Stars has STEPS SNGs to the PCA

[AaronL]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think there's any chance of #5 happening.
If you want to encourage the top-notch pros to continue to play in them then giving them T$ instead is a good to do that.

I don't know how I feel about #4. If you do that then a lot of people will just play a bunch of step 2's as Sunday-qualifiers. If enough of these people take themselves out of the cycle via that option then wouldn't it become somewhat harder to get Step 3's and higher to run?
Probably wouldn't make that big a difference. Just something that occured to me though.
If they did this then I would very seriously consider playing them as a Sunday-ticket satellite instead and I'm not sure they want people using them for such a purpose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or the they could just add a second set of 3 level step tourneys that pay out seats to weekly millions... these would be hugely popular without giving an exit to those who make level 3 but don't want to gamble up higher...

[smartalecc5]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think there's any chance of #5 happening.
If you want to encourage the top-notch pros to continue to play in them then giving them T$ instead is a good to do that.

I don't know how I feel about #4. If you do that then a lot of people will just play a bunch of step 2's as Sunday-qualifiers. If enough of these people take themselves out of the cycle via that option then wouldn't it become somewhat harder to get Step 3's and higher to run?
Probably wouldn't make that big a difference. Just something that occured to me though.
If they did this then I would very seriously consider playing them as a Sunday-ticket satellite instead and I'm not sure they want people using them for such a purpose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or the they could just add a second set of 3 level step tourneys that pay out seats to weekly millions... these would be hugely popular without giving an exit to those who make level 3 but don't want to gamble up higher...

[/ QUOTE ]

thats bad

[CharlieDontSurf]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think there's any chance of #5 happening.
If you want to encourage the top-notch pros to continue to play in them then giving them T$ instead is a good to do that.

I don't know how I feel about #4. If you do that then a lot of people will just play a bunch of step 2's as Sunday-qualifiers. If enough of these people take themselves out of the cycle via that option then wouldn't it become somewhat harder to get Step 3's and higher to run?
Probably wouldn't make that big a difference. Just something that occured to me though.
If they did this then I would very seriously consider playing them as a Sunday-ticket satellite instead and I'm not sure they want people using them for such a purpose.

[/ QUOTE ]

I imagine two of the main headaches with introducing the STEPS is

1. Players are going to want Cash STEPS not just PCA/WSOP STEPS.

I know people have been asking Stars for this for awhile but they have never done it which leads me to believe that for whatever reason...they don't want to do it. Probably to much clutter unless they create a seperate STEPS category in the lobby.

*Personally I don't even really want to go to the PCA given I'm not sure I even could work wise...but I loved playing the STEPS on Party so I'm gonna play these a ton if only to try and win multiple packages and hopefully they implement some of my suggestions thus making it more worthwhile. I'd prefer cash STEPS but don't see that happening, so $T for multiple wins would be nice cuz in my opinion $W is pretty useless given I want to play my MTTs online on Stars...not live.

Offering $T for multiple wins essentially turns the PCA/WSOP STEPS into quasi cash STEPS after you accomplish what the STEPS are intended for(winning a ticket to PCA/WSOP/etc). It also allows them to run nonstop...though they would probably slow down during the week/month gap between events..PCA/WSOP/EURO etc etc.

2. The other problem is what to do with the leftover tickets.

Seeing that a level 4 ticket = the buy-in for Stars Millions/Second chance...it makes all tickets for Level 4 and lower useable 24/7 year round. Maybe when there is a gap between 12K events u simply only go up to Step 4 and people can hold onto their Step 5 and Step 6 tickets until the STEP 5/6 come back during WSOP/PCA/all other 12K events etc.

And every month during the last week you can create a special STEP 5 for the $530 and $1060 Sunday Million.


-In regards to the sit n go pro's. Making Step 5 and 6 ticket only and not allowing direct buy-ins is enough in my view no matter if they offer $T for multiple wins.
If the high rollers are willing to take the time to buy-in at the STEP 4 level and work their way up to STEP 6 then they deserve all the seats they win. You could always be hardcore and only allow direct buy-ins for Level 3 and lower but I think that is being a bit crazy.

I personally think it would be awesome if STEP 4 would = Sunday Millions tickets given you could build up a ton of tickets only having to work up to STEP 4 with an initial buy-in of $7. Also having special STEP 5s for the $530 and $1060 would be sweet too.

[CharlieDontSurf]

I think if you have STEPS that you can use your level 4 for Sunday Millions/2nd Chance/etc, wins at Level 6 = PCA/WSOP/EURO/other big tourneys etc, multiple wins at Level 6 = $T....you'll have players in the STEPS system playing a lot trying to win all of the above...it will just depend on what is being offered at the given time.

During events like PCA/WSOP etc a large portion will be playing for that. Some will be playing for the 12K $T after multiple wins. Others may play for the Sunday Millions Step 4 tickets.

When there is no 12K events...obv everyone will be playing for a Sunday Million ticket or to get to a sepcial STEP 5 for the higher buy-in Millions(or the SUPER TUESDAY). But you could always offer STEPS 5/6 which pay in $T if u really wanted.

[Shoe]

I personally would love to see a set of steps (it can be for cash or something seperate than this tournament), where the only way to enter is through step 1 and everyone has to win their way up. I doubt it would ever happen though as the site would miss out on too much money that would buy in at a higher step, but I think if they ran them as a seperate set of steps (such as that paid cash payouts at the end) it could work, and they would generate a very loyal following.

i don't think limiting the buy in to only step 4 or below would do much. It would help some, but the people would buy in directly to step 6 would just multi-table the the 4's all day to generate tickets, making it that much harder just to get past step 4.

I love the idea of having either a set of steps or seperate satellites that are dedicatee only to people who have not yet won a seat. This is in fact how I won a seat to aruba at UB. However, it can't be the only way to win a seat -- you have to give repeat winners a chance to win extra seats too. I'd say make half your steps/satelllites for repeat winniers, and limit the other half to non-winners. This has multiple benefits. Your PCA tournament will get more entries, and your field will be softer with all the donks that got in from the first-time winners tournaments. Also, there will still be plenty of chances to win additional seats with the other tournaments that will still be going around the clock (and filling almost as fast, with winners and non-winners alike -- even the donks who won a seat will try to win another -- and people who have not qualified will play in both). Also, the tournaments that are limited to non-winners will get more entries as you will convince more people to give those that might otherwise be scared away completely.

[KSOT]

Worked my first 500 FPPs into a step 4 with only one recycling and now I'm too afraid to play it lol...

A $215 SNG??? I wanna cash outttt [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Dr_Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Be warned that any steps type tournament where rake is taken at every step generates a tremendous amount of rake, so while step 1 is advertised as $7 + 0.5 it is really a $4.55 + 2.95 tournament.

8,257 players pay $7.50 or $61,927 that is distributed as 3 12k packages and $1,606 to the 4th place finishers in step 1, while Stars keep the remaining 24k.

That said, I will probably use some FPP to play some step 1’s anyway.


Chris

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't the rake even higher then this since you get people being recycled back to the same and lower levels? Of course the same arguement could be made for people who play any sats or take shots at higher tourneys with winnings from lower buy in events (since they pay more rake then people who buy in directly to a tourney) of course the softness of the sats should make up for a large percentage of the additonal rake...

[/ QUOTE ]


This effect is included in the calculations so for every final level 6 game there has to be 1071 level 1 games with 9639 players, 1071 have tickets from level 6, 310.5 have tickets from level 2 and 8257.5 buy in directly.

Stars doesn’t have to collect rake on every level, Primas Rounders system is a good example that takes 10% rake irrespective if you enter on the first level or the last.


Chris

[1p0kerboy]

I would like to see either STEPS for Sunday Million tickets OR allow a STEP 4 ticket for entry into any Stars $215 event.

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure what collusion issues there are with this above and beyond the same ones that exist with any high stakes game

[/ QUOTE ]
Satellite-format tournaments are inherently more susceptible to collusion than tournaments with a laddered payout schedule.

The reason should be obvious.

In addition, collusion is more difficult to detect and more difficult to prove, because in satellites even innocent strategy can appear rather odd (for example, folding despite huge pot odds).

[Shoe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure what collusion issues there are with this above and beyond the same ones that exist with any high stakes game

[/ QUOTE ]
Satellite-format tournaments are inherently more susceptible to collusion than tournaments with a laddered payout schedule.

The reason should be obvious.

In addition, collusion is more difficult to detect and more difficult to prove, because in satellites even innocent strategy can appear rather odd (for example, folding despite huge pot odds).

[/ QUOTE ]

could you please elaborate? It is not obvious to me.

I'm surprised by this because the part of poker I have had the most success ROI-wise is satellite poker. I don't know if I just adapt to it better than others or what, but it would seem if collusion was prevalant in satellites my ROI would be worse.