|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Solution to Limit Tournament Crapshoot Structure- Comments Appreci
ha....allen, u ok???
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Solution to Limit Tournament Crapshoot Structure- Comments Appreci
You need to keep to the limits rising so that the tournament won't last forever. The solution is to make the early levels both higher and longer. Right now the early levels are meaningless. But if more people are eliminated/build big stacks in the early levels, the average stack in the middle levels will be higher. If players don't want to be aggressive and just wait around for great hands, they should be forced to risk their stack on a single hand. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Solution to Limit Tournament Crapshoot Structure- Comments Appreci
[ QUOTE ]
You need to keep to the limits rising so that the tournament won't last forever. The solution is to make the early levels both higher and longer. Right now the early levels are meaningless. But if more people are eliminated/build big stacks in the early levels, the average stack in the middle levels will be higher. If players don't want to be aggressive and just wait around for great hands, they should be forced to risk their stack on a single hand. [/ QUOTE ] I think this is about right. Half the problem is that there is a mindset of "the levels are all the same length and the blinds increase gradually". There's no reason why the first four levels shouldn't be just one level, with limits such that a starting stack = 4 or 5 hands to the river. Then start to increase. When you basically don't eliminate anyone in the first three levels, it's bound to be too fast later on. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Solution to Limit Tournament Crapshoot Structure- Comments Appreci
[ QUOTE ]
Half the problem is that there is a mindset of "the levels are all the same length and the blinds increase gradually". There's no reason why the first four levels shouldn't be just one level, with limits such that a starting stack = 4 or 5 hands to the river. [/ QUOTE ] This is the best solution I've seen so far. Give players 20-40 big bets and just let them play for 4 hours. Then bring up the levels in a way that if you weren't winning any hands yet, you're gonna get knocked off, but if you've built up a bit of a stack, it actually means something. There's so much Dogma when it comes to tourney structures. Would it really be so hard to do something a little different? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Solution to Limit Tournament Crapshoot Structure- Comments Appreci
On another note, am I going to get much play in the $1000 SHOE event? I just reread the structure, and it's not what I thought it was originally. They may have changed it, or it may just be worded poorly. Rounds are 1 hour long, but games change every 30 minutes. But round 1 is Stud, round 2 is Holdem, etc. Round 1 is really rounds 1 & 2. I guess.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Solution to Limit Tournament Crapshoot Structure- Comments Appreci
the levels are probably 30 minutes
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Solution to Limit Tournament Crapshoot Structure- Comments Appreci
I think the issue is the doubling of the initial chip stack. This is what threw off the limit events, as anyone that played limit would tell you it would. Frankly, I would appreciate it if the players on the advisory com. would either look at the structure or make room for someone who would. Honestly, no one who is on there is really a structure person.
To compensate for the doubled intial stacks in the limit events it seems they will need a larger initial bring in/blind and have levels advance faster at first and then slow later in the tournament. But someone needs to do the math on what the precise compensation needs to be. Also, the later blind structure in the NL events seems not to allow enough play, but I think Harrah's did this intentionally to get more of a WTP type final table, with the coordinating cheaper production costs. Players need to scream loud and long about this because this year is the only year there is a chance of changing this. Disappointing so few players went to the meeting with Pollack. |
|
|