3SP: A new NLHE format that requires skill, not recklessness.

[Vorlin]

3SP: A new NLHE format balancing skill and aggression in NLHE tournaments...

One of the things that has always irritated me in large, online NLHE tournaments is that, if you care about how you finish at all, you're relegated to hunkering down as the suicidal all-iniots take shots at everyone for the first two to five rounds, depending on the structure of the tournament. Then you have to be careful as you try to take a pot or two in order to get your stack to some sort of size that will allow you to shift into second gear and use all the moves that you know... without getting picked off while your stack can be a little less than the buy in because more than half the field has you covered.

Sadly, pot limit has apparently become influenced by this same thinking as pot raises and re-raises fire around the table exponentially until everyone is all-in anyway. Fixed and spread limits are more skillful games over the long haul but watching (and sometimes even playing) good fixed limit poker is about as thrilling as watching paint dry.

If there were only a game that combined the need for skill over the long haul with the ability to use all-ins properly, at some point in the game. Something that combined the skills required in limit Hold 'Em with the aggression and thrills of NLHE... and tested the overall skills of the players while preventing a good player from being eliminated by one lucky all-in by a reckless player early in the tournament. Someting that had all this, while still requiring a player to posess great NLHE skills in order to make the final table.

I was sitting on the porcelain throne one day as I pondered this dilemma... I was sitting there on a break just after having just spent the first 90 minutes of a NLHE tournament avoiding entanglements with a mob of all-iniots, only to have my AA cracked by a good player with QQ when I tried to get some chips to start really working with. It was then, in the “idea room”, that it hit me. There is a way.... and it's one that just might be crazy enough to work.

I call it 3SP. It could be 2SP or 4SP but for the purpose of forming the idea I simply used 3. I want to publish this in order to some sort record that shows that I dreamed up this format and when. Not to be greedy but hopefully, if it were to catch on, I wouldn't be completely left out in the cold. After all, it's not as if people get taken advantage of in this day and age of corporate exploitation... oh no, of course not.

The idea behind 3SP to help eliminate the following kind of situation:

- A good player who cares about how he finishes sits at a table where every hand involves PF overbets of twenty times the pot or, worse, one hundred times the pot (all-in for 12,500 on a 125 chip pot... it happens all the time online).

- This player patiently waits, refusing to get caught up in the fray. He waits through first break, only seeing two flops that miss his hand. 90 minutes into the online tournament, he finally gets AA and has to take his shot due to the fact that he has been blinded off for an hour and a half while being patient.

- An all-iniot two seats over who uses all-ins to steal pots, and has already been all-in more twenty times, calls his bet and shows J6o.

- The patient player who refused to play recklessly is outdrawn when the flop comes 662, and is knocked completely out of the tournament the very first time he tries to take a pot. His 90 minutes of patience, his commitment to playing his best game and all his skill were ***completely wasted***. How can he feel anything other than frustrated and bitter?

Wow... looks familiar doesn't it?

3SP starts as a variant of pot limit with a twist and then progresses to NLHE in steps. The key feature that makes the game attractive is that it allows a good player to start working earlier in the game, without fear of being blown out by a suicidal maniac, while slowly morphing to a point where the game becomes NLHE. However, it only does so in the latter stages of the tournament... so only those who play well consistently, proving themselves to be skilled and responsible, will earn the privilage of being able to use the most deadly of weapons. That weapon being, of course, the all-in bet.

That's right, you have to earn the privilage of being able to use the all-in.... or be short stacked. But, then again, genuine short stacks have always had the perogative of going all in and that should never change.

In 3SP the maximum amount that can be bet or raised in any SINGLE action is 3X the Starting Pot. So, in the 1000/500 level with a 200 ante at a ten handed table the maximum amount of any single bet or raise becomes 10,500 chips.

1,000 BB + 500 SB + (10 Players x 200 ante) = 3,500
3 X 3,500 = 10,500

So, at the above level, the max that someone can bet out is 10,500. Any number of players are free to raise but only up to the max of 10,500 for each single raise.

That may not seem to make a lot of difference... until you look at how it progresses through all of the levels. Starting with a stack of 10,000 chips, watch how the game begins as one of skill over the long haul and then slowly, gradually, morphs into what has come to be known as “Kamikaze Poker”:

(Actual structure can move more quickly or sowly... this is a simple example.)

Round..........BB..........SB..........Ante....... ...Max Bet..........Seats
1.............50...........25.............-................225...............10
3.............150.........75.............-................675...............10
5.............200.........100..........25......... ....1,650..............10
7.............400.........200..........50......... ....3,300..............10
9.............800.........400..........100........ ...6,600..............10
11..........1600........800..........200.......... .13,200.............10
13..........3000.......1500.........500........... 28,500..............10
15..........6000.......3000.........1000.......... 57,000.............10
17.........10000.......5000........1500.........90 ,000..............10
18.........16000.......8000........1500.....NO RESTRICTIONS
19.........20000......10000.......2000.....NO RESTRICTIONS

Since there is no need to calculate a max bet above level 18, there is no need to take seats into account for that or higher levels.

This sort of structure combines many of the best features and benefits of limit, pot limit and No Limit Hold 'Em:

-In the first round or two, skilled players can no longer be eliminated from the tourney just because one or two flops have gone the other way against an all-in-aholic.

-THERE IS NO CAP. So, if people are so inclined, they're still free to raise themselves into an all-in situation... however they can no longer drag others with them so easily within the first few rounds.

-As the tournament progresses, those who played intelligently and skillfully early on are rewarded with ever increasing betting limits, allowing them to turn the stacks that they so carefully and skillfully built into more and more powerful weapons of aggression.

-Those who have survived over time and have proved that they can play skillfully will reach a point where all restrictions are removed, paving the way for brutally aggressive maneuvers... but only by those who have shown themselves to be skilled and responsible first.

Players who are simply determined to self destruct will still self destruct. You can't save someone from themselves. Nor should you try... to save them that is. You should, however, try to get their chips before they go.

I truly believe that an escalating max bet is the best way to protect more serious players from being victimized by maniacs who couldn't care less about how they finish while still preserving the best aspects of NLHE for those who are serious enough to play well consistently. This sort of structure also gives newer players something to strive for, since the only way to be able to use the all-in as a weapon is to buckle down and play well so that you survive long enough to be able to earn it. Lastly, no matter how new a person may be, they're not going to be inclined to risk being blown out in one big all-in hand if they've worked for 2 or 3 hours to get to a point where they can finally use the all-in as an offensive weapon. This should help to eliminate the plague of frivilous all-ins and help teach the value of limiting one's exposure to risk to newer players who will learn that lesson the very first time that they spend 3 hours earning the right to use the all-in only to get nuked within 30 seconds of trying it out.

I've put quite a bit of thought into this and would like to see if a tournament using such a structure could be arranged to test it out. To ensure that we get all sorts of players, it should be a freeroll... opening the door for every maniac who wants to come. The structure itself should protect the more serious players from the worst of the insanity and it would be interesting to see how it all works out as the rounds progress.

It's an attempt at a balanced approach that could get rid of the vulgar use of all-ins by people who have no real skill but still preserve them for intelligent use later on. The all-in or nothing systems are intended to give one or two people a chance when playing in a skilled field but things have grown so out of control that now the skilled players need something to shield them from the Kamikazes who now out number the skilled players 3:1 in many freerolls and low buy in events. It also could be a structure that improves the overall game by giving newer players an incentive to learn to do more than shove... because learning to play well enough to make the "all in line" could become a goal. The next goal would be the bubble and the next being the final table.

Right now, with so many Kamikaze's all over the place shoving every chance they get, it's really ruining the game for a lot of people who are drawn to the game by the idea that it's a contest of skill. The lower limits are becoming a contest of recklessness... and I hope that 3SP could help bring skill back to the early stages, so it's a test of skill all the way through.

Scott Stoll, A.K.A. “Vorlin”

[Requin]

[ QUOTE ]
I want to publish this in order to some sort record that shows that I dreamed up this format and when. Not to be greedy but hopefully, if it were to catch on, I wouldn't be completely left out in the cold.


[/ QUOTE ] Didn't get through your whole post...I'm no lawyer, but 2+2 owns rights to all posts made in their forums and so I think they have the rights to every idea you just wrote down.

[Vorlin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I want to publish this in order to some sort record that shows that I dreamed up this format and when. Not to be greedy but hopefully, if it were to catch on, I wouldn't be completely left out in the cold.


[/ QUOTE ] Didn't get through your whole post...I'm no lawyer, but 2+2 owns rights to all posts made in their forums and so I think they have the rights to every idea you just wrote down.

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to read the Terms and Conditions more carefully:

"All other trademarks and copyrights appearing on the 2+2 website are owned by their respective companies. Copyrights to all posts on the 2+2 website are owned by the authors of the posts, and not by 2+2 or ConJelCo. If you want to reproduce a 2+2 website post in a publication or on another web site, please get permission from the author of the post."

Not knocking you, simply pointing that out. As one who writes now and then, it was the main thing I looked for before agreeing to the T&C.

Vorlin

[Beachman42]

lol - BBV institutionalized in an MTT wrapper! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[tedtodd]

[ QUOTE ]
lol - BBV institutionalized in an MTT wrapper! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
With 100x the effort of most BBV posts.

[Vorlin]

If you hadn't noticed, the thread isn't about one, two or five beats. It's about the entire game being ruined by people who think it's all about playing 'demolition derby' with chips. I know several who have quit in disgust over this trend and am close to joining them... or playing only PL & limit MTT's.

As Padraig Parkinson said in his recent interview on The Circut: "ESPN's got a lot to answer for because this s**t is ruining the game."

Forget the beat and focus on the real topic... a way to keep the game from going to s**t.

Vorlin

[tedtodd]

[ QUOTE ]
If you hadn't noticed, the thread isn't about one, two or five beats. It's about the entire game being ruined by people who think it's all about playing 'demolition derby' with chips. I know several who have quit in disgust over this trend and am close to joining them... or playing only PL & limit MTT's.

As Padraig Parkinson said in his recent interview on The Circut: "ESPN's got a lot to answer for because this s**t is ruining the game."

Forget the beat and focus on the real topic... a way to keep the game from going to s**t.

Vorlin

[/ QUOTE ]

You're referring to 'pushbotting' which is basically just a calculated risk. And proper pushbotting is +EV. Read HOH1&2 and you'll understand.

[Mclane665]

I agree that its very annoying early on in a tournament when the blinds are low and people are making you commit all your chips. Its not +EV to go all in early on in an unraised pot. I would be interested in a trial tournament but it would take alot to convince me that NLHE is still not the best poker game around.

[Vraket]

TL, DR.

But anyway, it's the decent luck factor that keeps the donks (=producers) playing. If the luck factor is reduced to much, then the amount of donks will fade, since they'll win even more rarely.

[Vorlin]

Thanks, never heard of "PushBotting" but, if I understand the idea, it's an attempt to get all the chips in anytime you're +EV.

That's great for a cash game but when you're trying to make the final table of a 1500+ person event you can't shove every time you're +EV beacause the game is one of probability, not certainty. The bets have to be in proportion to the reward and limit risk... the RRR.

Early on shoves are rediculous because they ignore the RRR by risking everything when the reward is not certain... although this is necessary *occasionally*, half the field ends up doing it once every 2 minutes through the first 2-3 levels.

This is why many consider all in PF to be the most vulgar form of poker. Al-ins have their place and time, certainly... but it's getting to the point where every MTT is being ruined by suicidal maniacs and, once they're dead, how well you can finish often depends on if you were or weren't lucky against the Kamikazes.

That's not skill. Skill is using all-ins when you are sure you have your opponent beat. Skill is building a stack over time. And, in the later stages when the blinds are big, using an all-in for a steal is skillful as well.

But putting your entire tourney on the line by going all-in for 15,000 into a pot that's only 1,250, and has more than 3 callers, when the blinds are 100/200 isn't skillful... it's idiotic.

It's easy to say that a good player will eventually get the chips... and in a cash game it's true. But in an MTT without a rebuy, all it takes is being out-drawn one time by an all-iniot to ruin your entire day.

It's one thing to be at a table with 8 good players and 2 suicidal maniacs... it's something else entirely to be at a table with 4 good players and 6 maniacs. Sadly, the latter is getting to be the case far too often... and that's what's ruining the game for a lot of people.

The all or nothing systems were designed to be used by a few people in a large field... and for that they're fantastic. But when half the field or more starts doing it, the game completely changes into something else. I don't know what it changes into... but I can tell you that it's not poker.