tournament, but why force the issue? Why compromise the integrity of the tournament in the first place? If you don't open Pandora's box...

[/ QUOTE ]

There's a lot of prbs with this argument, not the least of which is that if X hour tournaments are not feasible as 1 day events, they shouldn't happen regardless of the threat of cheating.

Take for example live tournaments. They are played over multiple days, and there's no doubt that this makes life easier for chip dumpers, colluders and the like (this is particularly but not exclusively true when seating assignments are released days/hours in advance).

So I guess WSOP events should be played continuously, with 10 min breaks after every level and a 1h break every 9 hours? Of course not, it's just not feasible.

You have to recognize that this is the case. Indeed the debate here isn't a matter of 1 day vs 2 day events really. Everyone favors 1 day events as long as the length is not ridiculous. The debate is actually about at what duration does it become ridiculous to keep an event 1 day? For some people it's ~22 hours, for others it's longer or shorter.

We all share your indignation toward cheaters as well as your appreciation for the great structure, but certainly you'd agree that there exists a point in the duration of a tournament after which playing it as a 1 day event becomes ridiculous, the only difference between you and people calling for a 2 day ME is the location of that point.

Everyone, given their own understanding of how the human body, real world commitments and the poker mind work will decide on their own point. Moreover, everyone, given their love of good structures and desire to keep things from catering to cheats will push that point as far ahead forward as they imagine possible. Nevertheless, eventually everyone will meet a duration at which they agree an event must be split over multiple days. Accordingly, arguments about multi-accounting/seat selling are not really relevant since everyone is considering them, even those calling for a 2 day event.

[schwah]

structure is awesome but theres really no good reason not to make at least the bigger events 2 days

i just woke up and yesterdays tourney is still running, almost 20 hours later.. insane

[BryanSPokerStars]

[ QUOTE ]
structure is awesome but theres really no good reason not to make at least the bigger events 2 days

i just woke up and yesterdays tourney is still running, almost 20 hours later.. insane

[/ QUOTE ]

Hello, 2p2...

There's been quite a bit of discussion about WCOOP lately, in particular the length of the events and the desire on the part of some to have two-day WCOOP events. Some have wondered if it's even possible for us to have two-day events, and of course there has been quite a bit of discussion regarding whether or not doing so would be good for the events, etc.

As for the technical ability, we do have the ability to pause events and then continue them at a later time/day/etc. We have had this ability since PokerStars opened, in fact. However, there is more at issue than simply the technical ability to stop an event and then resume it later.

When we were planning WCOOP, the topic of two-day events came up and was discussed at length. In the end, it was decided that we would not have two-day events, with the deciding consideration being the preservation of the integrity of each event.

To this point, we have not yet received any negative feedback regarding event length from those who have been most-impacted by the length -- those who have been playing at the five final tables held to this point. For that matter, there hasn't been any negative feedback from those at the final three tables of any event of which I'm aware.

Having said all of the above, we will of course continue to review feedback as we do at all times. Our goal in everything we do is to give our players the best experience possible. We accomplish that goal by making sure we're listening to what our players are telling us, as this forum is well-aware. The second-highest attended WCOOP event ever (this year's Event #1) came about in large measure because of feedback from this forum. In short, we are definitely listening, and we will continue to do so as we review all possibilities.

All the best,

Bryan S.
Tournaments Administrator
PokerSTars Poker Room Management Team

[raconteur]

Whilst its undeniable that Pokerstars has always been the site most responsive to suggestions and feedback, I'm not sure that the results you just provided have much validity.
Firstly, polling the winners is unlikely to result in negative feedback, do you seriously think someone who just won six figures in a tournament is going to say, "you know what, I wish I was in bed right now waiting to play the second day well rested"?
Secondly, I'd be highly surprised if some of those deep finishers hadn't played tag team for some of the event. Of course they aren't tired and of the opinion that the tournament was too long, they probably slept through half of it.

Regards,
Richard